To what extent can they be said to have 'saved civilization' in the Early Middle Ages?

To what extent can they be said to have 'saved civilization' in the Early Middle Ages?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    IT'S TRUE

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Stop ruining a good history thread, autist!

      You're seething op. How many times do you post this thread?

      They defeated the last of the vikings, ensuring the victory of Christ in the north

      >In that battle, there were Norsemen on either side.
      Lies

      Because nobody ever gives a proper answer, just calls the Irish subhuman or whinges about seething Angloids

      irish have no culture
      >we wuz LotR
      >we wuz English folk
      >we wuz norse myth
      >pray to Stonehenge 3 times a day
      >think the Wyrd is celtic
      >think full on Anglo-saxon words are celtic
      >think every English colony is irish
      >think every English writer is irish
      >think they are spiritually the same as native americans and aborigines.
      >claim they are spiritual pagans despite being christians first
      >claim they are forest loving pixies despite sawing them all down
      >claim they are more creative but no one can name anything they have created
      >thats ok just claim English stuff
      >they think they are japanese too
      >mysteriously had a fishing industry before and after the famine.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Take your schizo meds.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That flag represents the Republic of Ireland which didn't exist in the time frame you've posited, so it's a trick question and a wasted thread

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      what a stupid answer

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The answer is not at all unless they are time travellers.
        Make better threads

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Stop ruining a good history thread, autist!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The flag represents a united ireland, hence the orange to represent ulster. the republic fly it as a cope because not everyone wanted to join their stupid rebel state.

      https://i.imgur.com/4q2JTHw.jpg

      To what extent can they be said to have 'saved civilization' in the Early Middle Ages?

      Anglo-saxons had a great rich germanic culture that was spoilt and ruined by ireland proselytism. now we've lost all the cool germanic myths and have to learn lame israeli myths.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The original republican tricolour is green white gold, not orange. That was changed as a gesture to our whacky moronic cousins up north, pointlessly because they don't appreciate it anyway

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The only man to unit all of Ireland under a single republic.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            He let your ancestors back into England too. You must be a big fan.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          This is completely untrue. Meagher's flag had orange on it. Protestants have been involved in Irish Republicanism from its conception, so very obviously the flag "represents" them.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The flag represents a united ireland, hence the orange to represent ulster.

        The orange represents protestants not Ulster.

        the republic fly it as a cope because not everyone wanted to join their stupid rebel state.

        The flag was around 70 years before the state was founded and 60 years after the 1798 rebellion when Catholics and Protestants had come together to try and found an independent Republic in Ireland.

        >Presented as a gift in 1848 to Thomas Francis Meagher from a small group of French women sympathetic to Irish nationalism,[3] it was intended to symbolise the inclusion and hoped-for union between Roman Catholics (symbolised by the green colour) and Protestants (symbolised by the orange colour). The significance of the colours outlined by Meagher was, "The white in the centre signifies a lasting truce between Orange and Green and I trust that beneath its folds the hands of Irish Protestants and Irish Catholics may be clasped in generous and heroic brotherhood".[1]

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You're seething op. How many times do you post this thread?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because nobody ever gives a proper answer, just calls the Irish subhuman or whinges about seething Angloids

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They defeated the last of the vikings, ensuring the victory of Christ in the north

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      not really at all, the book everyone posts is a meme. the argument that's generally told is that they had a very strong literary tradition and were spreading Christianity beyond Ireland into northern Britain and parts of Germany in a time when some believe it was vulnerable.

      In essence, it's more like "the Irish were an unexpected but significant safeguard of Christian Civilisation in places where it was floundering or falling behind."

      They assimilated them more than anything. The Vikings in Ireland were "defeated" as a force distinctively foreign to Ireland by the end of the 10th Century. The Battle of Clontarf in 1014 marked the last real attempt of Vikings to invade or conquer any of Ireland, but that was really only on behalf of a Norse-Gael King as part of a war between Irish Kings. In that battle, there were Norsemen on either side.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >In that battle, there were Norsemen on either side.
        Lies

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The revisionist take is that it shouldn't even be called an "Irish vs Viking" battle but rather civil conflict while the traditional take is that it was Gaels vs Norsemen but the truth is somewhere in the middle.

          One of the main instigators of the rebellion was Máel Mórda mac Murchada, King of Leinster. His sister was Brian Boru's wife, Gormlaith, who was the mother of Sigtrygg Silkbeard, the Norse-Gael King of Dublin at the time.

