On the transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages

33
On the transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages

The question of the criteria for the chronological boundary of late Antiquity will always be open, that is, which events or activities of which individuals can be taken as the stage or date of the transition from Antiquity to the Middle Ages.


The traditionally accepted date for the fall of the Western Roman Empire - the year 476 - cannot, we believe, be considered as the desired result, since this date only recorded the completeness of the continuity of the Eastern Roman / Byzantine Empire of a single Roman Empire: the regalia of the Western Roman emperors were sent the barbarian usurper Odoacer to the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Emperor Zeno.




Emperor Zeno

Antiquity is, first of all, a set of characteristic stable cultural phenomena. The most radical steps in getting rid of these phenomena, and above all from paganism, were taken by Emperor Theodosius I the Great and his son Emperor Honorius. Theodosius, the last emperor of a unified Roman Empire, with an edict of 391 finally established Christianity as the state religion, and in 394 banned the Olympic Games, and Honorius, having become emperor of the Western Roman Empire in 395, banned gladiator fights in 400 as manifestations of pagan savagery.


Emperor Theodosius I the Great


Emperor Honorius

It is noteworthy that it was during the reign of Honorius, whose residence was in Ravenna, in 410 that Rome was captured and destroyed by the Visigoths under the leadership of Alaric. This became a symbolic event that marked the beginning of the fall of Roman statehood in the Apennine Peninsula, as well as the capture of Rome by the Gallic Sennonian tribe led by Brennus in 390 BC. e. marked the chronological point from which the rise of Roman statehood began (as is known, then “the geese saved Rome”).


However, ancient culture continued to survive and develop, despite the Christianization of both the Western Roman and Eastern Roman/Byzantine empires. The closure of philosophical schools, including the Platonic Academy in Athens, in 529 by decree of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I became deeply symbolic. At the same time, the Alexandrian philosophical school, being a branch of the Athenian philosophical school, was not closed, since the Alexandrian theological school grew out of it, and also because of the passion for Neoplatonism of some Alexandrian theologians, for example, Stephen of Byzantium, who even became the last head of the Alexandrian philosophical school.


Emperor Justinian I

It is noteworthy that the figures of the Athenian school, led by its leader Damascus, after its closure, moved to Iran (on the map - State Sassanids) to the court of Shahinshah Khosrow I Anushirvan. That is, Athenian intellectuals found refuge where a thousand years ago the threat to the culture of Hellas and even its very existence came from. Thus, the School of Athens became a phenomenon of Antiquity with a minus sign, if we take into account the Greco-Persian, and later the Roman-Parthian/Iranian enmity, which lasted for more than a thousand years. This is where we believe we need to put an end to stories Antiquity.


Shahinshah Khosrow I Anushirvan

The next step of Justinian I was the construction of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople in 532-537, which became the most grandiose Christian temple of the Middle Ages.

As for the chronological point from which the Middle Ages began, this, we believe, is the beginning of the Christianization of barbarian states, starting with the Frankish kingdom under Clovis I in 487, from where Christianity spread to Germany and the Netherlands.

So, the period between 391 and 487. can be considered as a transitional stage between Antiquity and the Middle Ages, and 529 as the year of the final abolition of the remnants of Antiquity at the highest level.

Author's article on the topic: Conflictological approach to the periodization of world history.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    20 November 2023 05: 19
    Yes, there are many criteria. Transitions are a complex issue.
  2. +2
    20 November 2023 06: 03
    Antiquity is, first of all, a set of characteristic stable cultural phenomena

    If you follow the Author’s logic, then does antiquity persist to this day? Jurisprudence, theater, knowledge from the ancients that has passed on to our time, the organization of public administration. And even military discipline in the army is all a legacy of ancient civilization. Antiquity did not die, it simply flowed smoothly, albeit with great civilizational losses, into what would later be called the Middle Ages
    1. 0
      20 November 2023 06: 30
      Dutchman Michel, “first of all” does not mean “only”, but quite the opposite. What you list is indeed the “heritage of ancient civilization,” but it does not end there.

      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      Antiquity did not die, it simply flowed smoothly, albeit with great civilizational losses, into what would later be called the Middle Ages


      It is impossible to talk about a “smooth flow” with directive measures and crucial fateful events that caused this “flow”, as well as with changes in the mentality of the population, incl. scale of values, and with a different nature of social relations.
      1. +3
        20 November 2023 06: 59
        Quote: Pavel Gusterin
        You can't talk about "smooth flow"

        Word smooth I'll take it back. I'll just leave it overflow. Will this suit you? The history of mankind is like walking along the road - everything is smooth and predictable, then bam, a hole or a bump. He fell, shook himself off and walked further. Barbarians and the fall of Rome - a bump. Then further development, albeit with minor civilizational losses. Then another bump - Renaissance, the world again became somewhat different. Then the Reformation and Humanism

        Quote: Pavel Gusterin
        when the mentality of the population changes, incl. value scales

