DId the Christianisation of the Roman Empire in the 4th century cause a dark age ?FWIW here is a summary made in 2017 concerning Freeman's thesis:
This summary consists of the following sections:
SECTION A: Defining the thesis and its refutations
SECTION B: A summary statement by Charles Freeman on what his thesis is about.
SECTION C: REVIEWS
SECTION D: DETRACTORS
SECTION E: CONCLUSIONSHope this may be useful for some. Comments are welcomed.
SECTION A: Defining the thesis and its refutationsAlthough Freeman's thesis is focussed on the 4th century, the background evidence being discussed ranges from the 2nd to the 11th century. Consequently, as long as the focus on the 4th century is not obscured, the way I see the opposing arguments at the moment may be summarised as follows by considering three time periods:
(1) 2nd/3rd centuries: Prior to 325 CE: primarily the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
(2) 4th century: The Christian Imperium and State of the 4thcentury (Constantine to Theodosius)
(3) 5th/11th centuries: The epoch from the 5th century to the 11th century (West and East)
The arguments relate to the question as to whether there was a decline (or progress) in "critical thinking" which Freeman associates with the practice (and preservation) of the Greek Intellectual traditions. Freeman summarises these follows:
Philosophy (and its major fields such as logic, metaphysics, philosophy of language, theory of knowledge, political philosophy etc), mathematics, science and the methods of doing science (other than experimentation), history, drama, rhetoric, political theory, astronomy, a scientific approach to medicine, all draw on ancient models of conceiving and analysing problems.
Freeman's thesis and the arguments of his detractorsFreeman's thesis and the arguments of his detractors for these three epochs are:
(
1) 2nd/3rd centuries: Prior to 325 CE: primarily the 2nd and 3rd centuries.Freeman argues that there was little decline in epoch (1)
He cites Plutarch, Galen, Ptolemy and Plotinus as "remarkable for their range and depth".
His detractors argue there was decline in epoch (1) as a result of various causes:
(a) "Romans were not much interested in science"
(b) Political and economic or [ADD CAUSE HERE} instability of the Roman Empire
(2) 4th century: The Christian Imperium and State of the 4th century (Constantine - Theodosius)Freeman argues that there was a massive decline in epoch (2).
"Something dramatic happened in the fourth century".
He cites Theodosius as a central case.
His detractors have remained relatively silent on this.
(3) 5th/11th centuries: The epoch from the 5th century to the 11th century (West and East)Here the argument is complicated a little by the fall of the western empire and the preservation of the eastern empire.
Freeman argues that there was a relative vacuum of progress in both the east and the west in epoch (3). "Opinion among historians of science and mathematicians is that this was a dead period in both east and west". Freeman argues that there was a decline and closure of "critical thinking" in the 4th century. and things stayed that way for a long time.
His detractors argue that whatever decline is perceived in the west in epoch (3) is attributable to barbarian invasions. They then argue that in the East, Byzantine scribes, furiously copying manuscripts, saved the day: "Science was preserved by Christians". [Ronald Numbers (Historian of Science)]
SECTION B: A summary statement by Charles Freeman on what his thesis is about.The following statement by Freeman is derived from the Amazon Review page. Since it is not too long, and summarises many hundreds of pages, I have cited it in full
https://www.amazon.com/Closing-Western- ... 1400033802Yes, there was a Closing. By Charles Freeman
on March 24, 2004
I am grateful for the care with which Amazon readers have reviewed my book whether they have agreed with my argument or not. The reviews are worth a reply.
My thesis is that Christianity was heavily politicised by the late Roman empire, certainly to the extent that it would have been unrecognisable to Jesus. Note the linking of the church to the empire's success in war, opulent church building and an ever narrowing definition of what beliefs one had to hold to be saved. (Hand in hand with this went an elaboration of the horrors of hell, a radical and unhappy development which can only have discouraged freedom of thought.) My core argument is that one result of the combination of the forces of authority (the empire) and faith (the church) was a stifling of a sophisticated tradition of intellectual thought which had stretched back over nearly a thousand years and which relied strongly on the use of the reasoning mind.
I did not depend on Gibbon. I do not agree with him that intellectual thought in the early Christian centuries was dead and I believe that the well established hierarchy of the church strengthened not undermined the empire. After all it was the church which survived the collapse of the western empire. Of course, Gibbon writes so eloquently that I could not resist quoting from him at times but my argument is developed independently of him and draws on both primary sources and recent scholarship.