          Brian had in his realm at the time of the battle a large Norse population through the many Norse trade posts and settlements that had been conquered, which already had an increasingly mixed population by the time Clontarf happened. There were MORE norsemen on the side fighting Brian Ború (they were invited by Norse and Norse-Gael leaders in Ireland with promise of land and adventure) but there were Norsemen and Gaels on either side.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          source then?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I was there

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a shame any thread about Ireland just devolves into autistic shit flinging , normally by people who aren’t even Irish or English themselves.

    To answer your question OP, it’s true that they kept many records alive and were instrumental in spreading Christianity to the Germanic pagans of NW Europe but to say they saved civilisation is a bit much. Ireland was practically unaffected by the fall of Rome and even expanded during it, establishing kingdoms in Scotland and Wales. They developed a monastic tradition and their own “Celtic” church that was at odds with Rome on some issues. The Irish for a short while were in a golden age before the rest recovered and overtook them.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >instrumental in spreading Christianity to the Germanic pagans of NW Europe
      OK, but I question the 'saving civilization' element there as it seems most Irish monks were invited by Franks, Popes, etc who knew that they possessed translations of old texts

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >golden age

      A few ascetic hermitages founded on wind swept isles and a few raids and settlements into their neighbouring island. Geez was that the irish golden age? how do they cope with this mediocrity?

      https://i.imgur.com/DLDV1N6.jpg

      The only man to unit all of Ireland under a single republic.

      'Ate catholics - not a racialist, just don't like 'em.
      Luv the israelites - lots of monies innit
      simples as.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        A few ascetic hermitages founded on wind swept isles

        There were monastic schools that had thousands of pupils with many coming from abroad to study especially from Britain.

        >and a few raids and settlements into their neighbouring island. Geez was that the irish golden age? how do they cope with this mediocrity?

        The Irish golden age of the early medieval period was based on learning and art. Raids into Britain and establishing settlements there had nothing to do with it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The Irish importance is hugely overstated though

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Your own sense of self importance is hugely overstated too.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You sound upset. There were a few monasteries in Ireland that had access to texts (brought there by Romans and Romano-Britons and Gallo-Romans in the 4th Century). Popes and continental missionaries invited a few monks to Europe with their copies of old books. And that's it. A charming contribution, but hardly tantamount to 'saving civilization'.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not upset and I'm not talking about missionaries or scholars from Ireland in European royal courts. There was schools here that had thousands of pupils and had libraries and those places attracted students from all over Europe. They must have had great knowledge and copies of lots of books if they had schools with thousands of pupils. I wouldn't say they saved civilisation either but they played their part.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The greatest number of foreign students came from Great Britain they came in fleet- loads.as Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborne (A.D. 705 to 709), expresses it in his letter to his friend Eadfrid, Bishop of Lindisfarne, who had himself been educated in Ireland. Many also were from the Continent. There is a remarkable passage in the Venerable Bede's "Ecclesiastical History" which corroborates Aldhelm's statement, as well as what is said in the native records, and indeed in some particulars goes rather beyond them. Describing the ravages of the yellow plague in 664, he says: -"This pestilence did no less harm in the island of Ireland. Many of the nobility and of the lower ranks of the English nation were there at that time, who, in the days of Bishops Finan and Colman [Irish abbots of Lindisfarne, p. 146, supra], forsaking their native island, retired thither, either for the sake of divine studies. or of a more continent life..... The Scots willingly received them all, and took care to supply them with food, as also to furnish them with books to read, and their teaching, all gratis."

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That doesn't contradict what I said

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >(brought there by Romans and Romano-Britons and Gallo-Romans in the 4th Century). Popes and continental missionaries

            By who and what texts? Do you have more information

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Ireland's patron saint is St Patrick for a reason
            How do you think Ireland came to be Christian? It was introduced there by missionaries from Britain, Gaul and Rome

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They kept the british isles christian while saxons were too busy farming cattle or getting btfo by vikings up north

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      but pagan beliefs lingered far longer in ireland than in britain, and it was the syncretic element to irish christianity that offended other nations (despite their use as copiers of old texts)
      descendants of roman christians obviously persisted in britain as the cult of st alban survived the entire middle ages

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >but pagan beliefs lingered far longer in ireland than in britain, and it was the syncretic element to irish christianity that offended other nations (despite their use as copiers of old texts)
        No they didn't you lying irish rat
        The irish literally mass converted to christianity iwth no resistance while anglos and scandinavians resisted christianisation and remained pagan for hundreds of years
        the irish cut down viking pagan sites and are responsible for the spread of christianity to the anglo saxons and norse yet they LARP as pagans despite hating paganism for their entire history

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the irish have only ever been a detriment to civilisation
    Reminder in their earliest days they were incestuous cannibals then upgraded to pirates.
    Then they reverted back to hovel dwelling troglodytes for a bit before inventing modern terrorism
    btw they hate nature and beauty thats why they have no culture.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >thats why they have no culture.

