Well argued Steven

Anti-Americanism is a lazy ideology of those ignorant of how much America has done for us:

- WWII, Guadalcanal principally to prevent a Japanese naval blockade of Australia - 7,100 Americans dead,

- WWII, New Guinea Campaign mainly to prevent Japanese threats to Australia, 16,850 American casualties. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pacific_War_Japanese_Advances.jpg

No foreign country apart from America has defended Australia.

Anti-Americans are generally ignorant or ignore Australia's history. The Australian government did its utmost to draw the US into Vietnam.

The US never organised mass scale campaigns in which Australian had to fight only for America. Meanwhile Britain organised and ordered Australian forces into Gallipoli, WWI Western front, WWII Mediterranean, WWII Bombing of Europe all totalling approximately 70,000 Australians dead.

Pete

It always amuses me to read the stuff put out by indoctrinated American apologists, god bless them.

The 'stuff' always includes mention of the action of the U.S. in fighting Japan in WW2. The fact that the U.S. joined the war TWO YEARS AFTER IT BEGAN is never mentioned. The fact of Pearl Harbor causing the U.S. to attack Japan also barely receives a mention. You would think that the U.S. attacked Japan to save Australia! What a load of bollocks!

The fact that the U.S. is the world's biggest imperial nation intent on controlling the world and the fact that it has almost gone bankrupt building up an enormous military and the fact that it has thousands of military bases around the world or access to them never gets much mention either. Funny thing that!

Neither does its 'endless war' strategy or its attempt to grab most of the world's scarce resources or its attempt to push China into a corner, etc, etc. Then neither does its use of torture and rendition or its use of drones and white phosphorous or its putting people in cages or its support of despots and Royal Tyrants or its crushing of dissent in America and its spying on its citizens.

America poses the major threat to the survival of our world. And it will use nukes to get its way if push comes to shove!

Australia must become neutral if it is to survive!

http://dangerouscreation.com

Plantagenet put it very well: no other nation on earth has had its men die to defend this small nation. America is a long way from decline, but we can show her how well we work within our means and by our example show them that we are more than allies, but friends with mutual dreams and aspirations.

Often anti Americanism is really a hatred of the God who blessed America so richly. Most of the great nations founders honoured Him. As America has turned to the godless secular dogmas and draw its support away from Israel its blessing has and is being lifted. Their destiny will be determined by whether they repent and turn back to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or continue down the path of secularism where vile language is an everyday affair, the murder of the unborn, pornography, child abuse, racial hatred and violence is rampant. Take away the God of peace and you are left with sinful, prideful man trying to work things out with no hope of solutions.

David G and runner

I can see you're both ideological twins.

David, of the predictable anti-Americanism and your new mate runner off on his special Anti-US crusade:

"Their destiny will be determined by whether they repent and turn back to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or continue down the path of secularism where vile language is an everyday affair, the murder of the unborn, pornography, child abuse, racial hatred and violence is rampant. Take away the God of peace and you are left with sinful, prideful man trying to work things out with no hope of solutions."

Runner you shouldn't talk about priests that way. They have enough trouble in Godawful China which will be slowed (slewed?) with pollution as it strives to be No. 1.

Enjoy your fellow traveller David and remember the witch burnings of Salem (USA) and don't mention The Spanish Inquisition :)

Cheers

Pete
(who voted Greens last Election)

Pete, do you understand that, because I'm an atheist, I can't be an ideological twin of Runner?

And I notice in your reply that you haven't queried any of the many points I made in my comment. American-apologists never do.

American-apologists are similar to god-botherers: they just ignore any facts that contradict their foolish beliefs.

Australia will pay a heavy price for its mindless idolatry of the U.S.

Know thy enemy!

Cheers.

Thanks for the excellent article Steven. It will take some digesting before I could comment, but I appreciate the effort that must have gone into gathering the information.

Have you ever thought of taking over our ABC?

Never mind that the very best of the "hate-America" writing etc is written by Americans who are passionately committed to the project of seeing that the founding ideals upon which the American experiment was supposedly based are actually put into practice, especially by the rich and powerful.
The kind of people who are featured on Truthdig, Truthout, Alternet, Reader Support News Service, Democracy Now and Common Dreams - to name a few.
Another of my favorite "hate - America" sites is Orion Magazine.

I have two points that I disagree with you on to start with.
First for some reason it is quite often assumed that the US is too big to fail. It seems to be beyond the comprehension of some that the mighty US could become a failed state or empire.
Surely the previous run of empires that have self destructed, would destroy that argument?
Second is the comparison between China and the US with the differences if any between their manufacturing output. There is room for argument here mainly because China is rapidly increasing their manufacturing capacity and the US is fairly static in this area.
The main difference and the one that is the most telling is that the US has an unpayable debt and China is awash with cash.
I know that the US has been printing money to keep themselves afloat but that will inevitably have to cease when inflation wipes out the purchasing power of the US$.
A minor point is that despite the hype about the US and it's technology overcoming the energy crisis it is going to smash into quite soon, China has been living on a much lower amount of energy till recently and will be able to continue, whereas the US is totally committed to a supply of cheap oil.

plantagenet

'Enjoy your fellow traveller David and remember the witch burnings of Salem (USA) and don't mention The Spanish Inquisition :)'

as horrific as these events were they are insignificant compared to the bloodbath of the atheist including the ongoing slaughter of millions of those who can't defend themselves. An inconvinient truth for the god deniers.

good piece, very informative

Hi David

Aside from your standard anti-imperialist titbits and sundry China lovin(?) rhetoric, yes you did actually bring up a historical matter:

"The 'stuff' always includes mention of the action of the U.S. in fighting Japan in WW2. The fact that the U.S. joined the war TWO YEARS AFTER IT BEGAN is never mentioned."

The US provided huge assistance to Britain before Pearl Harbour (December 1941) including 50 sorely needed destroyers in September 1940 (a force larger than Australia's navy at the time) . The US Lend-Lease program began in March 1941, which probably saved Britain and benefitted the large number of Australians fighting for Britain (especially food and other essentials) before Pearl Harbour.

I invite you to do more research outside of your usual anti-American sources.

And whats wrong with imperialists if they have hearts of gold?

And though runner be a tub thumper he might save your soul if you just let him pray for you.

I'm an Agro-nostic so I'm saved :)

Planta Pete

Yes I remember a bloke telling me a funny story about all the aircraft the yanks lost, before they joined the shooting war.

It appears the yanks had an airstrip right on the Canadian boarder, & the Canadians had one right across the boarder. Strangely the yanks used to park all these aircraft, mainly bombers on that airfield, right on the boarder.

