Saw that the chivalry total war moders call their mod as the only one for medieval age .
Well ?
Some where between 476 to 1492 .
800 to 1453 ?
1066 to 1453 ? 1492 ?
843 to 1350 ?
it is confusing !
Please post your views .
Saw that the chivalry total war moders call their mod as the only one for medieval age .
Well ?
Some where between 476 to 1492 .
800 to 1453 ?
1066 to 1453 ? 1492 ?
843 to 1350 ?
it is confusing !
Please post your views .
"The essence of philosophy is to ask the eternal question that has no answer" (Aristotel) . "Yes !!!" (me) .
"Its time we stop worrying, and get angry you know? But not angry and pick up a gun, but angry and open our minds." (Tupac Amaru Shakur)
I´d say the end is pretty clearly 1453, about the start I´m not sure, one could say the end of the huge migration, but I forgot when that was.![]()
![]()
![]()
"Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu
There is no real convention for dates concerning the Middle Ages. Many people do indeed use 476 as a starting date, as it is seen as the end of antiquity. The end date is however more diputed, and can differ between 1453 and 1517. In the medieval department of the History department of Leiden University, where I myself study, the time range subjected to study is that between 1300/1350 and the 1570's, when the Dutch Revolt started and politics became really different. As it is, you can give different end and starting dates which alternatively have to do with economics, social structure, culture (which seems the one that defines eras like Antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance) and politics (which is usually the one that give the exact breaking points in history). These would also differ between different regions and countries.
So, actually all of it is just a made-up convention used to make history more easy to understand. The events in 476 which are now seen as the end of Antiquity weren't seen as such by anyone who lived at the time, and it is nonsense to say people like Columbus or Luther went to sleep one day in the Middle Ages and woke up in the Renaissance.
Another fine example is the new period-dating our Ministry of Education is supplying to schools: The Middle Ages are broken up into two eras: The Time of Knights and Monks (500-1000) and the Time of Cities and States (1000-1500). This is so clearly bullocks that you almost cannot take it seriously (at least, I can't) and should therefore only be used as a means to make historical education more easy. Otherwise, this kind of dating is just useless.
Well of course middle age is a artificial construction. If my memory serves the starting point is the assault of Rome by Germanians and the end is the discovery of America by Cristoph Columbus.![]()
From the end of the Western Roman Empire (5th century) until the fall of Constantinople (1453)
Brutus and TK have pretty much cleared it up, but I just thought I'd note a few things.
Part of the confusion stems from when you consider the Roman Empire to have fallen. The beginning of the MA's is therefore also contested. 476 is the depostion of the last Roman Emperor, but some would argue the Middle Ages had already begun. They might point to the sack of Rome in 410, the Battle of Adrianople in 378 or perhaps even the accession of Constantine in 312 (a religious explanation here: the beginning of the converstion of the empire to Christianity).
Another thing that confuses people is that the first 'Age' of the Middle Ages used to be called the 'Dark Age(s)'. Some older texts will therefore divide things up into the 'Dark Ages' and then the 'Middle Ages'. These are the ones that have the Middle Ages beginning in 800 or 1000.
Scholars generally now divide the Middle Ages into three: The 'Early Middle Ages, from the Fall of Rome to c. 1000, the High Middle Ages, c. 1000-1300, and the Late Middle Ages, c. 1300-1450 or 1500. On top of that, there has also been a strong movement to see the period from the end of Rome to the rise of Charlemagne as its own separate era, 'Late Antiquity', which generally runs from 312 or so up to about 750-800.
Brutus, that division in your schools between the 'age of monks and knights' and the age of states and cities is horrible. 'Knights' themselves didn't appear until about 1000! Ack! I sympathize with you.
"I love this fellow God. He's so deliciously evil." --Stuart Griffin
Bookmarks