      B b but what about their corny rebel songs?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Despite 0 influence of Roman civilization, Irish monks did a large scale work of Christian exegetical and theological interpretation, its missionaries led the Christianization of northwestern and northern Europe, and its artists led the way in the Carolingian Renaissance. The role of Irish exegetes, missionaries and monks in the Early Middle Ages can be compared with the Patristics of Late Antiquity.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Despite 0 influence of Roman civilization
      apart from Romano-Britons and Gallo-Romans introducing Christianity, you mean
      I like how people jump this step, as if Christianity sprang from the bogs of Ireland in a pure and unadulterated form, rather than being the work of Roman, British and Gallic missionaries like Palladius and Patrick
      >Irish monks did a large scale work of Christian exegetical and theological interpretation
      Well, one did. In the 9th century.
      >its missionaries led the Christianization of northwestern and northern Europe
      Scotland and a few pockets of coastal Northern England were the only places the Irish bothered to go of their own accord. Even the Anglo-Saxons converted a vast swathe of continental Europe. The Franks, Gallo-Romans, Italians and even Greeks did more missionizing than the Irish, especially in continental NW Europe and even Britain, but deceitful ideologues like Cahill ignore this
      >its artists led the way in the Carolingian Renaissance
      This is just made up. Carolingian art owes far more to Roman/Byzantine tradition, with some Insular influence from Irishmen and Englishmen in the employ of Charlemagne and his sons. Likewise with their architecture

      So once again we establish that the Irish had a respectable monastic class, who were definitely trusted by their continental employers to teach the works of others (even if they produced little original work of their own, at least of worth, bar one man)
      what we cannot see is evidence that they 'saved civilization'

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >apart from Romano-Britons and Gallo-Romans introducing Christianity, you mean
        Non very important works from them

        >I like how people jump this step, as if Christianity sprang from the bogs of Ireland in a pure and unadulterated form, rather than being the work of Roman, British and Gallic missionaries like Palladius and Patrick
        Because the Christian bulk in Northwest Europe during Early Middle-Ages was Ireland. You inherently fell on influence of North African Christians as Spain and Italy, or in the influence of Irish Christians as Britain, West Germany and France.

        >Scotland and a few pockets of coastal Northern England were the only places the Irish bothered to go of their own accord. Even the Anglo-Saxons converted a vast swathe of continental Europe. The Franks, Gallo-Romans, Italians and even Greeks did more missionizing than the Irish, especially in continental NW Europe and even Britain, but deceitful ideologues like Cahill ignore this
        Anglosaxon missionaries were a branch product of Irish activity. Marianus Scotus and Johannes Scotus, the last one the main philosopher at the level of St. Augustine & Origenes born in Europe during Early Middle-Ages, were in Central Europe doing missionary work. The Schottenklöster of Irish monks in Central Europe were highly impart around 800 - 1000 AD.

        >This is just made up. Carolingian art owes far more to Roman/Byzantine tradition, with some Insular influence from Irishmen and Englishmen in the employ of Charlemagne and his sons. Likewise with their architecture
        Irishmen*** anglosaxon culture belonged to Irish cultural sphere before switching to French cultural sphere after the arrival of Guillaume le conquérant. Also, not true at all, the artistic tradition of Illustrated manuscripts had its peak in northern Europe with the Irish monastic culture, which introduced their style to the Franks and Anglo-Saxons.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Non very important works from them
          But it's about saving civilization, not pinpointing a single text. Ireland was widely regarded as a barbaric place throughout the Middle Ages, and its forms of Christian worship condemned as near-heretical. People knew that the monks there had access to old texts (having been taken there by non-Irish missionaries in the 4th and 5th centuries), and that's about it.

