А какво мислите за хипотезата,видяла бял свят в един английски вестник голям формат, че Тъмните векове в Западна Европа, са били причинени от голямо природно бедствие, а именно удар на комета през 540 година.

Тя била опустошила земята като във филм на Тарковски и на хората не им оставало нищо друго освен влязат в Средновековието.

Покрай другото била поразила и крал Артур с пряко попадение, където и да се е намирал през това време.

Mislia, che se sheguvash!

Не бе, съвсем сериозно го четох като вестникарско резюме на исторически труд. Авторът на идеята бил стигнал до заключението, че със сигурност е имало природно бедствие през 540. Иначе трудно се обяснявал упадъкът на Запада. Но понеже било доказано, че тогава вулкани не са изригвали (а и обсегът им е малък), атомни бомби не са падали, остават само кометите. И понеже става дума за английски историк, интересът му към крал Артур, чиито дири се губели точно тогава, е подчертан.

Е, може би малко съм иронизирал преразказа, пък то да се окаже вярно.

е логична последица от лошата икономическа конюнктура в Западната Римска империя. Западна Европа просто е била доста бедна и затова хората са живеели все по-зле и по-зле. Авторът на изследването трябва да е пълен идиот, за да смята, че обедняването (и оскотяването) на европейците е било светкавично и ненадейно. Дори и варварските нашествия не са нанесли кой знае какви поразии. Просто римският свят е упадъл, а западните провинции още повече.
Ще ми се да знам как тази комета е ударила само Европа, а не е засегнала съществено Близкия изток.

И дали просто на господин англо-центрика не му се е сторило доста необичайно, че предците на най-големите сноби в света са били диваци от сой.

P.M. moeto lichno mnenie e che po-golemi snobi i naduti pujaci ot Francuzite niama.

Mnogo pozdravi!

Prez Yuli 2000 davaha dokumentalen film za tova po angliiskia Channel Four samo che ne stavashe vqpros za kometa, ami za volkanichna eksplozia okolo ekvatora stanala prichina za metereologichni kataklizmi prez 6 vek. Tova namerih v Dejanews kato review na filma:

http://x74.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=506114373&CONTEXT=970501237.1989541895&hitnum=0

"This was the first of a two part documentary which intends to show that during the C6th AD a major volcanic eruption so disturbed the climate as to lead to famine, plague and the downfall of civilisations all over the world. This first
episode was to prove the basic theory that such an eruption actually took place.

The theory is propounded by a David Keays who has written a book on the subject. Together with a Mike Baillie a dendochronologist, they start by showing that around 536 AD there was an abrupt and distinct narrowing of tree rings in samples from around the world. The range of dates covering
535-42. The change is most noted in a sample of German Oak which actually shows frost damage in 536 proving that it was extremely cold that year.

This is substantiated from archaeological evidence of the island forts in Ireland, which apparently began to be rebuilt in that period, showing that the inhabitants were forced back on to non-agricultural food.

(Weren't the Iron Age Hill Forts in Britain reoccupied at this time as well?)

Written evidence is then presented from the writings of John of Ephesus who remarks on the sun being dimmed for 18 months at that time. Another writer Cassidorous also makes a
complaint of a poor spring and summer. Further East, the chronicles of the Japanese Great King refer to a yellow dust falling like snow.

This evidence suggests a large volume of dust circulating in the atmosphere which could only have been caused by either a cometary collision, or a volcanic eruption.

A cometary collision is fairly easily ruled out, as there are no contemporary records of such an event, no evident craters that recent, no record of great waves from an impact in the ocean. Which only leaves a volcano. However a little red herring is thrown with the idea of a fragmented cometary impact. This is based on the legend of
King Arthur and his land being laid waste about this time.

To show if it was a comet or a volcano the next step was to examine cores from the Antarctic ice caps. Each year a new layer of snow is added to the ice cap and core samples of these date back over 1,000 years so that analysis can show
exactly the chemical composition of each layer. If it was a volcano, there should be a noted increase in sulphur content. If a comet, iridium.

A sample from 535 AD was analysed and sure enough a huge sulphur spike was immediately evident, proving it was a volcano. Other samples from the Arctic were similar but not quite as conclusive.

Armed with this the next question was to ask where was the volcano? Because of the distribution of dust the site had to be on the Equator, and the major concentration of such sites
is around Indonesia. And here documentary evidence was again used. In the C18th Indonesian Book of Kings (based on much earlier records) there is mention of a great noise and light, followed by a great wave which split Java in two
parts to produce the present-day island of Sumatra.

All the evidence pointed to a nearby volcano, the notorious Krakatoa.

Examination of the layers of ash on the island suggested that there had been a major explosion many years before the well-known 1883 event. The thinking was that this had split the island into three parts, all active, which over the
years had merged again to form one island and then in 1883. . .

The eruption layer was clearly evident, but it needed to be dated. This was done by extracting charcoal samples from immediately above and from some layers below the event layer. Carbon dating of the above sample produced a date of 1215AD (That might explain a few things??)

The below sample showed a date of 6600BC. However, this was several layers below the event layer and the consensus of opinion was that the event took place sometime in the middle of the first millennium. . .

One chilling fact that arose from the programme was that these climatic shifts may be expected every 1500 years or so, and that this century has been very quiet volcanically speaking. (By the bye, AFAIK it has also been very quiet on the cometary front as well. Now there's a theory for you . .
.)

And finally, it seems we now have a good reason for calling them The Dark Ages."

krai na citata

Pozdrav

Peshun

Да, горе долу така звучеше и във вестника, но по-кратко и изводите бяха в полза на кометата, за крал Артур се споменаваше по-насериозно, без да броим общоисторическите обобщения.

Сигурно зависи какъв "цвят" е вестникът и кое научно лоби има достъп до страниците му.