"In Technology we trust" or is "medieval" a contemptuous word

US banknotes feature the motto "In God we trust". Today it should rather be "In Technology we trust".

There is something about this, as belief in technological progress has almost become a religion. Times when technological progress was evident, such as the Renaissance or the first Industrial Revolution, are generally regarded as times of progress.

Times in which technological progress was less pronounced, like the Middle Ages, are considered the 'Dark Ages'. This is evident in both language and mass culture. We call the Taliban 'medieval', and on the famous Pulp Fiction, Marcelus Wallace says: "I will go medieval with your ass".

And were the Middle Ages really so dark??

And here arises the question that is the fundamental axis of my column: Does technological progress generate social progress, or vice versa: does social progress generate technological progress?

These questions occurred to me after reading the excellent book 'Medieval Horizons' by Ian Mortimer. The author argues strongly that times of social progress lay the groundwork for later times in which technological progress is vibrant.

At the opposite end of the spectrum is the super-popular Yuval Noah Harari, who argues in a strongly materialist way that technological progress is driving the progress of civilisation. Interestingly, Harari is originally a historian focusing his original interest on medieval warfare.

Harari cites the example of a Spanish villager near Cadiz who falls asleep in the year 1000 and wakes up in the year 1492, when Columbus sails from Cadiz to discover the New World. According to Harari, for the example villager he would notice little change, compared to if he woke up in the year 2024, for example.

Mortimer, on the other hand, notes that, for the villager, 1492 would have been a greater shock than 2024. In the year 1,000, this man was a subject of the Muslim Caliphate of Cordoba. In 1492, he was a fresh subject of the Queen of Spain, and he and his family would be expelled from the lands where they had lived for centuries. Unless they were killed. The life of this man and his family would have been in real danger. This is much harder to accept than learning to use a smartphone or even understanding that electricity, television and the internet exist.

Historians argue over which time period covers the Middle Ages. Some consider its beginning to be the fall of the Roman Empire (476) and others point to the year 1000. Some point to the rise of the universities in the 1200s as the beginning of the Renaissance, while others point to the 1500s, all the way up to 1600.

Mortimer takes the assumption of 1000-1600 (the latter somewhat controversially, I would take 1500).

What happened that was significant for humanity in that time frame?

The first constitutions and the first parliaments ('Magna Charta') came into being, guaranteeing that the king could not levy taxes without the consent of the people. Guaranteeing that a person could not be arrested without a court sentence. Of course, you are right - this only applied to the nobility, i.e. between 10 and 20% of the population (depending on the country). Nevertheless.

The Middle Ages were a time of gigantic human travel. In a geographical sense. The infamous Crusades contributed to this. But not only. Also the centralisation of administration-a nobleman had to travel to the royal court across the whole. It was medieval merchants who reached China first. Travel educates.

The Middle Ages saw the emergence of banks, which made the international possible by inventing bills of exchange and bypassing church prohibitions on interest loans.

Medieval monasteries, where monks transcribed books by hand, are the basis for the institution of universities, whether we consider the latter to be an invention of the Middle Ages or the Renaissance.

It was the medieval philosophers who began to write about the 'just war': on which days (religious holidays) it is not allowed to fight, women and children must not be murdered, etc.

Finally, the Middle Ages were the adoption of Arabic mathematics (including Arabic numerals). Did you know that the Romans did not know or use the concept of 'zero'? Without 'zero' would you be reading this column on your device?

We tend to treat the Roman Empire as the pillar of civilisation.?

The great philosophers, the adoption of Greek tradition, the law, the administration of the empire.

Meanwhile, beyond the building of roads and aqueducts, I am unable to see what the Romans achieved in technology.

And socially? These are also the times of burning Christians, cruel gladiatorial fights, mad emperors and the death penalty on the cross. And lack of public law with the burst of civil law.

The achievements of the Middle Ages paved the way for the invention of printing, Copernicus' theory, the great geographical discoveries, the Reformation, astronomy and physics.

In my opinion, the periods in history in which social progress and civilisational progress prevail are intertwined like DNA strands.

I am curious to know which period we are currently in. We have AI, but we are not ready to adopt it socially and therefore economically. Are we in a new Middle Ages? And is that a bad thing?