The End of the Middle Ages, Periodisation, and Our Own Age
centno...@hotmail.com
issue of periodisation. We got into Burckhardt, the Renaissance,
humanism, Huizinga, the idea of modernity, the terminology of the
"early modern period", and many related issues, such as whether
traditional dates and battles signify an end to the middle ages. This
was done with a view to moving students into the early modern material
that they will be taught next term. The point was made that it was
easier for people like Burckhardt to identify aspects of modernity in
the "Renaissance" because he was (and they were) closer to the period
than we are today.
This is something which comes around on SHM every so often, so I
thought that I'd offer a question as a topic for discussion: has
anyone got anything new to say about the relationship between present
day historiographical periodisation and the idea of the end of the
middle ages, and the ways in which it is represented in
historiography?
The one thing which struck me as being new today was a remark made by
one of the contributors. He suggested that there is no prevailing term
for the period which we are in just now. He implied that we are coming
out of the postmodern period, but that there is not a term for what we
are heading into yet, which has general currency. Has anyone got such
a term, or do some people still want to stick with (or deny) the label
"postmodern"? What are the newspapers saying? What are the
philologists, theorists, and writers saying?
EDEB.
Paul J Gans
>In the last lecture class of the season, we have just debated the
>issue of periodisation. We got into Burckhardt, the Renaissance,
>humanism, Huizinga, the idea of modernity, the terminology of the
>"early modern period", and many related issues, such as whether
>traditional dates and battles signify an end to the middle ages. This
>was done with a view to moving students into the early modern material
>that they will be taught next term. The point was made that it was
>easier for people like Burckhardt to identify aspects of modernity in
>the "Renaissance" because he was (and they were) closer to the period
>than we are today.
>This is something which comes around on SHM every so often, so I
>thought that I'd offer a question as a topic for discussion: has
>anyone got anything new to say about the relationship between present
>day historiographical periodisation and the idea of the end of the
>middle ages, and the ways in which it is represented in
>historiography?
I can only give you my opinion, for what it is worth. I
think that periodizations are useful for constraining
discussion. Without it everything would be up for discussion
at the same time.
So for me periods are arbitrary. What their time limits are
or should be depends, I think, on what one wants to discuss.
For me (and possibly me alone) the European medieval period
(because that is what I want to discuss) goes from the
removal of Rome as a dominant factor in the west to the change
in world view that happened in the last decade of the 15th
century.
So convenient, but not rigid dates are 500 to 1500 AD.
On the other hand, I know people who are quite happy to bound
their periods by 1066 on the one hand and the Black Death on
the other. Or by the date of the Roman withdrawal from England
to the advent of William the Conqueror.
>The one thing which struck me as being new today was a remark made by
>one of the contributors. He suggested that there is no prevailing term
>for the period which we are in just now. He implied that we are coming
>out of the postmodern period, but that there is not a term for what we
>are heading into yet, which has general currency. Has anyone got such
>a term, or do some people still want to stick with (or deny) the label
>"postmodern"? What are the newspapers saying? What are the
>philologists, theorists, and writers saying?
I think that there can be no term because everyone wants to discuss
different aspects of the present. Again, using myself as an example,
I tend to think that medieval rural life would not be alien to
western rural folks in 1850. So for me the real "modern" period
starts with the 19th century or, conveniently, the end of Napoleon.
And it is still going on.
Others will, of course, have other views.
---- Paul J. Gans
Dick Wisan
>
[snip]
>The one thing which struck me as being new today was a remark made by
>one of the contributors. He suggested that there is no prevailing term
>for the period which we are in just now. He implied that we are coming
>out of the postmodern period, but that there is not a term for what we
>are heading into yet, which has general currency. Has anyone got such
>a term, or do some people still want to stick with (or deny) the label
>"postmodern"? What are the newspapers saying? What are the
>philologists, theorists, and writers saying?
Once you call anything "postmodern", you are off the rails. "Modern"
means "of or pertaining to nowadays". You can push nowadays as far
back as you like, but you can't ende it before nowadays. "Postmodern"
is cute, a kind of paradoxical witticism particularly popular among
European writers.
