1177 BC – The Year Civilization Collapsed [video] | Hacker News Reader

1177 BC – The Year Civilization Collapsed [video]

youtube.com

280 pointsdmlhllnd67 comments

Unfortunately I can't recommend the book. It's a fascinating subject, but ... Much/most of the book is devoted to what various Eastern Mediterranean civilizations were like before the Collapse of the Late Bronze Age. It's useful as an introduction so that you can get some idea of what collapsed, but it shouldn't be most of the book.

The treatment of the collapse itself is fairly shallow. I know the collapse is still mysterious and comparatively little is known about it, but that's why a book like this should be so interesting. Surely there is enough information to fill a comparatively short book like this. The ever mysterious Sea People's are mentioned of course, but other than noting that they weren't just one group and that the Egyptians defeated one group of invaders he says little. There is the usual "they may have been from here, or perhaps there" but it doesn't go into much detail about the different theories. The possible causes of the collapse aren't discussed much either. Basically it says "stuff fell apart and here are some examples". I know that much of this stuff is far from settled but discussing the evidence and arguments for various theories is a good approach. Talking about how new civilizations arose after the collapse would have been interesting too; much more than endless detail about pre-collapse civilizations like the Minoans.

> "...much more than endless detail about pre-collapse civilizations like the Minoans."

Funny you should say that, because the author does in the book (by your description) what he describes happening in a systems collapse scenario:

[describing a systems collapse, 48:10] "It usually takes about a century, there's usually a dark age that happens right afterward. And when they're coming out of that dark age they start immortalizing the great period ... before them."

Take my opinion with a grain of salt because I put this books down after only 100 pages or so, but it seemed to exemplify my main gripe with many/most popular science/non-fiction publications these days...padding. Many authors seem to have a great ~150 page thesis, but publishers push hard that best sellers are 400-600 pages.

I recall someone commenting that most non-fiction books have only 15 minutes of true comment. The rest is commentary and persuasion.

I used to feel awful if I did t finish a book because the author created it with a certain vision. As I get older I've realized how limited my time is, and I am more content with a quick skim for many.

I would say this is true of a lot of non-technical, popular non-fiction. I would consider "The Art of Electronics" [1] one of the greatest pieces of non-fiction in the English language, but that sucker's dense.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Art-Electronics-Paul-Horowitz/dp/0521...

Yes. I think Gladwell was the target of the comment. :-)

that was my main problem with "The Lean Startup" too. it was really really hard to finish it when only 10% of the content was actionable (the rest anecdotal)

I often find myself reading about 30% of books like "The Lean Startup," and moving on. Not necessarily the first 30%, but overall. Understand the thesis, and move on.

I have yet to find a business book where this doesn't apply. I only finish the ones where I particularly like the writing style or the anecdotes.

Have you read "The hard thing about hard things"? I found it had very little padding and was loaded to the rim with valuable information.

It was worse in audiobook form.

I was stuck in a jury duty situation without any other materials (I had a library play away, my phone was dead, and reading materials were taken), and I still couldn't listen to that thing!

It's probably even worse than that. Ages ago [1] Philip Greenspun wrote about the gap between "the five-page magazine article, serving as filler among the ads [and] the book, with a minimum of 200 pages." For the most part surprisingly little has changed although that comment was made in 2009. There are some shorter form books these days, e.g. from O'Reilly. But if you want the gravitas that a book often conveys there are still a lot of forces pushing you toward 300+ pages.

[1] http://philip.greenspun.com/writing/changed-by-web-and-weblo...

It's funny you say that because the author addresses this at the start of the talk. He says that when it was suggested to him by a friend that he write a book about the Collapse, he agreed only on the condition that he could distinguish himself from previous publications on the same topic precisely by talking more about what the Late Bronze Age was actually like, and what was lost.

He also says if he had to choose any period of history to live in he would choose that period.

I don't think he should be blamed for writing what he wants to write about, but maybe the marketing of the book is a bit misleading.

Not recommending the book is not the same as blaming the author.

Because books write themselves.

No, because blaming the author for unnamed transgressions is not a fundamental aspect of not liking a book.

I like the "it's complicated" theory, but it also a bit of a cop-out. Can we not have a meta-theory? Here are three candidates:

1) Climate change. Doesn't directly cause famines because people adapt; but the adaptation might be e.g to become wondering marauders. Thus war, destruction famine etc.

2) Technological change. Iron-working upset existing power balances. The political results were different in different places but in the end there was a whole lot of war and chaos.

3) Luck. History is complicated and random things happen at all scales. Including total collapses of civilisations.

In each of these, the proximate causes of destruction are a complicated networks of events. But there are higher level explanations behind them.

Are these more general explanations testable? Are there good arguments for or against any of them?