Next morning they would be unable to find those aircraft, so they would park another bunch there. This went on for months, & those dumb yanks never figured out what was happening to their aircraft.

Bet Hitler noticed.

Steven Meyer,

Well argued. I never believed that the USSR was a threat to America's economic supremacy either, Kruschev's "We will bury you!" speech always seemed like empty boasting, I doubt whether any of his Politburo colleagues really believed that they had a chance.. "Convergence", not collapse, was the experts' prediction for the USSR

I returned to university in the early 90s, to study East Asian economic development. I can also remember the "Japan as No 1" mania, various Japan specialists with mega IQs were also predicting the country's economic supremacy, it seemed daft to me. Trees don't grow to the sky.

Of course there's also Niall Ferguson's "Sudden Imperial Collapse" scenario (because of America's sovereign debt) to consider.

All thing considered, if I had a lazy $100 to bet on which nation would be No 1 in 25 years time--

$80 USA, $19 China and $1 India.

An excellent assessment Steven Meyer.

'I could write much more ...'

I agree, to the energy security and International Relationships you mentioned, you might add water and food security as well as the comparative disparities in wealth distribution, international relationships and migration policies.

The US feeds itself, has water in abundance, has respectful relations with it's immediate neighbours and others and has compartively open borders, while China is a net importer of food, is running short of water, occupies and suppresses it's neighbours, discourages both immigration and emigration and has massive differences in poverty and wealth.

Lily pads and Julia!

Did you know that the drone base to be built upon on our Cocus Islands is described by the U.S. as a lily pad base? No! Better Google the term.

Yeah, apparently the Yanks are building these military bases on soil belonging to unsuspecting Allies who have fallen for the U.S.B.S. The U.S. keeps spreading the message that 'we're here to save the world' but what they're doing is putting lily pad 'Trojan Horses' every which place!

They're building these 'lily pad' bases all over the world so they have stepping off bases that allow them to dominate the world, to take control, to pull all the strings, to manipulate every nation.

Now, you might think this is a huge joke but only if you are a fool. Its implications for the world are dire.

Do you really want a nation that killed nearly all its native Indians to run the world? Do you really want a nation that supports Israel to run the world? Do you really want a nation that is owned by the Corporations and embraces assassination squads, torture, rendition, caging prisoners, all manner of human rights abuses, the killing of millions, endless war, etc, running the world?

Wake up, Australia. The U.S. is a danger to itself and the free world. Its only interest is self-interest and grabbing total power for its own benefit!

I don't want to live in a world run by Yanks. No intelligent person would!

David G

My piece was not about whether the Americans are the good guys or the bad guys. I am not going to enter that debate.

I was simply pointing out why I thought the Americans were unlikely to implode as so many people seem to hope.

Plantagenet

A note of realism. Countries have interests, not friends. The Americans are not our mates. Like all countries they will act in what they perceive to be their best interests.

Right now I think it is in Australia's interests to keep the US involved in the Asia Pacific. So do the Japanese, Vietnamese, Philippines and Indians. We're in good company.

Hasbeen,

Glad you like it.

Don't get me started on the ABC. They should be devoting at least as much time to covering Indonesia, India and China as they do covering the USA. They're hopeless.

Sarnian

FYI. US oil consumption seems to have peaked around 2005.

Tough new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations mean that US vehicle manufacturers will have to double the fuel efficiency of their vehicles by 2025

See: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/fuel-economy/obama-announces-54-6-mpg-cafe-standard-by-2025

Also higher oil prices have made it economical to deploy technologies that exploit "tight oil" deposits.

Not only is the US weaning itself from it's cheap oil addiction, it is developing new sources of oil as it has already developed new sources of natural gas. Even the Guardian's George Monbiot admits he was wrong about peak oil.

See:

We were wrong on peak oil. There's enough to fry us all

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/02/peak-oil-we-we-wrong

mac

Glad you liked the article. I think $80 on the Yanks is reasonable.

Imajulianutter

Yep, there's a lot more I could write about.

But in the end I think it's America's unparalleled network of universities and laboratories that draws the brightest and best to it from all over the world. Unlike China, the USA, and Australia, find it relatively easy to absorb immigrants and renew themselves.

David G and sarnain (again)

As I pointed out, there seem to be a lot of people from China who do not share your pessimism about the USA.

Steven, Obama is a product of American Universities. He made a lot of promises. He kept very few.

Even George W Bush went to an American University and had a Masters Degree. He was clearly the village idiot of world politicians.

Your worship of American Universities is entirely misplaced. That's why the U.S. is all but bankrupt and is run by carpetbaggers, conmen, rabbis and corporations.

Oh, and Donald Duck!

Good comment David G.

David G wrote:

>>Your worship of American Universities is entirely misplaced.>>

I do not "worship" American universities.

It is Shanghai Jiaotong University in China that ranks them so highly.

It is also the 700,000+ students, many from China and India, whose parents make enormous sacrifices to procure a US university education for their children that value them so highly. They are willing to back up their admiration with their hard-earned money.

It is these universities that are attracting the brightest and best to America from all over the world.

These are the facts David G.

It is worth reading

Oil: The Next Revolution
THE UNPRECEDENTED UPSURGE OF OIL PRODUCTION
CAPACITY AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE WORLD
Leonardo Maugeri

See: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Oil-%20The%20Next%20Revolution.pdf

Some quotes:

>>Contrary to what most people believe, oil supply capacity is growing worldwide at such an
unprecedented level that it might outpace consumption. This could lead to a glut of
overproduction and a steep dip in oil prices.>>

>>Oil is not in short supply. From a purely physical point of view, there are huge volumes of conventional and unconventional oils still to be developed, with no “peak-oil” in sight. The real problems concerning future oil production are above the surface, not beneath it, and relate to political decisions and geopolitical instability.>>

>>The most surprising factor of the global picture, however, is the explosion of the U.S. oil output.>>

>>Thanks to the technological revolution brought about by the combined use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the U.S. is now exploiting its huge and virtually untouched shale and tight oil fields, whose production – although still in its infancy – is already skyrocketing in North Dakota and Texas.>>

>>It is worth noting that the U.S. shale revolution cannot be easily replicated in other areas of the world – at least in a short period of time – due not only to the huge resource base of shale/tight oil plays existing in the U.S., but also to some unique features of the U.S. oil industry and market, such as the private ownership of mineral rights, the presence of thousands independent companies – oftentimes small – that historically played the role of pioneering new high-risk, high-reward targets, the huge availability of drilling rigs and other exploration and production tools, a very active financial market that supply money for new ventures. With the exception of Canada, these key features are foreign to other parts of the world, and they make the U.S. and Canada a sort of unique arena of experimentation and innovation.>>

Yes, I know I've overdone this link, but the subject keeps coming up.