If you're serious about insisting on a break in the periodization,
you really need to invent something to call the last no-longer-modern
period, and I don't recommend "pre-postmodern". I understand the
difficulty, though. When I grew up, Art Deco was modern, and I
was taught to call it "modern art". After that fad passed, I took
to calling it "modren" using an ignorantism to show it wasn't
current any more. "Art Deco" is much better. (This shows, at
least, that it can be done."
At least for a while "Enlightenment", seemed to be a popular word
for pre-postmodernism, unfortunate because already in use, but at
least it indicated something shorter than "postmedieval". Actually,
if you really think the modern era is over, "mostmedieval" would
do in a pinch as a synonym", until we find something better. I
take "modern" to be a term for so large a period (like "medieval")
that "postmodern" thing (already being rung out) is merely a
momentary fashion in the very recent modern period. How about
"post abstract expressionism"? Or, was abstract expressionist
already postmodern. "Postcubism" perhaps? Funny: why is it
so much easier to periodize painting then the history of anything
else.
Pardon the outburst. Private bete noire.
--
R. N. (Dick) Wisan - Email: wis...@catskill.net
- Snail: 37 Clinton Street, Oneonta NY 13820, U.S.A.
- Just your opinion, please, ma'am: No fax.
Inger E
how crazy it may seem from linguistic view today's age is called Postmodern
Age here in Europe in many academic and other works...
Inger E
"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:attcd...@enews4.newsguy.com...
Paul J Gans
If you allow the Gans Theory of Periodization, i.e. that
there are 1000 years to a period, we have about 500 more
to go before we have to thing up a new name for "modern".
If it is subperiods were are interested in, how about
something like "20th century" for the last 100 years or so?
---- Paul J. Gans
John Wilkins
Modernism was an architectural style in (IIRC) the 1920s. Postmodernism
was the Bauhaus movement. The term properly applies only in
architectural styles.
Me, I'm a prepostmodernist. Whatever it is in philosophy that
postmodernism is post *to*, I'm for it...
--
John Wilkins
DARK IN HERE, ISN'T IT?
Dan Goodman
@newshost.abdn.ac.uk:
Following early modern, we have middle modern, which lasted till the fall
of the Soviet Union. We are now slightly past the beginning of the late
modern age.
This will be followed by the age of interplanetary settlement.
Dick Wisan
>
>Following early modern, we have middle modern, which lasted till the fall
>of the Soviet Union. We are now slightly past the beginning of the late
>modern age.
Hmmm. I've been thinking of running middle modern to the end of the
"American Century", i.e. the fall of the United States, last of the
great &/or super -powers. It won't be long now, but I'm not exactly
sure when. I most favor 2014 on the ground that the Centuries have
been running 14 years late recently: 18th ended at Waterloo; 19th
ended with (a) Sarajevo I, and (b) completion of the Panama Canal,
--last of the great steam-and-rail construction projects. Possibly,
however it will not happen until 2022, if we take 1814 and 1918 as
the end of 18th and 19th respectively --end of war to end of war.
Makes a "century" run 104 years, of course.
>This will be followed by the age of interplanetary settlement.
There is also the theory that it will be the age of bow-and-arrow
technology. Teach your kids to recognize flint when they find it.
Dan Goodman
news:atua4...@enews2.newsguy.com:
> Dan Goodman dsg...@visi.com says...
>>
>>Following early modern, we have middle modern, which lasted till the
>>fall of the Soviet Union. We are now slightly past the beginning of
>>the late modern age.
>
> Hmmm. I've been thinking of running middle modern to the end of the
> "American Century", i.e. the fall of the United States, last of the
> great &/or super -powers. It won't be long now, but I'm not exactly
> sure when. I most favor 2014 on the ground that the Centuries have
> been running 14 years late recently: 18th ended at Waterloo; 19th
> ended with (a) Sarajevo I, and (b) completion of the Panama Canal,
> --last of the great steam-and-rail construction projects. Possibly,
> however it will not happen until 2022, if we take 1814 and 1918 as
> the end of 18th and 19th respectively --end of war to end of war.
> Makes a "century" run 104 years, of course.
>
>>This will be followed by the age of interplanetary settlement.
>
> There is also the theory that it will be the age of bow-and-arrow
> technology. Teach your kids to recognize flint when they find it.