On the relationship between Christianity and philosophy I argue that there were two major strands of Greek philosophy , those of Plato and Aristotle. The early church did not reject Greek philosophy but drew heavily on Platonism to the exclusion of Aristotle. In the thirteenth century Christianity was reinvigorated by the adoption of Aristotelianism , notably by Thomas Aquinas. It seems clear that Christianity needed injections of pagan philosophy to maintain its vitality and a new era in Christian intellectual life was now possible. I don't explore it in this book. Even so, when one compares the rich and broad intellectual achievements of the `pagan' Greek centuries with those of the Middle Ages, it is hard to make a comparison in favour of the latter. Where are the great names? (The critic who mentioned the ninth century philosopher Erigena should also have mentioned that he was condemned as a heretic.)
When one reads the great works of second and third century AD thinkers such as Plutarch, Galen, Ptolemy and Plotinus, which are remarkable for their range and depth, one cannot but feel that much has been lost in the west by the fifth century. Something dramatic happened in the fourth century. In 313 Constantine brought the traditional policy of Roman toleration for different religious beliefs to its culmination by offering Christians (who had condemned the pagan gods as demons) a privileged place within the empire alongside other religions. By 381 the Christian emperor Theodosius when enforcing the Nicene creed condemns other Christians as `foolish madmen..
We decree that they shall be branded with the ignominious names of heretics . . .they will suffer in the first place the chastisement of divine condemnation, and in the second the punishment which our authority , in accordance with the will of heaven, shall decided to inflict'.
If this is not a `closing of the western mind' it is difficult to know what is. It goes hand in hand with a mass of texts which condemn rational thought and the violent suppression of Jewish and pagan sacred places. There is no precedent for such a powerful imposition of a religious ideology in the Greco-Roman world. The evidence of suppression is so overwhelming that the onus must be on those who argue otherwise to refute it.
Some readers have related my book to the present day- I leave it to them to do so if they wish -it is important to understand ANY age in which perspectives seem to narrow and religion and politics become intertwined as they certainly did in the fourth century. After all American Christianity was founded by those attempting to escape just such political straitjackets. Christianity has never been monolithic or static. In fact,as my book makes clear, one of my heroes is Gregory the Great who, I believe, brought back spirituality, moderation and compassion into the Christian tradition after the extremes of the fourth century. It is the sheer variety of Christianities which make the religion such an absorbing area of study.
I hope Amazon readers will continue to engage with my arguments whether they agree with them or not. Keep the western mind open and good reading! Charles Freeman.
SECTION C: REVIEWSStan Prager
https://regarp.com/2015/05/13/revie...t ... s-freeman/Freeman reports: “Faith and obedience to the institutional authority of the church were more highly rated than the use of reasoned thought. The inevitable result was intellectual stagnation . . . The last recorded astronom­ical observation in the ancient Greek world was one by the Athenian philosopher Proclus in A.D. 475, nearly 1,100 years after the prediction of an eclipse by Thales in 585 B.C., which traditionally marks the begin­ning of Greek science. It would be over 1,000 years—with the publica­tion of Copernicus’ De revolutionibus in 1543—before these studies began to move forward again.” [p322]
Mark Edwards
The Closing of the Western Mind | History Today
The plot of this long book is simple enough: the Greeks of the classical age invented science, the Greeks of the Hellenistic age adorned it, the Romans tempered sovereignty with wisdom, until the classical tradition was swept away by the sudden victory of the Church, to be replaced by doctrinaire thundering, intellectual supinity and the forcible dissemination of a private myth. The narrative is clear and fluent, nomenclature is studiously precise, and every judgment is supported by appeal to some authoritative historian or quotation of ancient texts.
[pay wall]
Mary Beard
The Closing of the Western Mind, by Charles Freeman | The Independent
Did Christianity destroy rational thought for 1000 years? Mary Beard revisits classical conflicts
The real problem is in Freeman's stark opposition between the classical and Christian worlds. The truth is that we are only able to read most of the scientific triumphs of pagan antiquity because the hard-working monks of Christian monasteries chose to copy and study them. Thomas Aquinas may have "re-discovered" his Aristotle through Arab translations. But, by and large, we have Freeman's "irrational" Christians to thank for preserving classical "rationality" – and, for that matter, irrationality.
SECTION D: DETRACTORSJames Hannam
Review of Closing of the Western Mind
REVIEW: Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason
Bede's Library
Charles Freeman's Comments on Bede's Review.
Tim O'Neill
Armarium Magnum: The Closing of the Western Mind by Charles Freeman
REVIEW: Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason
Verdict?: Fundamentally flawed 2/5
Armarium Magnum: A Reply from Charles Freeman (of sorts)
A Reply from Charles Freeman
SECTION E: CONCLUSIONSThere is obviously a spread of opinion and critical reception of Charles Freeman's thesis. If anyone is aware of further REVIEWS or DETRACTORS available for review online please make a note of them.
Where to from here? Please feel free to discuss.
Were the Greek intellectual traditions, and critical thinking itself, suppressed
by the implementation of the Christian State during the 4th century CE?
by 