This is Canada's effort in "the unique arena of experimentation and innovation" - http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/03/canadian-oil-sands/essick-photography

They employ people to scrape bird carcasses off the toxic tailings ponds.

A great future awaits......

Excellent article Steven. Full of logic and facts, which are the bane of those who spout anti-americanism. Anti-americanism is a nebulous, emotionally driven, intellectually bereft philosophy for those driven by a kind of tortured unhappiness looking for a hook to hang it on. Those hoping to see the decline of the US seem to be happy that a misanthropic, totalitarian regime may one day dominate the world. Why ?

Poirot, is that something like the people employed to pick up the bird & rare eagle carcasses scattered around all those dreadful windmills?

Steven Meyer,

Yes, "peak oil" is really a variable not a fixed point, it's a product of technology as well as supply and demand, in practical terms oil reserves will never be zero.

Hasbeen,

You're right of course, human ingenuity always has a downside for wildlife....but my point was the sheer degradation and toxicity associated with oil sands mining. The land earmarked for this is around the size of England - and already the Athabasca Tar Sands is the single most polluting industrial site on the planet. That's the future for an oil dependent species.

So much for innovation, if that's the best we can do.

(I note that Obama failed to okay the Keystone Pipeline from Canada into the U.S. which would have delivered oil from Alberta to Americans - and that decision was in response to the controversy surrounding environmental damage caused by oi sands mining in Canada)

Thank you Steven for an interesting analysis. As always it is the interpretation that people place on events that is revealing. Many responses reflect a typical knee jerk reaction: if one is critical of the US ipso facto one must be anti-American. That is simply tiresome and not worth a response.
Others appear to take comfort in an interpretation of history that suits their current prejudices but bears little relationship to historical fact. That the Americans "saved" Australia by coming to our aid in 1941/42 is a favoured meme. As you pointed out, following Talleyrand, nations have neither friends nor enemies, only interests. What the Americans did following Pearl Harbour (which incidentally they engineered - see Stinnett) was decidedly in their interests.
But even if the view of history is one of America coming to the rescue like some latter day cavalry charge against those pesky redskins who resented their land being stolen from them were true, is one supposed to excuse the post-war history of US imperialism because of that? Many of the commenters seem to think so. That is either ignorance, wilful blindness or denial.
I agree that top US universities attract the best and brightest from all around the world, but what one needs to note is that more than half of Ph.d candidates in the US are foreign students, the bulk from Asian countries including China. After graduation they return to their own countries to use that knowledge in their own countries' interests, which are not necessarily the same as the US interest.
One should also be mindful of the fact that US global hegemony owes a great deal to the US$ being the world's sole reserve currency. When that ceases, as it inevitably will sooner rather than later, the US empire will crumble as all empires before it have crumbled. I only hope that Australia is prepared for that eventuality.

Every Empire, since the dawn of time, has come and gone.
Every Empire since the dawn of time has sown the seeds of its own destruction.
America has no need to look elsewhere for those problems that could destroy it, it only needs look in its own backyard.
It only needs to look at the extreme capitalism that now defines the land of the free.
It only needs to look at the failed war on drugs, vastly over populated prisons, no go lawless ghettos; or, where the only place the disadvantaged get real justice, is in TV soap operas?
In the real world the rich and privileged still get to "TRUMP" or screw over, the most disadvantaged?
Why, real wages for the least advantaged, haven't moved in real terms, for thirty years.
White supremacy, inequality and Tea party type conservatism, still guides much of the current social outcomes; and division, that so marks the "social hatred" and or fear, that still divides/defines America.
This and the demand for a hugely unfair, unequal share of the world's resources, simply builds and builds international resentment.
Yes America did save our WW11 bacon at considerable blood sacrifice. However, America was a very different, much more fair-minded place back then.
The premeditated attack on Pearl Harbour, might not have been a complete surprise and was suggested by some analysts, on the grounds, this is what they would do, if positions were reversed?
America needs to rediscover its humanity and re-implement its bill of rights.
It needs to invest in re-energising its economy, with self sufficient, much lower cost alternative energy, even if that then means, embracing DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM.
Sure America is in some sort of decline, but thus far, it remains the land of innovation and technical superiority.
It may well survive as a still powerful entity, with a formidable sting in its tail, through the rise and rise of China; and, that nation's eventual decline, caused yet again, as for so many past tyrannous expansionist empires, by internal dissent and problems associated with the annexing of just too many alienated/disenfranchised minorities?
Rhrosty.

James, if the U.S. Empire crumbles, the world will be filled with sobbing, breast-beating American apologists who will resemble the flat-Earthers of long ago when they found out the world wasn't flat at all.

It's amazing to me how easily people, especially Australian people, are taken in by the lies and duplicity of the U.S. as it goes about trying to gain military control of the world for its own benefit.

Of course if the demise of America corresponds with the realization that there is no God and that all religion is based upon a lie, the tears shed will create a flood of biblical proportions!

I might start to build an Ark tomorrow!

http://dangerouscreation.com

"FYI. US oil consumption seems to have peaked around 2005".
I have been studying peak oil for years so I already know that it had peaked in 2005.

"We were wrong on peak oil. There's enough to fry us all"
Sorry but that is oil company hype and it is a uneconomic supply that will fizzle.

"Contrary to what most people believe, oil supply capacity is growing worldwide at such an unprecedented level that it might outpace consumption. This could lead to a glut of overproduction and a steep dip in oil prices"
Really this is the ultimate denial and would be humorous if it was not so serious.

"Tough new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations mean that US vehicle manufacturers will have to double the fuel efficiency of their vehicles by 2025"
There will be no US car manufacturing by 2025.

Rhrosty: I am in complete agreement with you.

David G: I have had my ark (lifeboat) built for some time.

Wow sarnian,

you built an Ark while all the other leftie global warmers were telling everyone that the earth was in the grip of terminal drought?

Astonishing and now others are thinking of doing the same. Are you all expecting God to do his Noah deluge again? What happened to global warming?