>
Not necessary; certain types of glass work very nicely.
Michael Farthing
<wis...@catskill.net> writes
>Dan Goodman dsg...@visi.com says...
>>
>>Following early modern, we have middle modern, which lasted till the fall
>>of the Soviet Union. We are now slightly past the beginning of the late
>>modern age.
>
>Hmmm. I've been thinking of running middle modern to the end of the
>"American Century", i.e. the fall of the United States, last of the
>great &/or super -powers. It won't be long now, but I'm not exactly
>sure when. I most favor 2014 on the ground that the Centuries have
>been running 14 years late recently: 18th ended at Waterloo; 19th
>ended with (a) Sarajevo I, and (b) completion of the Panama Canal,
>--last of the great steam-and-rail construction projects. Possibly,
>however it will not happen until 2022, if we take 1814 and 1918 as
>the end of 18th and 19th respectively --end of war to end of war.
>Makes a "century" run 104 years, of course.
Nah.. if we did that the sixteenth century would end in 1648 (which is
ridiculous) rather than 1618 (which fits the pattern quite nicely).
--
Michael Farthing
cyclades
Software House
William Black
"John Wilkins" <wil...@wehi.edu.au> wrote in message
news:1fnhj1b.150qql71ag25s7N%wil...@wehi.edu.au...
> Modernism was an architectural style in (IIRC) the 1920s. Postmodernism
> was the Bauhaus movement. The term properly applies only in
> architectural styles.
No it doesn't.
In fact both Modernism and Postmodernism are literary styles.
The Post-modern revolution took place about twenty years ago when the new
generation of academic literary critics (mostly from France) can to power in
a number of influential universities.
Postmodernism as a literary movement is still powerful and has not yet been
toppled by anything new, although Magic Realism came close.
--
William Black
------------------
On time, on budget, or works;
Pick any two from three
Dick Wisan
>
>"John Wilkins" <wil...@wehi.edu.au> wrote
>> Modernism was an architectural style in (IIRC) the 1920s. Postmodernism
>> was the Bauhaus movement. The term properly applies only in
>> architectural styles.
>
>No it doesn't.
>
>In fact both Modernism and Postmodernism are literary styles.
Oh, it's much more than that. Take off the "ism" and you have
adjectives with application in all fields of human activity and
endeavor: science, philosophy, history, law, politics... Post-
modernism, at least, is surely a style of thinking, feeling, and
_being_.
>The Post-modern revolution took place about twenty years ago when the new
>generation of academic literary critics (mostly from France) can to power in
>a number of influential universities.
>
>Postmodernism as a literary movement is still powerful and has not yet been
>toppled by anything new, although Magic Realism came close.
>
But, to say it remained a literary movement is to diminish it and
to circumscribe its domain.
erilar
<dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
> Dick Wisan <wis...@catskill.net> wrote in
> news:atua4...@enews2.newsguy.com:
>
> > Dan Goodman dsg...@visi.com says...
> >>
> >>This will be followed by the age of interplanetary settlement.
> >
> > There is also the theory that it will be the age of bow-and-arrow
> > technology. Teach your kids to recognize flint when they find it.
> >
> Not necessary; certain types of glass work very nicely
I'm ready; I even have extra points for my arrows.
--
Mary Loomer Oliver(aka erilar)
Erilar's Cave Annex:
http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
William Black
"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> wrote in message
news:atvlv...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> William Black black_...@hotmail.com says...
> >Postmodernism as a literary movement is still powerful and has not yet
been
> >toppled by anything new, although Magic Realism came close.
> >
>
> But, to say it remained a literary movement is to diminish it and
> to circumscribe its domain.
You are obviously a man who doesn't mix with people from university English
departments, or even English graduates.
If you were then you'd know that there is nothing superior to literary
movements, and to deny that is to be instantly accused of 'being someone
who only reads books with pictures'.
Dick Wisan
>"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> wrote in message
>
>> William Black black_...@hotmail.com says...
>>
>> >Postmodernism as a literary movement is still powerful and has
>> >not yet been toppled by anything new, although Magic Realism
>> >came close.
>> >
>>
>> But, to say it remained a literary movement is to diminish it and
>> to circumscribe its domain.