          As I said, "I like how people jump this step (Ireland being Christianized), as if Christianity sprang from the bogs of Ireland in a pure and unadulterated form, rather than being the work of Roman, British and Gallic missionaries like Palladius and Patrick"

          >The Schottenklöster of Irish monks in Central Europe were highly impart around 800 - 1000 AD
          Yeah,
          I notice we're jumping between wildly different timeframes here too. You can't jump between the 5th and 10th centuries to try to prove a nonsensical point lol

          >Anglosaxon missionaries were a branch product of Irish activity
          >anglosaxon culture belonged to Irish cultural sphere before switching to French cultural sphere after the arrival of Guillaume le conquérant
          >Also, not true at all, the artistic tradition of Illustrated manuscripts had its peak in northern Europe with the Irish monastic culture
          LMAO

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >But it's about saving civilization, not pinpointing a single text.
            Yeah. The title is an exageration but Irish christians played a keyrole at the spread of culture and Christianity in Northern/Central/Western Europe during Early Middle-Ages, a role at the level of North African patristic.

            >Ireland was widely regarded as a barbaric place throughout the Middle Ages, and its forms of Christian worship condemned as near-heretical.
            Arabs also considered Europe as a barbaric place, still a lie.

            >People knew that the monks there had access to old texts (having been taken there by non-Irish missionaries in the 4th and 5th centuries), and that's about it.
            There were many Irish exegetes and theologians with their own systems of thought (as you said, some even considered heretical) highly influential in Europe during Early Middle-Ages, John Scotus for example.

            >As I said, "I like how people jump this step (Ireland being Christianized), as if Christianity sprang from the bogs of Ireland in a pure and unadulterated form, rather than being the work of Roman, British and Gallic missionaries like Palladius and Patrick"
            Irish Catholicism was fruitful from very early on, both in originality and strength, and in the 6th century they were leading the production of illustrated manuscripts, israeliteels of European pre-Romanesque art.
            It was not until the French invasion and the wars with England that Ireland declined sharply despite having been a bastion of Christian thought in the second half of the First Millennium.

            Yeah,
            I notice we're jumping between wildly different timeframes here too. You can't jump between the 5th and 10th centuries to try to prove a nonsensical point lol
            Early Middle-Ages go from 5th century to 10 century, period of Irish Christians cultural amd expansive peak.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    To the same extent that "le byzantines" started the renaissance which is to say not at all. both attempts to glory hog what little they can from pathetic and irrelevant people

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You quote implies Ireland 'saved civilisation' because some Englishmen took refuge in their monasteries in the middle of a plague. Hardly the same as saving the West, is it?

    Within Britain, Irish 'conversions' were mostly in Scotland - where the people were essentially Irish anyway - or Northumbrians. Even there, however, there was a recognition that they were quite backwards by comparison to the Romans, Franks, etc. Gildas, in the 6th century, calls the Irish 'a throng of worms wriggling out of the rocks'. Bede acknowledges Irish monastic generosity, but also refers to the people generally as 'inpudentes grassatores Hiberni', or, 'shameless Irish robbers'.

    Aldhelm of Canterbury, who may have been taught by an Irishman himself, wrote to one of his own pupils (named Wihtfrith) to advise him not to go to Ireland for study. Why? Because it is known to be a dangerous place, where paganism is still prevalent and a perverse influence on even the Christian inhabitants. He even compares an Irish education to 'drinking from briny and muddy waters, full of croaking toads, when [alternatively] there are clear waters flowing from glassy pools'. Stephen of Ripon, on the matter of the English adopting Roman rites, quotes St Wilfrid as saying, 'Was I not the first, after the death of the first elders who were sent by St Gregory, to root out the poisonous weeds planted by the Scots?'

    The Irish obviously have a chip on their shoulder about the English, and like to indulge in fantasies about 'civilising' them, but the degree of larping we see across the internet is embarrassing.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The greatest number of foreign students came from Great Britain they came in fleet- loads.as Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborne (A.D. 705 to 709), expresses it in his letter to his friend Eadfrid, Bishop of Lindisfarne, who had himself been educated in Ireland. Many also were from the Continent. There is a remarkable passage in the Venerable Bede's "Ecclesiastical History" which corroborates Aldhelm's statement, as well as what is said in the native records, and indeed in some particulars goes rather beyond them. Describing the ravages of the yellow plague in 664, he says: -"This pestilence did no less harm in the island of Ireland. Many of the nobility and of the lower ranks of the English nation were there at that time, who, in the days of Bishops Finan and Colman [Irish abbots of Lindisfarne, p. 146, supra], forsaking their native island, retired thither, either for the sake of divine studies. or of a more continent life..... The Scots willingly received them all, and took care to supply them with food, as also to furnish them with books to read, and their teaching, all gratis."

Comments are closed.