I have enjoyed this thread very much, especially thanks to your extraordinary posts cmacq. I just think that there is no reason to start blaming anybody for expressing (quite innocently I think) his opinion, even if there might be grounds for deeming it rather rhetoric charlatanism (which I think there are not). Just keep it civil and let´s continue in this very educating discussion.

To keep it going, I do have question. I remember a commentary to the Ten Books of Gregory of Tours (a chronicle of early Frankish kingdom) that stated that actually the early Frankish kingdom was doing rather well, even preserving a professional state bureaucracy and keeping a rather large volume of long-distance trade across almost all Mediterranean basin. This account somewhat relativized the usual image of the Dark age, coming with the beginnings of the "barbaric kingdoms" and stressed that much more continuity in fact existed for some time. According to that account the crisis came rather late (late 6th century), just before the Karlid(?) dynasty took over... I do know next to nothing on this issue, so I would appreciate if I could learn more on this fascinating forum.

Could you please comment on this, admittedly not well represented - sorry for my English , opinion?