>
>You are obviously a man who doesn't mix with people from university
>English departments, or even English graduates.
>
>If you were then you'd know that there is nothing superior to literary
>movements, and to deny that is to be instantly accused of 'being
>someone who only reads books with pictures'.
Why some of my best friends are in English departments. As a matter
of fact, I have something of a bad conscience about having been an
enthusiast of literary theory (in its infancy) during my undergraduate
years in the rush of the "New Criticism". In those days, we still
considered ourselves modern. In fact, we thought poetry was the
important thing and criticism merely a help in reading it. I see now
where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
erilar
<wis...@catskill.net> wrote:
> Why some of my best friends are in English departments. As a matter
> of fact, I have something of a bad conscience about having been an
> enthusiast of literary theory (in its infancy) during my undergraduate
> years in the rush of the "New Criticism". In those days, we still
> considered ourselves modern. In fact, we thought poetry was the
> important thing and criticism merely a help in reading it.
We were and are right!! 8-)
> I see now
> where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
No, just ignore the modernist %^((*^*&)( that followed and no regret is
necessary.
OK, I was an English major before I discovered philology and medievalism
as more than historical novels.
Michael Kuettner
"erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:erilarloFRY-314B...@news.airstreamcomm.net...
> In article <au2hj...@enews3.newsguy.com>, Dick Wisan
> <wis...@catskill.net> wrote:
>
> > Why some of my best friends are in English departments. As a matter
> > of fact, I have something of a bad conscience about having been an
> > enthusiast of literary theory (in its infancy) during my undergraduate
> > years in the rush of the "New Criticism". In those days, we still
> > considered ourselves modern. In fact, we thought poetry was the
> > important thing and criticism merely a help in reading it.
>
> We were and are right!! 8-)
>
While I think that Poe is an excellent author I fail to see why I need
criticism to read him; and I think that naming the studies of Poe's
works "Poetry" goes a little over the top.
> > I see now
> > where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
>
> No, just ignore the modernist %^((*^*&)( that followed and no regret is
> necessary.
>
> OK, I was an English major
<snip>
So what ? I was an Austrian private ;-)
With Dadaistic greetings,
Michael Kuettner
Dick Wisan
>
>"erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> schrieb
>>
>> In article <au2hj...@enews3.newsguy.com>, Dick Wisan
>> <wis...@catskill.net> wrote:
>>
>> > Why some of my best friends are in English departments. As a matter
>> > of fact, I have something of a bad conscience about having been an
>> > enthusiast of literary theory (in its infancy) during my undergraduate
>> > years in the rush of the "New Criticism". In those days, we still
>> > considered ourselves modern. In fact, we thought poetry was the
>> > important thing and criticism merely a help in reading it.
>>
>> We were and are right!! 8-)
>>
>About poetry ?
>While I think that Poe is an excellent author I fail to see why I need
>criticism to read him;
You don't, but sometimes a good critic will point out good stuff
that you missed.
> ...and I think that naming the studies of Poe's
>works "Poetry" goes a little over the top.
Now _here_ you may have a profound piece of philology.
Poet 1. (s) E. A. Poe.
2. (s) imitator of Poet (1)
Poetry 1. (s) commentary on Edgar Allan Poe or other Poets (2)
2. (s) writings by the Poet (1), much imitated by
Poets. (2)
Now, E. A. Poe is usually thought to have existed only in the 19th
Century, but some have complained that this is not possible on the
grounds that Homer, not having lived until that century, could not
then be a Poet, a complaint which demonstrates the superiority of
medieval to modern criticism, because having available to them,
the Scientific writings of Aristotle, medieval critics understood
Final Cause, as one of the legitimate ways of understanding things,
and, indeed, on an imitator, the thing or person imitated must
certainly operate as final cause, so, to a medieval critic, or
indeed any critic not limited to the canons of "modern" science
--very few modern scientists understand, let alone believe, very
much of Aristotle-- there is no difficulty in understanding Homer
as an imitator of E. A. Poe.
[If any self-styled "Commander" wishes to pick at this sentence,
let him begin by recasting it into smaller ones.]
>> > I see now
>> > where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
>>
>> No, just ignore the modernist %^((*^*&)( that followed and no regret is
>> necessary.