James O'Neill wrote:

>>One should also be mindful of the fact that US global hegemony owes a great deal to the US$ being the world's sole reserve currency. When that ceases, as it inevitably will sooner rather than later, the US empire will crumble as all empires before it have crumbled.>>

I have what I used to think was a contrarian view of that. I think that owning the world currency has caused America immense damage and that the emergence of credible competitor currencies would be the best thing that could happen to the US.

To my surprise it turns out that a number of economists agree with me. Losing ownership of the only world currency would be the best thing that could happen to America.

You've given me an idea for my next piece, provisional title:

HOW OWNING THE WORLD'S CURRENCY HAS DAMAGED THE UNITED STATES.

Thanks.

You wrote:

>>After graduation they [foreign students] return to their own countries to use that knowledge in their own countries' interests, which are not necessarily the same as the US interest.>>

Some do. Many don't.

The Chinese government is actively trying to persuade Chinese graduates who have settled in the US to return to China. The fact that they have been offering $158,000 indicates that the Chinese Government sees a problem in this respect.

More to the point most foreign students express a desire to stay for at least a few years after graduating but fear they will not be able to get a visa. In fact difficulty in getting a visa seems to be a factor in many students returning home straight after graduation.

To re-iterate several points:

--This is not about whether you like or hate America. It's about whether China, under the present regime, will supplant the US as the world's number one. Your hatred or admiration for America will not affect the outcome any more than barracking for the Demons will get them a grand final victory.

-- America's worst enemy is America

imajulianutter;

"Arc"= "lifeboat".

"Are you all expecting God to do his Noah deluge again"

I do not expect a figment of the religious masses imagination to do anything. How could I when I do not need a crutch or believe in it?

Dear Steven,

Thanks for the article. Interesting reading.

Do I think the US is in decline, yes. Is it irreversible, hopefully not completely.

But there are two indicators you have not mentioned that really have me questioning its chances.

The first is the obscenely high number of people those in power are forced to incarcerate in the US, at a rate higher than any other nation in the world, to keep their society functioning. Russia comes in second but at a rate 20% less than the States. Australia has a seventh the rate.

The reintroduction by default of debtors prison will only serve to march these figures substantially higher.

The second is one we can take from history. It is claimed by some scholars that the real decline of the Roman empire set in around the time of Commodus.

“In the view of Dio Cassius, a contemporary observer, his accession marked the descent "from a kingdom of gold to one of rust and iron" — a famous comment which has led some historians, notably Edward Gibbon, to take Commodus' reign as the beginning of the decline of the Roman Empire.” Wikipedia

Here we have the first Roman Emperor ever “born in the purple” reigned after his father (see Bush Snr – George W), dramatically undermined the economic viability of the Empire (see George W) and once he left saw the military selling off the high offices to the highest bidder (see military/industrial complex legally bribing politicians).

Okay this one might be a little fanciful, but not completely without merit I would have thought.

Good to read the economic facts pointed out in Steven’s article.
I found it interesting. Economics can certainly play an enormous
part in the decline of powerful countries. However so can cultural
Shifts.

The economics can remain powerful but be taken over
by cultural demographic shifts. If the new controllers of the economic
power and weaponry are more barbaric and more inclined to use nuclear missiles, then the fact that there is economic power and huge devastating military power can make the fall dangerous and unpredictable for the world as a whole.

Steven Meyer,

At least half the commenters here appear to be missing the point entirely-too busy with their own agendas. Oy vey!

csteele,

"The second is one we can take from history. It is claimed by some scholars that the real decline of the Roman empire set in around the time of Commodus."

That's with the benefit of hindsight. There were some reforming Emperors after Commodus-- Aurelian, Diocletian and Constantine, who succeeded in slowing the decline. The Empire was also faced with enormous external pressure from the barbarians and Persians, and later the Moslems. The Americans are safe in their hemisphere and still have, by far, the world's most efficient military machine.

The Eastern Roman Empire survived for centuries after the collapse of the West, a fact which is often overlooked.

Yes the Romans were often their own worst enemies, but there's more to the story, with a little more luck, the Imperium Romanum might still exist. There was no inevitability about the Roman decline and there is nothing inevitable about the forecast decline of the US

Dear Mac,

'That's with the benefit of hindsight.', sure but to throw in another adage, 'those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.'

However I will confess to being attuned to the history of the Roman Empire and it's lessons for the Republic of the United States of American as I am availing myself of an excellent podcast series by Mike Duncan. I am half way through the Second Punic war at the moment. 

Mike is really interesting, not only in his references to the current dominant power throughout the podcasts, but also by revealing how much the founders and settlers of the US were so cognizant and appreciative of Roman History.

For instance Cincinnati was named after Cincinnatus who relinquished power and returned to humble pursuits after defeating the invading northern tribes. 

"His immediate resignation of his absolute authority with the end of the crisis has often been cited as an example of outstanding leadership, service to the greater good, civic virtue, lack of personal ambition and modesty." Wikipedia

Washington's similar action after the Revolution is honored by the Society of Cincinnati.

As you say the US is indeed blessed with relatively benign neighbours and extensive ocean borders but the flip side is the need to extend its military presence to protect trade and supply routes on the other side of the world. This requirement soaks up funds that might otherwise go to social spending and the incarceration rate flags the effects.

As I said I don't see the decline as totally irreversible I'm just not seeing the willingness to get the job done. When China recently set quite ambitious targets to attack poverty it was not hard to see them achieving them purely because the determination is there. The furore over Obamacare leaves little sense of the same for the US.

mac, csteele

How much do we actually know about the fall of the Roman Empire?

Most of what we think we know is simply a rehash of Gibbons.

Here's in a nutshell what I learned in history.

--Western Roman Empire falls in fifth century

--Dark ages. Science, technology, arts, literature, commerce stagnate

--Muslims keep learning alive

--Greek knowledge recovered from Muslims

--Renaissance, enlightenment, progress

--Eastern Roman Empire does not rate a mention

And for a long time I believed it.

Only the archaeological evidence says something different. It says that while the Western Empire may have fallen Roman civilisation persisted for many centuries. Instead of an abrupt change there was actually a gradual transition from classical Roman civilisation to the more vibrant civilisations that succeeded it.

The period between the supposed fall of the Roman Empire and the advent of the renaissance in Western Europe was actually a time of great technological advance and vibrant commerce. It was during this period that Western Europe was laying the foundation for what was, in effect, the world's first knowledge economy.

