Talk:Early Middle Ages#Failed GA

{{Talk header}}

{{ArticleHistory

| action1 = GAN

| action1date = 16 April 2007

| action1link = /Archive 1#Failed GA

| action1result = failed

| action1oldid = 122718282

| currentstatus = FGAN

}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=

{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject History|importance=Top}}

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}

|maxarchivesize = 70K

|counter = 2

|minthreadsleft = 5

|algo = old(90d)

|archive = Talk:Early Middle Ages/Archive %(counter)d

}}

{{archives|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=90}}

{{Broken anchors|links=

}}

“Fiddling” with the dates

I’ve altered the introductory summary’s “to the 10th century” to “through the 10th century.” If the High Medieval Period began in 1000, then the Early one ended in 999, or just a year short of “through the 10th century,” a much better term than the equivocal “to the 10th century.” Per my review of this Talk page, it doesn’t take up this specific matter.

Of course, these dates are necessarily imprecise anyhow, indeed as “from the late 5th or early 6th century” denotes. Likewise, the Middle Ages Wikipedia article’s “terminology and periodisation” section acknowledges “no universally agreed-upon end date.”

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:25, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Unsourced caption on picture is offending Muslims

The illustration to the "Rise of Islam" sub-section is causing offence to Muslims, who object to pictorial representations of their Prophet. The picture was uploaded to Commons on 22 September 2006, since when there has been a petition (garnering 400,000 signatures I believe) against the way it is used on Wikipedia and four deletion discussions, the argument for deletion being "it is also fake because no one in any islamic history book tried to draw him because it was and still forbidden in any case good or bad." We can therefore say with confidence that this is not Muhammad - it is most likely to be a picture of Ali, as the Ahl al-Bayt are pictured closest to the preacher. The Ahl al-Bayt are especially revered by the Shia, and the picture is one of a series created as a propaganda exercise to please a Shiite ruler. 92.28.118.179 (talk) 12:18, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Transmission of learning to "non-literate Barbarians"

I've added an {{ambiguous}} tag to the following phrase in the "Transmission of Learning" subsection, asking for clarification on its meaning:

:: ""Due to the demographic displacement that accompanied the end of the western Roman Empire, by this point most western Europeans were descendants of non-literate barbarians rather than literate Romans.""

Is this phrase claiming that during the Early Middle Ages, most Western Europeans were descended from Germanic peoples who had settled in the Roman Empire during the Migration Period (thereby displacing the Romanized population)? That's a very bold claim. The debate over the demographics of post-Roman Europe is one of the biggest difficulties among historians. The question of whether or not there was mass population displacement is controversial even regarding sub-Roman Britain, where it is most likely to have happened.

I would have re-written this passage myself but I couldn't access the original reference.theBOBbobato (talk) 19:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

::I have found and consulted the book where this passage is supposed to come from - nowhere does it claim that literacy disappeared because barbarians displaced the Romanized population. After checking the edit history of this article, I also learned that this phrase was inserted months after the citation was inserted in the article by a different user. I am removing this passage.theBOBbobato (talk) 19:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

:I would say neither characterization is correct. Of course, there was significant population displacement, migration, and resulting warfare and upheaval in 3rd–6th century Europe, concerning what I understand to be a representative example: the traditional narrative that the Anglo-Saxons either slaughtered or wholly displaced the Celtic or Roman Briton populations of Britain now lacks any purchase whatsoever.

:I would be pretty surprised if the medieval population of any region in Western Europe that had been integrated into the Roman Empire should not be said to descend from both Germanic and Roman populations. Remsense 19:53, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

::I agree with removing it. The book in the citations is different from the one in the bibliography, and both are very dated. As to England, Cantor's view has long been out of fashion. Historians generally deny that there was large-scale immigration, but the latest ancient DNA research shows that nearly half the population in Anglo-Saxon ruled areas were descended from German immigrants, a partial return to the older view. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:20, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Agreed - the assumption that a high proportion of the population of the Roman Empire was literate, especially outside the great cities, is also dubious, surely? Johnbod (talk) 22:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 4 May 2025

:The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Speedy close per WP:SNOW. OP, please see Dark Ages (historiography); the difference in scope between it and this article will be made clear to you rather quickly. (closed by non-admin page mover) Remsense ‥  15:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

----

:Early Middle Ages → {{no redirect|Dark Ages of Europe}} – The term 'Dark Ages' is used to describe the period covered by this article, especially in Western Europe. Although it may be controversial, it is still used in both academic and popular discourse. And it specify the subject. the proposed title is more accurate to the cultural and historical context that many readers are familiar with and easy to find. Similar page title exists — Parthian Dark Age, Byzantine Dark Ages and Greek Dark AgesA$ianeditorz (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.