Should we still use the term 'The Dark Ages'

[Jim Webster]

Easy....the number of years since Gildas's birth....

If you could tell us when that was you'd answer an awful lot of academic questions :-)

[Jim Webster]

Maybe it would be better not to use labels and just to specify centuries? But then it has to be centuries since the birth of Christ, so more cultural baggage to agonise over.

But surely the whole reason behind choosing a set start date for any calendar is to stamp your culture's mark over it and claim it for your own.
So we have BC/AD. We have AH (Anno Hegirae), Ab urbe condita (since the founding of Rome), the Seleucid Era etc.
The French did try starting a new calendar but it was abolished after about 12 years of operation. The Americans could legitimately have started one, perhaps starting in 1776.
Actually calling something BCE rather than BC has often struck me as a cop out. Starting a calendar on somebody else's date merely proves you've done nothing noteworthy 
And given the other calendars in use, calling it 'the common era' is probably a sign of an imperialist colonialist mindset which will get them purged or at least depersonned on twitter/X/whatever in the next ten years.

[Erpingham]

Actually calling something BCE rather than BC has often struck me as a cop out. Starting a calendar on somebody else's date merely proves you've done nothing noteworthy 

Or maybe learned your lesson from the French Revolution experiment?  Rather than invent your own system, rebadge an existing one 

[Justin Swanton]

And given the other calendars in use, calling it 'the common era' is probably a sign of an imperialist colonialist mindset which will get them purged or at least depersonned on twitter/X/whatever in the next ten years.

Hang in there Jim. I very much suspect that sort of thing has already passed its peak. 🤞

[Andreas Johansson]

And given the other calendars in use, calling it 'the common era' is probably a sign of an imperialist colonialist mindset which will get them purged or at least depersonned on twitter/X/whatever in the next ten years.

I once ran into a guy who preferred BCE/CE on the grounds that it rubbed the fact that the West has won into other cultures' faces.

It sounds like my pre-tertiary history curriculum was rather more comprehensive - but presumably more superficial? - than many of yours'. In primary school we did Antiquity (ancient Near East, Greece, and Rome), Swedish history from the Viking Age to the Cold War, and (western) European history from the fall of Rome to WWII. The book also had a set of chapters on various extra-European regions (incl Russia), but time constraints meant we only did the one on China, the profoundity of which may be judged from the fact that the only individuals named were Qin Shi Huangdi, Genghiz Khan, and Marco Polo.

In secondary we basically redid post-Roman history from the fall of Rome. The only history course I took at university was on German history from Napoleon to Hitler.

[Erpingham]

I have just recalled that we did "Bible" history in Scripture (what would later be called Religious Education (RE) ).  I distinctly remember drawing a map of the Fertile Crescent and learning the meaning of Mesopotamia.

[Imperial Dave]

Easy....the number of years since Gildas's birth....

If you could tell us when that was you'd answer an awful lot of academic questions :-)

Suitably nebulous i thought....

[Adrian Nayler]

And given the other calendars in use, calling it 'the common era' is probably a sign of an imperialist colonialist mindset which will get them purged or at least depersonned on twitter/X/whatever in the next ten years.

I once ran into a guy who preferred BCE/CE on the grounds that it rubbed the fact that the West has won into other cultures' faces.

Interesting perspective! I always thought that its adoption was intended to do the opposite by not 'forcing' other cultures and religions to use the Christian nomenclature.

That aside, I think Andreas definitely received a much better historical foundation than I did at school in England in the 1970s. This discussion has highlighted just how variable different schools' syllabus and approach can be even within the same nation.

Adrian.

[Nick Harbud]

Having read all these reminiscences of posters' education, are we sure that 'Dark Ages' refers to a historical period over 1,000 years ago and not the time spent studying history in the more modern classroom?

[Imperial Dave]

There's a war on you know...!

[Jim Webster]

And given the other calendars in use, calling it 'the common era' is probably a sign of an imperialist colonialist mindset which will get them purged or at least depersonned on twitter/X/whatever in the next ten years.

I once ran into a guy who preferred BCE/CE on the grounds that it rubbed the fact that the West has won into other cultures' faces.

Interesting perspective! I always thought that its adoption was intended to do the opposite by not 'forcing' other cultures and religions to use the Christian nomenclature.


Adrian.

If all else fails, assume the worst 
The issue is that it assumes that
a) the era is common which is nonsense because some use the Christian era and some AH.
b) Other, lesser breeds without the law who may have perfectly good eras are shunned entirely as befits a true Colonialist lackey of the Imperialist running dogs 

[Erpingham]

Interesting perspective! I always thought that its adoption was intended to do the opposite by not 'forcing' other cultures and religions to use the Christian nomenclature.

Globalisation needs to have a common calendar to manage trade, travel etc. The AD/BC system was in widespread use but an albeit historical reference to religion was deemed unacceptable, so we have the robustly secular CE/BCE.

[RichT]

Indeed a common calendar is a blessing. What we label it seems a matter of very little importance. I think we should go back to the 17th C term - 'Vulgar Era'. No baggage on that.

On the subject of BCE/CE and BC/AD and to drag Slingshot into it again, I notice from the article pool a mix of both (which is fine - author's preference) but also on occasion, a mix of both within the same article. In these mixed cases (only) I will standardise (to BC/AD). If anyone feels strongly enough about it that they would rather I didn't, email me.

[Imperial Dave]

Sensible Rich. I hadn't spotted that but there again I managed to get Kim's surname wrong twice in 2 articles....

[Erpingham]

On the subject of BCE/CE and BC/AD and to drag Slingshot into it again

At some point, when you have time, I suppose you will review the Slingshot guidelines on the website to ensure they fit ?