For those who want to understand what really happened in the aftermath of the (supposed) fall I recommend:

Barbarians to Angels: The Dark Ages Reconsidered by Peter S. Wells

http://www.amazon.com/Barbarians-Angels-Dark-Ages-Reconsidered/dp/0393060756

Never mind the hand wringing of the Roman writers that Gibbons relies on so heavily. This is the on-the-ground evidence of what really happened.

mac wrote:

>>At least half the commenters here appear to be missing the point entirely-too busy with their own agendas>>

I have to agree with you. People who are blinded by ideology will always try and shoehorn everything into their preconceived notions.

mac

As you point out the Eastern Roman Empire persisted until the fifteenth century, until it was overwhelmed by the Muslim Ottoman Empire.

It was the Ottomans that produced the great stagnation in science, technology and the arts.

It is now hard to believe that pre-Islamic North Africa, Middle-East and Arabia were once great centres of learning. It was astronomers in present day Iraq who, using only naked eye astronomy, laid the basis for our modern calendar. They discovered that 235 lunar months equalled 19 tropical years. They also mapped the paths of the planets between the constellations using a sort of primitive sine function. Much of Greek cosmology is based on the observations of those early Babylonian astronomers.

It was Eratosthenes, born in present day Libya, third librarian of the Great Library of Alexandria so shamefully destroyed by the Christians, who gave us our first realistic estimate of the circumference of the Earth in the third century BC. His experiment was as ingenious as any designed by a modern scientist.

See: http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Biographies/Eratosthenes.html

The Romans called present day Yemen "Arabia Felicia" because of its wealth and its sophisticated commercial culture. Hard to believe when we look at present day Yemen.

The rest of pre-Islamic Arabia, including present-day Saudi Arabia, too had a sophisticated commercial culture.

Many people think of Islam as a primitive religion because they think it originated in a primitive part of the world. They may be mixing up cause and effect.

csteele,

When I think about reasons for a possible American decline and fall it's not the Roman Empire that comes to mind but the Ottoman Empire. I worry that the kind of anti-science mentality that ultimately destroyed the Ottomans could infect the USA. Could Christian fundamentalists do to America what Islam did to the Ottomans?

Come to think of it, that worries me about Australia as well.

csteele,

I'm another fan of Mike Duncan, he presents a very coherent continuous narrative of Roman history, I'd also recommend Joseph Hogarty's "Europe; From its Origins." Hogarty is a critic of the idea that the Roman Empire collapsed suddenly in the 5th century, many of the barbarians who captured the Western Empire were, in fact, pro Roman and civilisation survived for centuries in some areas. In his opinion, the actual destruction of Greco-Roman civilisation was caused by the Islamic occupation that started in the 7th century, practically nothing survives in North Africa and the ME.

stevenmyer,

I'd also recommend Hogarty's podcast to you.

I disagree with you in regard to Islam, it indeed originated in a primitive tribal nomadic culture, this was the basis of the early Moslems' military advantage over the Romans and Sassanids and they were spectacularly lucky, of course.
The jury is still out as to who destroyed the library at Alexandria, there are many suspects, (most likely the Christians) but it probably also perished from neglect as Greco-Roman culture disappeared and Islamic civilisation stagnated.

I don't disagree with your comments re the Ottomans, however it's worth remembering that the "Golden Age" of Islam was over by the 13th century, everywhere in the Moslem world. The Ottomans simply absorbed the prevailing non-scientific culture.

Steven, I'd worry about Moslem fundamentalism as much as Christian fundamentalism.

Dear Steven and mac,

From the article I had assumed that rather than the thought of how long the US Empire may last Steven's proposition was centred around how long it will remain the 'dominate' world power.

That the Roman Empire survived in the East a reasonably healthy state in the guise of the Byzantine Empire for a thousand years past the fall of the Western Roman Empire is not in dispute. The question of course is was it the dominate world power through that period, even in a limited euro-asian sense? Of course not and the US is not, we hope, going to suffer a sharp decline outside a nuclear war even if it foregoes its position to China.

The most pertinent thing have I learned from listening to Mike Duncan's podcasts is that the Roman Empire was often on its knees having suffered defeats that had driven other powers of the time into the pages of history, but what kept them bouncing back was a deep investment in the notion of what it was to be a Roman. Pride, nationalism, patriotism, call it what you like but the citizenry bought into the narrative just as the much as the US citizen has up till now. Time and time again they were prepared to put their bodies and wealth on the line for Rome. The citizen soldier is an ethic that sustained both empires. It ultimately proved too powerful for the very well equipped and dominant mercenary armies of Carthage (note the growing propensity of the US to engage mercenaries).

So does that ethic pervade the Chinese? Here in the West we have been taught to assume no. Images such as those of Tienanmen Square still inform the notion that the people are terribly oppressed and can not wait to throw the yoke of government rule from their shoulders. Over the last few years I come into contact with quite a number of Chinese students studying here and I must say there is a strident nationalism that surfaces when longer discussions are ventured.

Cont...

Cont...

An example, ask a young Chinese person what they think of the Taiwanese, the dismissive retort is often 'ABC' which I now know means American Born Chinese.

My proposition is that inexorably growing wealth inequity, political corruption, the Occupy movement, disillusionment resulting from the hardships forced by GFC blamed on the greed and games of the elite, the body count from overseas wars, are all contributing to disillusionment with the American narrative. Of course this might be reversed, the question is will it and can it be done without a nationalism stoking war?

As to the claimed stultifying effects of Muslim rule, I have heard the arguments before and always get the feeling there is some revisionism at work. For instance Norman Cantor in his excellent book 'The Sacred Chain – A History of the Jews' talks of the period for Jews under Muslim rule in Spain as “an era of economic, political and intellectual vitality not seen among the Jews anywhere since the downfall of Alexandrian Jewry in the second century AD”. Perhaps I need further reading.

I'm not denying the Ottoman Empire in the last third of its reign was 'the sick man of Europe', marvellously captured by Twain's pithy observations when he saw “Abdul-Aziz, the representative of a people by nature and training filthy, brutish, ignorant, unprogressive, superstitious—and a government whose Three Graces are Tyranny, Rapacity, Blood.” pass him in a carriage at the World Fair in Paris.

“weak, stupid, ignorant, almost, as his meanest slave; ... a man who sees his people robbed and oppressed by soulless tax-gatherers, but speaks no word to save them; ... is nervous in the presence of their mysterious railroads and steamboats and telegraphs; ... a man who found his great empire a blot upon the earth—a degraded, poverty-stricken, miserable, infamous agglomeration of ignorance, crime, and brutality—and will idle away the allotted days of his trivial life and then pass to the dust and the worms and leave it so!”

Yet claiming its entire period “ produced the great stagnation in science, technology and the arts.” is unsupported.

