Grade 6 Spring — The Classical World and Late Antiquity to ~500 CE: Late Rome and Byzantium, Han China, Mauryan and Gupta India, Sasanian Persia, Aksum and Early Ghana, Classical Maya and Teotihuacan — Whose 'Fall'? Whose Golden Age? Whose Living Descendants?

The 'fall of Rome' critically examined — the SIMULTANEITY ARGUMENT — analyzing why the SAME 200-500 CE period was called 'Late' in Roman history but 'Golden Age' in Indian history and 'Classical' in Maya history, with multi-scholar refutation of Gibbon single-cause narrative per Heather / Ward-Perkins / Goffart / Geary (carried from G6-Fall) extended with Cameron / Brown 'Late Antiquity not Dark Ages' framing

Apply the SIMULTANEITY ARGUMENT — the same 200-500 CE period that European historiography traditionally called 'Late' (Late Antique) or worse 'Dark Ages' (a label rejected by every working professional historian today) was simultaneously the Indian Mathematical Golden Age (Gupta India), the Classical Maya florescence (Tikal-Palenque-Calakmul), the rise of Aksum, the peak of Sasanian Persia, and the continuation of Han-Chinese civilization (which transitioned through Three Kingdoms 220-280 CE / Jin 265-420 CE without civilizational rupture). Apply multi-scholar refutation of Gibbon's 'decline and fall' single-cause narrative: Heather (barbarian-migration thesis) + Ward-Perkins (material-decline thesis) + Goffart (barbarian-accommodation thesis) + Geary (continuity-of-Late-Antiquity thesis) from G6-Fall extended with new G6-Spring Cameron + Brown 'Late Antiquity is a period of continuity-and-transformation not a fall' framing.

Exercise pool (2)