        The mentality and scale of values ​​change along with the history of mankind. From cannibalism to vegetarianism... winked
        1. +3
          20 November 2023 12: 09
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          The history of mankind is like walking along the road - everything is smooth and predictable, then bam, a hole or a bump. He fell, shook himself off and walked further. Barbarians and the fall of Rome - a bump. Then further development, albeit with minor civilizational losses. Then another bump - Renaissance, the world again became somewhat different. Then the Reformation and Humanism

          Why do you limit the “history of mankind” and “the world” only to the European theater? What about the rest of the planet?
      2. +4
        20 November 2023 08: 34
        Quote: Pavel Gusterin
        Pavel Gusterin (Pavel Gusterin)

        Pavel, you are great! The framework in the chronology of history is probably the most interesting thing. I, too, constantly face the problem of when the Middle Ages ended: in 1450, 1456, 1492, 1500, 1556, or 1649... Each time I have to discuss this in books...
        1. +1
          20 November 2023 09: 18
          Thank you, kalibr! It’s especially nice since I’m Vyacheslavovich.

          You probably noticed immediately after the article a link to my other article on the periodization of history. I hope it's useful.
          1. +3
            20 November 2023 11: 58
            Quote: Pavel Gusterin
            You noticed immediately after the article a link to my other article on the periodization of history. I hope it's useful.

            Of course!
          2. +3
            20 November 2023 21: 45
            The Iron and Bronze Ages are also very conventional periodizations.
      3. +2
        20 November 2023 12: 06
        Quote: Pavel Gusterin
        It is impossible to talk about a “smooth flow” with directive measures and crucial fateful events that caused this “flow”, as well as with changes in the mentality of the population, incl. scale of values, and with a different nature of social relations.

        And smoothly or not smoothly from what point of view? An individual? You yourself indicated a transition period of 100 years! And this is the life of several generations. For an individual, this is not noticeable at all!
  3. 0
    20 November 2023 09: 13
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    I'll just leave it flowing. Will this suit you?


    Dutchman Michel,Are you bargaining?
    1. 0
      20 November 2023 09: 18
      Quote: Pavel Gusterin
      Dutchman Michel, are you bargaining?

      I am commenting on the article you wrote.
  4. 0
    20 November 2023 09: 23
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    Then another bump - Renaissance, the world again became somewhat different. Then the Reformation and Humanism


    Dutchman Michel, You do not master the school curriculum.
  5. -1
    20 November 2023 09: 24
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    The mentality and scale of values ​​change along with the history of mankind. From cannibalism to vegetarianism...


    Dutchman Michel, You are confusing mentality and food preferences.
    1. +2
      20 November 2023 09: 31
      Quote: Pavel Gusterin
      You are confusing mentality and food preferences

      Food preferences stem from mentality. A Muslim will not eat pork, and I, due to my mentality, will never eat human flesh
      1. +4
        20 November 2023 11: 55
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        A Muslim will not eat pork,

        When you're full! This is the only way it cracks when you're hungry!
  6. 0
    20 November 2023 09: 25
    Quote: Pavel Gusterin
    Dutch Michel, you don’t know the school curriculum

    And you with a pen! And the school curriculum too...
  7. +1
    20 November 2023 09: 52
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    Food preferences stem from mentality. A Muslim will not eat pork


    Dutchman Michel, this is not a food preference, but a food ban. You don't even understand what you are writing about...
    1. 0
      20 November 2023 11: 07
      I will answer you with your words:
      Quote: Pavel Gusterin
      You don't even understand what you are writing about...

      I am no longer interested in you as an interlocutor for an interesting discussion. And judging by your article, they never were...
  8. 0
    20 November 2023 09: 55
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    Due to my mentality, I will never eat human flesh


    Dutchman Michel, here you are great!
    1. +3
      20 November 2023 11: 57
      Quote: Pavel Gusterin
      Due to my mentality, I will never eat human flesh

      There was a raft called "Medusa"... There were shipwrecked people floating there. Christians... And they ate each other for their sweet souls!
  9. +1
    20 November 2023 09: 58
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    I am commenting on the article you wrote.


    Dutchman Michel, this is not commenting, but self-flagellation.
  10. +1
    20 November 2023 11: 14
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    I will answer you with your words


    Dutchman Michel, if you don’t have your own thoughts, you can borrow them from me.
  11. -2
    20 November 2023 11: 15
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    I am no longer interested in you as an interlocutor for an interesting discussion. And judging by your article, they never were...


    Dutchman Michel, well, if it’s easier for you...
  12. +3
    20 November 2023 12: 06
    We can take military affairs as a fundamental difference. Then the beginning of the Middle Ages will be the transition of the main role on the battlefield from infantry to heavy cavalry, respectively, the end of the era, the return of the leading role of the infantry.
    The first date: Adrianople 378 AD, the second date is somewhat extended in time and begins with the Hundred Years' War.
    Such a division, in addition to a purely military one, very logically explains the social structure.
    Heavy knightly cavalry requires VERY large expenses for training and equipping a mounted warrior, which is most effectively provided by the feudal serf system. Massive infantry army, requires a LARGE number of free, well, or relatively free wink citizens, with a high degree of uniformity in combat training and equipment. Which, in turn, greatly increases the importance of the state.
  13. -1
    20 November 2023 12: 20
    Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
    You yourself indicated a transition period of 100 years! And this is the life of several generations. For an individual, this is not noticeable at all!