Joseph Tainter's theory (The Collapse of Complex Societies) is even more general. Societies collapse when "continued investment in complexity as a problem-solving strategy yields a declining marginal return". The idea is that initially, solutions to problems are found and society becomes more complex as a result, but the benefit of the solutions exceeds the cost of the complexity. But as the society develops, the benefit in the form of solutions to problems become smaller and the cost of servicing the additional complexity becomes larger, until the cost exceeds the benefit. Then things break down and society is forced to become a lot simpler.

It scares me a bit that this very much describes the current situation

It shouldn't overly scare you: It required a complex society to produce someone like Tainter, so it isn't proof of imminent dark ages, merely that to be able to posit a theory like this you'd have to be alive roughly now.

Just like the future isn't equally distributed we're now so mobile that you could likely outrun a collapse of your society if you saw it coming.

You're going to have to give up some creature comforts though, and possible more than just a few.

Mumford had a similar view on the fate of cities.

"...the blind forces of urbanization, flowing along the lines of least resistance, show no aptitude for creating an urban and industrial pattern that will be stable, self-sustaining, and self-renewing. On the contrary, as congestion thickens and expansion widens, both the urban and the rural landscape undergo defacement and degradation, while the unprofitable investments in the remedies…serve only to promote more of the blight and disorder they seek to palliate."

It's also that to manage the complexity, individuals become hyper-specialized. So when a crisis comes along, that civilization can't repurpose people quickly enough to cope.

"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." — Robert Heinlein

It's my favorite Heinlein quote by far and I try to live by it but in the short term there is much to be gained for an individual by specializing, specialists tend to rake in the big bucks, generalists not so much.

Said by a character who lived to be 2000 years old.

A direct representation of this can be found in law. Countries start out with simple laws, then as society gets more complex the laws become substantially more complex as well, to the point where tax codes, private and criminal law are no longer wholly comprehensible by any single individual.

It shouldn't be a surprise that societies collapse though, everything has a life-cycle, even stars and the universe as a whole, it would be extremely surprising if something as simple as an organization made up of fragile humans would manage to last longer than say a millennium or so.

it would be extremely surprising if something as simple as an organization made up of fragile humans would manage to last longer than say a millennium or so.

Would it? In 868, the County of Portucale was created; in 1143 it became independent, with Vimaranes as its capital. Nowadays, Portugal is still around and Guimarães is still an important city, and while it certainly has its problems, I don't think it's in any danger of disappearing. Is it that exceptional?

Take Ethernet for example: we've had multiple distinct technologies that used the name, but we always call it ethernet (I suspect that we only avoided calling wi-fi "ethernet" is because wi-fi is shorter).

It is much the same for countries, who die and reform in approximately the same geographic location and keep the name to preserve the illusion of continuity. Portugal's history is far from free of such reformations, civil wars, etc...

I don't like that theory. Sounds a lot like the current era.

"Including total collapses of civilisations."

It seems to be an inherent thing of civilizations to collapse.

The Collapse of Complex Societies https://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Complex-Societies-Studies-Ar...

The collapse of our society seem to be inevitable. You don't have to believe is but I don't think we can beat mathematics in the long term:

"There is No Steady State Economy (except at a very basic level)" http://ourfiniteworld.com/2011/02/21/there-is-no-steady-stat...

Limits to Growth–At our doorstep, but not recognized http://www.resilience.org/stories/2014-02-12/limits-to-growt...

Wealth And Energy Consumption Are Inseparable http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2012/01/wealth-and-energy-...

Galactic-Scale Energy http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/07/galactic-scale-e...

Quote: "But let’s not overlook the key point: continued growth in energy use becomes physically impossible within conceivable timeframes."

You might be right that our civilization is going to collapse eventually. However, in many of the advanced economies, we have had gdp growth has been separated from energy consumption for several decades.

I am more worried about the effects of advance technologies, including it getting in the hands of people like ISIS who want to take down Western Civilization.

Here's a paper published just last week titled "Is Decoupling GDP Growth from Environmental Impact Possible?" (Their answer is "no.")

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/asset?id=10.1371/jo...

"However, in many of the advanced economies, we have had gdp growth has been separated from energy consumption for several decades."

Do we?

"In recent years, a large share of the world’s manufacturing has been moved to developing countries. This shift gives the illusion that the developed countries can get along with less energy to produce their GDP. This is not really the case. The developed countries find themselves with a need for a large amount of imported goods. Their heavily services-oriented economies tend to grow slowly. This is because, with little energy use, it is difficult for these economies to make productivity gains." https://ourfiniteworld.com/2016/10/11/why-energy-prices-are-...

Plus the current model is really fragile. Come up with a way to disrupt 4-5 pacific ports at the right time and the world would plunge into depression due to the supply chain disruption.

"I am more worried about the effects of advance technologies, including it getting in the hands of people like ISIS who want to take down Western Civilization."

This is true and this may be another nail in the coffin.