Just on csteele's point about Muslim Spain:

During the Dark Ages in Europe, Cordoba in Spain was the "largest and greatest city in Europe" - civilised and multicultural, where Muslims, Jews and Christians mixed at will. It was a centre for commerce and learning and was in contact with other major Islamic centres of trade and learning such as Baghdad. It was famous as a centre of learning. It's libraries served as repositories of much ancient knowledge as well as enabling the advancement of Islamic knowledge - all this while Europe was sunk in torpor.

http://www.spainthenandnow.com/spanish-history/cordoba-historical-overview/default_41.aspx

Csteele

Very few people within the Roman Empire were actually citizens. Most weren't

You wrote:

>>…Images such as those of Tienanmen Square still inform the notion that the people are terribly oppressed and can not wait to throw the yoke of government rule from their shoulders.>>

I don't know who in "the West" believes that. I don't believe it and I don't know anyone who does.

What I do know is that there are literally tens of thousands of riots and other incidents in China every year that need to be put down by force. There is also a significant plurality that do not want to overthrow "the yoke" but they do want the regime to liberalise.

On the other hand a rather virulent and dangerous brand of Chinese nationalism appears to be developing.

Poirot wrote:

>>During the Dark Ages in Europe, Cordoba in Spain was the "largest and greatest city in Europe" - civilised and multicultural, where Muslims, Jews and Christians mixed at will. It was a centre for commerce and learning and was in contact with other major Islamic centres of trade and learning such as Baghdad. It was famous as a centre of learning. It's libraries served as repositories of much ancient knowledge as well as enabling the advancement of Islamic knowledge - all this while Europe was sunk in torpor.>>

Cordoba was an outlier among Muslim cities. But that's not the point I want to make.

The "dark ages" is a myth.

--There was no "dark ages" in Europe. Some regions went backwards after the fall of the Western Empire but other parts of Europe were roaring ahead. As historians are learning, the so-called "dark ages" are dark only to historians who know so little about Europe in that period.

--Europe was never "sunk in torpor". That too is a fallacy. Great strides were being made in important technologies such as better ploughs, better ways of smelting iron and better wagon wheels that enabled trade without the need for hard-to-maintain Roman roads.

See "Barbarians to Angels" among other recent books.

http://www.amazon.com/Barbarians-Angels-Dark-Ages-Reconsidered/dp/0393060756

Steven,

Yes,

(1) the expressions 'Dark Ages' and "The Lucky Country" are often taken at face value, and misinterpreted.

(2) Europe made considerable technical progress, even in the much maligned Medieval period and unlike Islamic civilisation, the process has been continuous and accelerating for the past 700 years.

csteele,

What were the scientific advances developed by the Ottomans during their Empire as distinct from the European technical innovations they adapted. The Ottomans were like all Islamic cultures through most of their history, essentially parasitic on others--apart from a brief "Golden Age" derivative from Greco-Roman and Sassanid culture.

Summary

The point I was making earlier is that there's nothing inevitable about the decline of the USA, the Romans declined and recovered many times in their history and, apart from some remarkably bad luck, might still be with us.

The continental USA is probably the best piece of real estate on earth and as Steven indicated, still has vast unexploited resources, particularly if Canada is included in the equation. I'm old enough to remember two former candidates that were forecast to supplant the USA, where are they these days? We're probably going to have to remove a few letters from the BRICS acronym as well.

As Dan Gardner writes in "Future Babble", the great majority of economic and financial forecasts are total drivel, so my money is still on the Yanks

Technical progress is one thing, and yes human ingenuity is never at a standstill. Yet it was the preservation of ideological and philosophical wisdom from the ancients and the collation of emerging knowledge that marks the significance of Islamic civilisation of the time. All those libraries weren't provided for nothing.

Dear Steven and mac,

When Steven wrote “Europe was never "sunk in torpor". That too is a fallacy. Great strides were being made in important technologies such as better ploughs, better ways of smelting iron and better wagon wheels that enabled trade without the need for hard-to-maintain Roman roads.” did you not see this in any way an own goal?

It is like saying good on us for developing a good off road vehicle because our roads are so shithouse, or more topically a better watercart because the aqueducts were left to fall into ruin.

Roman roads became hard to maintain because the knowledge and expertise had gone along with the infrastructure to upkeep them.

It isn't hard to concede that the instability surrounding the Ottoman Empire in its latter years caused the Mullahs to dramatically gain in influence. However both the first half of its reign and indeed in earlier Islamic cultures great scientific figures abounded such as Omar Khayyam (1048–1131) “who calculated the length of the year to within 5 decimal places. He found geometric solutions to all 13 forms of cubic equations.” and ibn al-Haytham (965–1040) who “studied the effects of light refraction, and suggested the mathematics of reflection and refraction needed to be consistent with the anatomy of the eye”. Or what about "Al-Battani (850–922) was an astronomer who accurately determined the length of the solar year. He contributed to numeric tables, such as the Tables of Toledo, used by astronomers to predict the movements of the sun, moon and planets across the sky. Some of Battani's astronomic tables were later used by Copernicus.” Wikipedia

Proving the point that most science is parasitic in nature.

Putting these up against a better plow and wagon wheel doesn't seem to cut it somehow.

LOL csteele

You don't know much about the ancient world do you?

Most farms or villages were nowhere near any Roman road. The better wagon wheels were an important innovation because they broadened access to markets over a wide area.

It is easy in this motorised age of abundant food to sneer at better ploughs and wagon wheels. But at the time they multiplied the productivity of farmers and dramatically cut the cost of getting produce to markets. The combined effects of these two innovations, both of which depended on the development of other technologies, were more far-reaching than the effects of, say, the polio vaccine in the post-war era.

Just as most Australians know nothing of the history of Australia before the arrival of Europeans so most Muslims, and non-Muslims, are ignorant of the history of Dar-ul-Islam prior to the advent of Islam. It was not a sort of barbaric "Terra Nullius." North Africa and the Middle-East was home to what was for the day an advanced commercial and scientific culture. The so-called "golden age of Islam" was actually the tail-end of that pre-Islamic culture that Islam ultimately strangled.

The Persian mathematician and poet, Omar Khayyam, was very much part of that pre-Islamic tradition. Most of his work has nothing to do with Islam. In fact he had a much greater influence on the Western world than he ever had in his native Persia.

