Re: Romula - the news
| From: | Tom Wier <artabanos@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, January 10, 2000, 11:10 |
|---|
Artem Kouzminykh wrote:
> >New Ages?
>
> Well, how do you call a period after the Middle Ages - say, 17-19 centuries?
> We in Russian called it verbatim "The New Time". Renaissance? No, I don't
> think...
Well, depending on who you ask, the "Renaissance" went from about 1350 to
1550/1600, after which you get the "Age of Reason/Enlightenment", then the
"Progressive Age" and such. The point is: the ages are named based on the
unifying feature, if any, that made them important for *future* periods of time.
(Classical Greece didn't become classical until much, much later). So, if you're
constructing your own periodization of history*, I'd suggest naming them after
the important social developments of your civilization.
* You don't actually have to periodize history; that's just the European way of
doing things. Until quite recently, Chinese historiographers conceived of history
in cyclical terms, according to the rise and fall of dynastic succession and the
"Mandate of Heaven". Personally, I favor the "spiraling"-conception of history. :)
===========================================
Tom Wier <artabanos@...>
AIM: Deuterotom ICQ: 4315704
<http://www.angelfire.com/tx/eclectorium/>
"Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero."
===========================================