>>
>> OK, I was an English major
As a matter of fact, I wasn't, but for about a year, the English
Department thought I was.
><snip>
>So what ? I was an Austrian private ;-)
-- Ah, good. That, of course either solves or avoids the problem.
D. Spencer Hines
but some have complained that this is not possible on the grounds that Homer,
not having lived until that century, could not then be a Poet, a complaint
which demonstrates the superiority of medieval to modern criticism, because
having available to them, the Scientific writings of Aristotle, medieval
critics understood Final Cause, as one of the legitimate ways of understanding
things, and, indeed, on an imitator, the thing or person imitated must
certainly operate as final cause, so, to a medieval critic, or indeed any
scientists understand, let alone believe, very much of Aristotle-- there is no
difficulty in understanding Homer as an imitator of E. A. Poe."
Wisan The Witless ---- Professor of Philosophy, Hartwick College, [established
1797] Oneonta, New York ---- A.B., Carleton College; A.M., Harvard University;
Ph.D., Columbia University.
----------------------
Incredible!
Can you imagine that a college professor wrote that flakey slag? I've seen
*pond scum* that holds together better than that.
Yes, Virginia, we do have an Educational Crisis in the United States ---- and
apparently in Britain too.
But even these Brits don't appear to be THAT discombobulated. No, this Wisan
variant may indeed be a particularly virulent strain of the American disease,
as we know it.
This is a guy, Richard N. Wisan, a full professor, filling young skulls full
of mush ---- who cannot even write a cogent, coherent, English sentence
himself!
Appalling!
The sprawling, gaggling sentence supra, desperately in search of meaning and
clarity, is by no means SALVABLE by being RECAST.
It's the ruddy THOUGHT that needs to be recast. After the noodle that
generated it is given a complete dose of salts ---- and an emetic.
Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum.
Deus Vult
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing." -- Attributed to Edmund Burke [1729-1797]
Sol Disinfectus Optimus Est. Peccatoris Justificatio Absque Paenitentia,
Legem Destruit Moralem.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in
your philosophy." ---- William Shakespeare [1564-1616] The Tragedy of Hamlet,
Prince of Denmark, Act I, Scene V, Line 166-167
All replies to the newsgroup please. Thank you kindly. All original material
contained herein is copyright and property of the author. It may be quoted
only in discussions on this forum and with an attribution to the author,
unless permission is otherwise expressly given, in writing.
------------------
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor.
"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> wrote in message
news:au56u...@enews4.newsguy.com...
| Now, E. A. Poe is usually thought to have existed only in the 19th
| Century, but some have complained that this is not possible on the
| grounds that Homer, not having lived until that century, could not
| then be a Poet, a complaint which demonstrates the superiority of
| medieval to modern criticism, because having available to them,
| the Scientific writings of Aristotle, medieval critics understood
| Final Cause, as one of the legitimate ways of understanding things,
| and, indeed, on an imitator, the thing or person imitated must
| certainly operate as final cause, so, to a medieval critic, or
| indeed any critic not limited to the canons of "modern" science
| --very few modern scientists understand, let alone believe, very
| much of Aristotle-- there is no difficulty in understanding Homer
| as an imitator of E. A. Poe.
|
| [If any self-styled "Commander" wishes to pick at this sentence,
| let him begin by recasting it into smaller ones.]
John Wilkins
> William Black black_...@hotmail.com says...
> >
> >"John Wilkins" <wil...@wehi.edu.au> wrote
> >>
> >> Modernism was an architectural style in (IIRC) the 1920s. Postmodernism
> >> was the Bauhaus movement. The term properly applies only in
> >> architectural styles.
> >
> >No it doesn't.
> >
> >In fact both Modernism and Postmodernism are literary styles.
>
> Oh, it's much more than that. Take off the "ism" and you have
> adjectives with application in all fields of human activity and
> endeavor: science, philosophy, history, law, politics... Post-
> modernism, at least, is surely a style of thinking, feeling, and
> _being_.
Stephen Toulmin's _Cosmopolis_ discusses the problems of deciding what
either Modernism and Postmodernism are; IIRC he comes up with a dozen or
so possible answers. I'll stick with the architectural definition as in
the Holy Text _From Bauhaus to our house_...