Unfortunately the Muslim world seemed to prefer Al Ghazali. Here is what he had to say about astronomy:

>>He labels astronomy as futile and trivial. He regards only limited astronomy for a select few to be permissible – such astronomy which is necessary for navigation and finding direction in the land and sea. He argues that astronomy is guesswork and blameworthy. He propagates the truth of the Hadith that it is better to remain ignorant of some branches of learning. This is a position which is unpalatable to the modernist palate soured by mental corruption. He therefore advocates: “Do not indulge in such sciences which the Shariah brands as useless.”>>

mac,

The Tea Party and the West-hating left have this in common. They allow their ideology to blind them to the facts.

They are opposite sides of the same coin.

csteele,

"Roman roads became hard to maintain because the knowledge and expertise had gone along with the infrastructure to upkeep them."

Agreed, but we have to consider the reason the expertise disappeared, the political system in post Roman Europe was fragmented, with feuding principalities and minor kingdoms. What baron would want a road from his enemy's domain into his own? There was no need for a Roman style network, so innovation adapted to the new environment.
Late Medieval Europe, in many ways, was technically more advanced than the Romans, even though the roads were non-existent by Roman standards. So the fact that European roads were crap really isn't indicative one way or the other.

I'm not suggesting that Moslem scholars didn't make contributions to science and philosophy, but their work is insignificant compared with those of Western Scholars--The claims that some Islamic apologists make are sometimes actually comical, they're grasping at straws.

Omar Khayyam's "Rubaiyat" is marvellous, however it doesn't seem to be the work of a devout Moslem to me.

The fact that Al Ghazali was able to suppress independent philosophy and science in the Islamic world as successfully he did indicates a deep dysfunction in that society's culture. Christian theocrats were never able to silence the West's secular ethos.

Steven,

The West hating left are far more dangerous than the far right.

PC and multiculturalism are very effective camouflages, and they're certainly blinkered, as anyone who has tried to discuss immigration and multiculturalism rationally, will confirm.

"They allow their ideology to blind them to the facts."

Lol.

I had been just thinking the same of you two.

My goodness, we seem to have the heels dug in labeling any contributions to science that might have been said to have come from the Islamic period as parasitic, or non-existant, or non-Muslim and you are accusing me of being blinded by ideology?

Yeh right. 

Perhaps it might be a little more useful if you hop off the high/hobby horses for a moment. 

About 85% of Americans believe God had a hand in making humans and nearly two thirds of those believe in Creationism.

Given the high number of Jewish people represented in ranks of our Nobel prize winners including scientists like Einstein then why can't I make a similar argument about the fallacy of the superiority of the Christian empires since without the input of a Semitic people they would be rightly regarded as backward? 

Are you going to put forward the argument as you did with Omar that because Einstein wasn't an orthodox Jew his contributions shouldn't be counted?

Dial it down a touch gents.

csteele wrote:

>>Are you going to put forward the argument as you did with Omar that because Einstein wasn't an orthodox Jew his contributions shouldn't be counted?>>

Einstein's scientific achievements owed nothing to Judaism. He did not get the ideas underpinning special relativity from the Talmud but from Maxwell's equations and trying to imagine what he would see if he ran alongside an electromagnetic wave.

Now Galileo was a devout Christian. To my mind he was a greater scientist than Newton. But his contributions too owed nothing to Christianity.

However both Einstein and Galileo were both part of a broader "Western" culture that valued their types of scientific endeavour and had set up the networks that could expand on their work.

Poor old Omar was stuck in Dar-ul-Islam

Christianity mostly, not always, but mostly, tolerated a scientific culture that was separate from itself. Sometimes the toleration was grudging. Sometimes it imprisoned scientists or even burned them at the stake. But most of the time it was tolerant.

Islam never tolerated a scientific culture that was separate from itself.

Under Christianity a scientific culture could and did arise.

Under Islam a pre-existing scientific culture was extinguished.

That's the difference.

"Under Christianity a scientific culture could and did arise."

Yeah, Steven....but it sort of makes you wonder....

http://atomicarchive.com/Photos/Hiroshima/image1.shtml

Poirot,

Doesn't make me wonder, science is neutral, how humans use science is a different matter entirely.

There is far too much egregious, dare I say, strange historial revisionism going on here. The dark ages may well hide some technological advances, some learning and even some literature but a substantive comparision of Western Europe from the period 600BC to 400AD and 400AD-1400AD must leave us with lowered heads and shame.

In the 4th Century AD, The Goths running from the Huns are permitted into Roman territory and not dispersed across the empire as was the normal practice for a millenia, but instead allowed to remain a single entity within Roman territory. Within the next few decades several other barbarian tribes, The Vandals in particular, would likewise establish themselves within Roman territory with their own leadership.

This would inevitably cause the end of the western empire as it descended into smaller and smaller barbarian tribes. For a long time, it may have still been known as an Empire but it had become a facade and little else.

This of course does not tell us what caused the empire to become so weak that it allowed, welcomed and negotiated its own demise: plagues, famines, and economics played their part. There is some suggestion that the large landowners were a major contributor; They got so powerful, dispossed the small land farmer and took the very best young men for farm labouring, forcing the empire to turn to foreign mercenaries and inevatibly barbarian tribes.

The Elephant in the room is of course Chrisitianity. The irony is that arguably it is having a significant part to play in the decline of the USA today as well. But as for Rome, Christianity without question destroyed the culture of rome. The pagan beliefs, the roman and greek gods, greek and roman philosophers, aristotle, pythagoras, plays and tragedies, logic and oratory, family and honour everything was either destroyed, erased or quelled under the yoke of the new christian sect.

This is of course an unpopular, and uncomfortable conclusion. It is seen as overtly simplistic. But for all that it is also undeniable.

Perhaps to destroy an empire or a civilization what you need to do is first destroy its art, its philosophy, beliefs and culture; the rest will inevitably follow.

In recent times, the USA has shown signs of abandoning its own enlightenment culture. Its own pricinples and beliefs which protected the individual against unlawful actions, torture, indefinite detention. In recent times, it has become impossible to believe that our media, press is free. Rather it has become the tool of its owners and or our government. Wars no longer need to be just. Mass crimes may be committed without accountability. The public right and good is sublimated to secret proceedings by government agents and corporate patrons. Banks lie, fail and are saved by the public purse only to again lie and fail. The barbarian tribes are in the empire operating with impunity. The culture is still holding onto a facade.

Decline is now inevitable. Only its timing remains uncertain. Like Rome once the decline commences the war becomes internal; no cohesion is possible. Whilst, ostensibly the US fights for enemies in remote caves its true enemies are in their own midst: rogue agents, rogue military, rogue companies, rogue senators, congressman, media and cross purposes. The distinction between perception and reality becomes impossibly blurred.

