Why is the medieval age the most romanticized part of history?

Why is the medieval age the most romanticized part of history?

Last period european culture truely existed, now its replaced by jewish poison.

Lots of literature set in that period. You can thank the romanticists for that.

This is partially true. Romanticists were sick and tired of the degenerate garbage that was the enlightement and the renaissance, so they longed for a period that was less materialistic and more pure, mystical and wholesome. They imagined and idealized the middle ages to be like that but they weren't exactly correct.

Knights.

>"Things were better in the good old days!"
Every delusional romantic ever

Honestly, I’ve always thought that the medieval ages were the most demonized era in human history.

>Everyone was dirty
>Witch hunts were common
>The Catholic Church surpressed science and ruled with an iron fist
>Christians oppressed Muslims during the Crusades
Etc.

The real redpill is that things were always shit, even if they're getting shittier by the year.

You've been watching too much Monty Python, though I will admit that the late middle ages are routinely slammed in order to emphasis the Renascence.

Things were always shit but they're becoming somewhat less shit by the year statistically, but you will never realize or feel this effect because shittiness is subjective. "Hey there's niggers starving in china" or "people used to get polio and shit". Who the fuck cares, I gotta work TEN WHOLE HOURS A DAY and I ONLY get two days a week off, my life is the worst ever - is the reply. And the modern man is not wrong.

There is one universal truth - the shittiest era of history will always be the era you live in, because the human mind cannot conceive of circumstances shittier than it's own.

The fact that classical knowledge, largely independent of religious superstitions, thriving in intellectual centers all over the ancient world, was replaced by a religion based on a killed man... that's one of the main factors behind the dark ages

It's the result of unironic propaganda of the enlightement, which warped into maximum overdrive during the French revolution.
The witch hunt thing being the most obvious ones, as the vast majority of witch trials occured in protestant countries during the early modern period (Sweden, England, Germany, American colonies), not the middle ages.

>There is one universal truth - the shittiest era of history will always be the era you live in, because the human mind cannot conceive of circumstances shittier than it's own.
I think it's the other way around honestly, on this very board I've seen clueless 20 year olds being baffled by the fact there was a period before the internet and how much it must've sucked. I lived through it and it was just fine.

Pope John XXII formalized the persecution of witchcraft in 1320 when he authorized the Inquisition to prosecute sorcery.

Which changes literally nothing about what I said.

Nope.

>The witch hunt thing being the most obvious ones
That doesn't imply that witch-hunting wasn't common in the Middle Ages. The same charges of causing impotency and soiling wombs that were laid against "witches" in Salem in 1692 were attributed to Danish and Hungarian "witches" in the 12th century.
The Protestant witch trials were merely continuations of the Catholic Inquisition's, they simply grew in scale because in 14th/15th Centuries Christians started to see witchcraft as devil worship and heresy, not just peasant superstitions. It isn't propaganda, just historical fact.

True,1320 isnt the early modern period.

It wasn't common at all.

Yes, and?

>The Protestant witch trials were merely continuations of the Catholic Inquisition's,

Except the catholic inquisition, barring a few officially censured and discredited instances, were legal procedings held by church officials, which followed strict rules.. The belief of witch-craft itself was against catholic dogma, and chastised, so how could you find someone guilty of a crime that didn't exist?

The inquisition was aimed at rooting out jews and (in the case of spain) muslims practicing in secret.

Inquisition trials dealt with heresies, not with witches. Witch hunts were just a result of protestant peasant folk superstitions going haywire and trying to justify it with scriptures. Which is funny because they weren't scripturally sound either, for example Salem Trials despite the Puritan autism about the Mosaic covenant didn't actually follow the procedure with perscribed number of witnesses.

>and?
You haven't really studied this period enough to make an informed opinion about the prosecution of witches in the middle ages.

what? no its not
have you never heard of the Dark Ages?
id say people generally have a much worse view of the Middle Ages as nothing but plagues, masses of illiterate peasants rolling around in filth, and the ebil Church stifling all forms of expression/learning

>The belief of witch-craft itself was against catholic dogma
No it wasnt, to quote Malleus Maleficarum-

> "A belief that there are such things as witches is so essential a part of Catholic faith that obstinately to maintain the opposite opinion savors of heresy."

Not to mention that the "Hammer of the Witches" was a document officially denounced by the Catholic Church as fucking nonsense, of course the free and non-papal recognizing men of the Protestant reformation had every right to latch onto it like they did.

Yes I have. I think you have a problem with reading comprehension honestly, might want to re-read what I posted here and try to point out what exactly have you refuted.

Malleus Maleficarum wasn't even a medieval document depending on where do you see the Middle Ages ending. To me it's the fall of Contantinople.

>that's one of the main factors behind the dark ages

Yeah, nothing to do with the total destruction of the society which had ruled the region for some 4 centuries.

>was a document officially denounced by the Catholic Church as fucking nonsense,
When did this happen? Vatican 2?

>to quote Malleus Maleficarum-
>the Malleus Malficarum

You mean that document which received no endorsement from the Catholic church besides a papal bull published 2 years prior to it's own existence that acknowledged the existence of Witchcraft in an attempt to get local authorities to co-operate with inquisitor Kramer (which they refused to do anyway)? And in fact was condemned by the Church three years later?

>When did this happen? Vatican 2?
1490, after Kramer attempted to FORGE a letter from the Cologne University approving of his book (they rejected in in 1487)

People shouldn't view the dark ages as church suppressing knowledge but as a Mad Max tier post-apocalyptic world. It was actually the church that managed to preserve whatever knowledge of the ancients they could.

>You mean that document
Yes, the one that was was published with 14 editions between 1487-1520 and at least 16 editions between 1574-1669, that one.

>And in fact was condemned by the Church three years later?
Guess papal bulls outweigh condemnations

>It was actually the church that managed to preserve
Aristotle and Ptolemy, and everything else was destroyed

>Except the catholic inquisition, barring a few officially censured and discredited instances, were legal procedings held by church officials, which followed strict rules..
"Europe's Inner Demons" is one of the best books ever written on the Medieval Inquisition and its relation to the later witch hunts. I can't find a copy online which contains the exact number killed by the Catholic Inquisition during the Middle Ages so I won't make any claims, but it makes it clear that the charges laid against "heretics" by Inquistors such as Conrad of Marburg in the 12th/Early 13th Century, Medieval Italian Inquisitors and at the trial of the Knights Templar contained accusations (devil-worship, improper sexual relations, cursing women with infertility, killing crops and livestock, kissing the anus of a black cat) that were used by later "witch-hunters" to prosecute and kill some 60,000 people in the 15th/16th centuries. The idea that the Catholic and Protestant trials of "witches" and "heretics" are completely unrelated because they had different mechanisms of persecution is undermined by the fact they were accusing their chosen guilty party of the same crimes and had the same motive: :"the need to create a scape-goat for an unacknowledged hostility to Christianity."

>The inquisition was aimed at rooting out jews and (in the case of spain) muslims practicing in secret.
This is the case in Spain, but I was talking about Papal-sanctioned Inquisitors across Europe. Just pointing it out to prevent confusion.

You are correct but while the book was not officially recognized a lot of investigation methods, including torture was sanctioned by Church perfectly fine.