>
> >The Post-modern revolution took place about twenty years ago when the new
> >generation of academic literary critics (mostly from France) can to power in
> >a number of influential universities.
> >
> >Postmodernism as a literary movement is still powerful and has not yet been
> >toppled by anything new, although Magic Realism came close.
> >
>
> But, to say it remained a literary movement is to diminish it and
> to circumscribe its domain.
--
Michael Kuettner
"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:au56u...@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Michael Kuettner mik...@eunet.at says...
<snip>
> >About poetry ?
> >While I think that Poe is an excellent author I fail to see why I need
> >criticism to read him;
>
> You don't, but sometimes a good critic will point out good stuff
> that you missed.
You know, I was just a-trolling along when you jumped in my boat ;-)
>
> > ...and I think that naming the studies of Poe's
> >works "Poetry" goes a little over the top.
>
> Now _here_ you may have a profound piece of philology.
>
<snip>
> [If any self-styled "Commander" wishes to pick at this sentence,
> let him begin by recasting it into smaller ones.]
>
What sentence ?
But I'll see what I can do ;-)
>
> >> > I see now
> >> > where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
> >>
> >> No, just ignore the modernist %^((*^*&)( that followed and no regret is
> >> necessary.
> >>
> >> OK, I was an English major
>
> As a matter of fact, I wasn't, but for about a year, the English
> Department thought I was.
>
Err - that was erilar, not me.
> ><snip>
> >So what ? I was an Austrian private ;-)
>
> -- Ah, good. That, of course either solves or avoids the problem.
>
I still have the suspicion that I'm being mega-trolled; _but_ you've
snipped my reference to Dada - so I claim (prematurely) my catch.
Merry Dadaistic Christmas,
Michael Kuettner
Dick Wisan
Aw, gee, Commander. I thought you'd like it.
Dick Wisan
>
>"Dick Wisan" <wis...@catskill.net> schrieb
>> Michael Kuettner mik...@eunet.at says...
><snip>
>> >About poetry ?
>> >While I think that Poe is an excellent author I fail to see why I need
>> >criticism to read him;
>>
>> You don't, but sometimes a good critic will point out good stuff
>> that you missed.
>
>You know, I was just a-trolling along when you jumped in my boat ;-)
Yes, I knew that. Sorry to give a serious reply. I hope the rest
of my piece fixed that.
>> > ...and I think that naming the studies of Poe's
>> >works "Poetry" goes a little over the top.
>>
>> Now _here_ you may have a profound piece of philology.
>>
><snip>
>
>> [If any self-styled "Commander" wishes to pick at this sentence,
>> let him begin by recasting it into smaller ones.]
>>
>
>What sentence ?
The one you snipped.
>But I'll see what I can do ;-)
>
>>
>> >> > I see now
>> >> > where that movement led, however, and I regret my youthful ways.
>> >>
>> >> No, just ignore the modernist %^((*^*&)( that followed and no regret is
>> >> necessary.
>> >>
>> >> OK, I was an English major
>>
>> As a matter of fact, I wasn't, but for about a year, the English
>> Department thought I was.
>>
>Err - that was erilar, not me.
Why can't I reply to her, also?
>
>> ><snip>
>> >So what ? I was an Austrian private ;-)
>>
>> -- Ah, good. That, of course either solves or avoids the problem.
>>
>I still have the suspicion that I'm being mega-trolled;
Well, that's about right. Just trying to fall in with the spirit
of yours.
> _but_ you've
>snipped my reference to Dada - so I claim (prematurely) my catch.
>
>Merry Dadaistic Christmas,
And God save King Ubu.
Allan Griffith
says...
> Following early modern, we have middle modern, which lasted till the fall
> of the Soviet Union. We are now slightly past the beginning of the late
> modern age.
>
> This will be followed by the age of interplanetary settlement.
But don't hold your breath for that one!
Al
erilar
<mik...@eunet.at> wrote:
> "erilar" <erila...@SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:erilarloFRY-314B...@news.airstreamcomm.net...
>> > OK, I was an English major
> <snip>
> So what ? I was an Austrian private ;-)
I was explaining my bias 8-)