The entire show has already descended into farce. From 9/11 to Iraq, Afghanistan, wars on terror, GFC, Euro Crisis, Abi Graih, Guantanamo, detention centres, and torture, Wiki leaks, Manning and Assange. What all these events have in common is how little the public knows, how much incompetance, illegality, and accountability. All we know is that these now re little more than slogans marking mass failure.

Life will go on, the US will survive only not as we know it. Welcome to the age of idiocracy.

YEBIGA,

Thank you for your enlightened posts....I'll be interested to read Steven's response.

Steven and mac,

Here's an excellent commentary on the state on the U.S.'s social machinations and their descent into "cultural ignorance". I hope you can find time to read it.

http://www.joebageant.com/joe/2010/12/america-y-ur-peeps-b-so-dum.html

YEBIGA,

You're confusing the end of the Western Empire with the end of Greco-Roman civilisation, for centuries after the last Western Emperor, Roman culture continued in the West. You're also constructing a straw man argument, neither I nor Steven Meyer claimed that the early Medieval period was a "Golden Age", simply that the period was not as dark as the name suggests. You should read our earlier posts more carefully and note the references, particularly Joseph Hogarty's "Europe: from its origins" and John J O'Neill's "Holy Warriors" which records the devastating effect the Moslem invasions had on European civilisation, after the so called "Dark Ages".

The decline of the USA is not inevitable, neither was the decline of the Roman Empire, as any reader will realise from a careful reading of Roman history--it all seems inevitable, in hindsight.

Poirot,

Bageant's article is more like a rant than a reasoned political and social analysis. I doubt if the average Australian Commercial TV addict or Murdoch newspaper reader would score any better than the "dumb" Americans depicted in it. Climate change is just too much bother for Australians as well. Seems like a typical liberal democracy.

Steven,

Bageant's article is a superb social analysis because it cuts through the bullsh!t. It ties in nicely with YEBIGA's comment that "In recent times, the USA has shown signs of abandoning its own enlightenment culture. Its own principles and beliefs..... The barbarian tribes are in the empire operating with impunity. The culture is still holding onto a facade."

- and yes, I think you're right regarding your comparison of the American and Australian mainstream public.

Mac said:
You're confusing the end of the Western Empire with the end of Greco-Roman civilisation, for centuries after the last Western Emperor, Roman culture continued in the West.

Yebiga says:
I am sorry but it is a rather curious call to state Roman culture continued in the West after the fall of the Western Empire. Remnants of Roman culture remained as items of fashion but by definition the fall of the empire and its fragmentation into a myriad of barbarian and other local tribes must mean that Roman culture by necessity declined.

It is equally curious to separate the western empire from Greco-Roman civilization. Surely, the western empire is Greco-Roman civilization. It is precisely this disruption of the Greco-Roman civilization which we loosely mark the dark ages.

Finally, to me the dark ages are aptly named because they emotionally mark the will full vandalism caused by christianity to human knowledge, literature, the arts, politics, philosophy, etc. To me the damage is immeasurable. Thus the appellation the dark ages and or christendom are comfortably interchangeable. Whatever name the death of the Western empire is in Western Europe the death of greco-roman culture.

Dear Poirot,

Thank you for giving me an excuse to dip into Joe once more, may he rest in peace. A man who cared deeply about his fellow Americans but far less for what America had become.

Sorry, my last post should have been directed to mac.

YEBIGA,

Your last paragraph puts it particularly well. I'm no scholar of the period, but recently I watched a documentary on Italy and recall the narrator, while telling us of the study of anatomy at Bologna University, that in the dissection room there were small windows built into the walls where members of the Inquisition used to keep an eye on proceedings. They eventually shut it down. But, in defiance, a gifted sculptor made amazingly intricate wax statues of various anatomical systems and the students used them to understand the human body in the absence of the real thing....the wax statues still exist in the dissection room at the university.

My pleasure, csteele : )

Dear mac,

You say; “You should read our earlier posts more carefully and note the references, particularly Joseph Hogarty's "Europe: from its origins" and John J O'Neill's "Holy Warriors" which records the devastating effect the Moslem invasions had on European civilisation”

Well I have gone and googled your Mr O'Neill and as a supposed historian he is a revisionistic, agenda driven, shocker who hangs around sites like Islam Watch and Jihad Watch spouting such nonsense as;

“Just over a decade after the Christian knights of France and Germany had helped their co-religionists in Spain to retake the city of Toledo from the Muslims, some of them prepared to set out on the First (official) Crusade. Before they did so, a few of them took part in the mass murder of several thousand Jews in Germany and Bohemia – an atrocity unprecedented in European history.”

“In view of the fact that these pogroms were committed by warriors some of whom had learned their trade in Spain, and in view of the fact that such atrocities were hitherto unknown in Europe, we may state that there is strong circumstantial evidence to suggest that the Christians had been influenced by the Muslims. This is all the more probable in view of Islam’s history of virulent and violent anti-Semitism.”

What tosh.

Plus how many historians do you know want to wipe 300 years off the calender? His reasoning? “The motive then for the insertion of phantom centuries (and phantom characters such as Charlemange) into history, was the revival of the Western Roman Empire.”

WTF?

The guy is a fruit loop my friend.

Do you really endorse this rubbish?

YERBIGA,

First, Greco-Roman cultural traditions survived the disappearance of the Western Empire and were not confined to that Empire, ever heard of the Eastern empire? As to the disappearance of Greco-Roman Culture, what alphabet do we use, which language was Europe's lingua franca until a few generations ago? Which language is the ancestor of the modern romance languages? How much of Roman legal doctrine survives in continental Europe? I never once claimed that Greco-Roman civilisation survived entirely, even during the period of the imperium, civilisation was changing.
The Dark Ages were originally designated "Dark" because of the lack of historical records, not because darkness descended over Europe, people read too much into the name.

csteele,

"Do you really endorse this rubbish?"

No, I don't, I meant to reference J J Norwich, after I saw the email, I couldn't believe that I'd referenced O'Neill's book. I could claim a senior's moment, however the real reason was too much butterscotch schnapps. Sober, I still think Josephh Hogarty's podcast "Europe: from its Origins" is worth a look. Jeeez.

Dear mac,

Don't sweat it mate, happens to all of us. I try not to post after a good Cab-Sav.

I will have a look at Hogarty when I get the time. I do acknowledge even real historians are human beings too and are not above a tinge of revisionism to sharpen sales. The best we can hope to do is to try and filter out the most obviously afflicted.