    AllX_VahhaB, we are talking about formal periodization for use in historical research. When Theodosius issued his edict in 391, it was very noticeable for all the inhabitants of the empire. Just like for the Franks, who in 487, all at once, by the will of Clovis, had to accept Christianity. The transition period in question reflects the changing role of Christianity, which became a determining historical factor in the Middle Ages.
  14. +1
    20 November 2023 12: 51
    Quote: kalibr
    Quote: Dutchman Michel
    A Muslim will not eat pork,

    When you're full! This is the only way it cracks when you're hungry!


    One Muslim in the army ate lard at night and said - it’s dark at night, Allah doesn’t see.
  15. +2
    21 November 2023 12: 37
    Probably the most important thing is the economy. The historical materialism of Marx and Engels - now it is fashionable to criticize them, often offering all sorts of nonsense in return.
    The economic basis and superstructure are convincing and conclusive.
    “Antiquity is, first of all, a set of characteristic stable cultural phenomena” - following this thesis, even from the comments it is clear that many see “antiquity” today.

    In fact, antiquity and all its spirituality arose under conditions of a slave economy. To put it simply, the slaves plowed, and Aristotle and Plato philosophized (those who like to be sarcastic and stupid will like this). And among the barbarian peoples of that time, slavery, if it was, was not decisive and primitive (among the Germans and Vikings - the so-called “family slavery”). So they lagged far behind classical slave-owning civilizations; there was no time left for philosophy and all sorts of sophistication.

    When slavery exhausted itself economically, the entire system of the ancient world began to deflate. By the way, in Soviet school textbooks “History of the Ancient World” (6th grade, I think) this is explained clearly and convincingly. Re-read, I advise. It is difficult to simplify, it is easy to complicate.... Now they will probably start making fun of me in every possible way, making sarcastic remarks. Full of newfangled theories. I read almost all of them - they did not convince me. If I myself have not convinced possible critics, then everyone will remain with their own opinion, that’s all.

    Of course, 476 AD. - the date is conditional. No one can name the exact date of the end of antiquity. "Congratulations! Tomorrow we begin feudalism!" - of course it doesn’t happen that way.

    Different eras smoothly flow into one another, although this is not always the case. It’s also not an axiom. In Russia, before the October Revolution of 1917, there was no socialism in the economy, there were monopolies and, in general, there was a market economy based on private property, but with feudal remnants (often communal ownership of land by peasants). Lenin has many works on this topic - you can scold, insult and mock as much as you like, but he shows everything convincingly, with economic and statistical calculations, such as the work “Imperialism, as the last stage of capitalism”, etc.
    From Engels I recommend, first of all, “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State.” Fundamental work.

    PS
    By the way, the New American Encyclopedia once ordered a whole series of articles on historical topics from Marx and Engels. And encyclopedias haven’t yet ordered anything from their contemporary critics and ridiculers...

    1. -1
      1 March 2024 20: 56
      In fact, antiquity and all its spirituality arose under conditions of a slave economy.

      Now this is highly doubted. There were many slaves, but the basis of the ancient economy was still the personally free peasantry. And there were many slaves in the Middle Ages, especially in the East.
  16. 0
    21 November 2023 15: 58
    Quote: Timofey Charuta
    Of course, 476 AD. - the date is conditional. No one can name the exact date of the end of antiquity. "Congratulations! Tomorrow we begin feudalism!" - of course it doesn’t happen that way.


    Of course, conditional. This convention is needed primarily by the compilers of training courses and textbooks to make it more convenient to carry out the learning process. It is also convenient for the subsequent specialization of historians.

    That is, it’s simply more convenient and it doesn’t matter where to draw this line, the main thing is that you agree with it.
  17. +1
    14 February 2024 16: 42
    From a military point of view, and in my opinion, it is the development of military affairs that drives the development of society in all its guises. Transition, Battle of Adreanopolis, 378 AD. The defeat of the Roman infantry army and the promotion of heavy cavalry, the “rich army,” to the fore.
  18. +1
    14 February 2024 17: 09
    Quote: Grossvater
    From a military point of view,

    It turns out that the topic has a beard and I already wrote in it.
  19. 0
    19 March 2024 23: 50
    It seems to me that in the 5th century antiquity ended in Western Europe with the fall of the western part of Rome, while in its eastern part antiquity flourished in the eastern half of Rome until the Arab conquests of the 7th century. By the way, Iranianists also end antiquity in Iran with the 7th century. The terms “antiquity” and “Middle Ages” are not very suitable for other parts of the world; the Chinese have their own periodization of history (tied to dynasties), the Indians have their own (tied to the hegemons in Hindustan).