"The threshold necessary for small groups to conduct global warfare has finally been breached, and we are only starting to feel its effects. Over time, in as little as perhaps twenty years and as the leverage of technology increases, this threshold will finally reach its culmination -- with the ability of one man to declare war on the world and win." John Robb

> "I like the "it's complicated" theory, but it also a bit of a cop-out. Can we not have a meta-theory?"

Isn't a "systems collapse" the meta-theory you're looking for?

For those who don't want to watch the video, its about this book: http://www.npr.org/books/titles/341580791/1177-b-c-the-year-...

I inherited a fascination with this time period from my father who acquired it from an Oxbridge educated colleague in the RAF during WW2 - who took copies of Homer on their adventures.

My fascination was fed by the excellent 1980s BBC series "In Search of the Trojan War" with Michael Wood, which covers some of the same topics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkbUQKyie_w&list=PLH2l6uzC4U... [NB Warning of nipples].

Great video. Thank you for posting.

Not a scholar of ancient history nor anthropology, so I'm inclined to gloss over the social mechanisms. What is fascinating to me is the application of "systems collapse" theory.

I'm thinking of two contexts. On the one hand there are complex systems; Systems too large for humans to comprehend in total. This inclines us towards abstraction, dimension reduction and model-theoretic approaches which only simulate effects.

While on the other hand we have sudden collapse of complex systems. Popular examples which come to mind include Malcolm Gladwell's "Tipping Point", cascade failure (ex. Collapse of the World Trade Center, multiple organ failure).

Now I can add 1177 BC to my list of examples.

Also the In Our Time Podcast http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07fl5bh

With the mention of drought and famine in the Levant possibly leading to internal rebellion it makes you think of modern day Syria.[0]

[0] http://www.npr.org/2013/09/08/220438728/how-could-a-drought-...

Horses and iron weapons. Neither are mentioned in the Iliad, just before this period. And it is documented when the Egyptions learned these technologies in the New Kingdom after being pummeled by more capable barbarians.

I bet I'm far from the only one who wants an RPG supplement for adventuring in that era.

The analogy of ISIS and sea people is spot on.However, we can safely say the ISIS was an outcome from a chaotic situation in the first place ; not caused by famine or climate change perhaps but much more sinister reasons.

Love it! Reminds me of Dan Carlin's "Kings of Kings" series in his Hardcore History podcast. The world was fascinating back then. Even the names of people/places were epic: Ninevah, the Elamites, the Assyrians, Ahura Mazda, Marduk, etc! So epic!

http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-56-kings-of-kings/

Is this the same period cited by Julian Jaynes in his theory of the bicameral mind?

http://www.meltingasphalt.com/hallucinated-gods/

Oriental Institute youtube channel has some great videos.

Thank you for posting, I really enjoyed this video. What books or videos would you recommend to gain general knowledge about history from the Bronze Age to the fall of the Roman empire?

Cline also did a wonderful series of audio lectures on the archaeology of Troy. (The Modern Scholar: Archaeology and the Iliad: The Trojan War in Homer and History)

What about disease?

Also, the displacement of god-kings by divine creators?

tl;dw please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Bronze_Age_collapse

'its complicated'

Beware of the Sea People.

For more real horror stories read "The Collapse of Complex Civilizations" The Ik is the shortest example of what can only be called Lovecraftian History.

What makes this material scary is that it might not be the past.

Do you mean The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph Tainter?

Yes. Watch out for sea people. Possible fish-frog hybrids belonging to the Esoteric Order of Dagon.

- 8 civilizations collapsed

- Cause unknown

- Don't trust sea people :)

+ 1: don't build major cities on fault lines.

Although you may want to consider incorporating a fault scarp into your city defences:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_Gate

Someone should have told David Burnham before he built SF.

I wonder, if a catastrophe is to be expected, is it cynical, to create replacement infrastructure (sewage, waterpiping, streets, electricity) at a safer location nearby and once the disaster strikes to reroute the refugee streams too that location?

I'd call that responsible instead of cynical. If you know in advance that an asteroid is about to hit Earth, except the exact location you'd do the same.

In the case of SF, an entire continent is approaching very-very-very slowly.

To add to what others said:

The cultural collapse was so total that with writing systems disappeared. Greek had to develop reading and writing again.

What percentage of the population was actually literate? <1%?

We don't know why bronze era collapsed

He suggests that not one thing, but a series of disasters one after the other caused it.

The reasons: Sea People(invaders/raiders) Famine Drought Earth Quake 'Storms'

Since the societies were 'globalized' and reliant on one another, these disasters happening one after another, caused domino effect.

You should watch in full. It was really nice.

Summary:

* It is assumed that there was no single reason for the "collapse of civilization" (in Aegean, Eastern Mediterrean, Eygpt, and Near East) between ~1200-1000 BC. At the time, it seems there were droughts, famines, earthquakes, invaders, and rebellions; havoc was caused, international trade routes cut, and many cities were destroyed.

* Parallels drawn at end to modern society with exception of the migration and/or invasion of "sea people" (actually people from several areas).

* Eric then at end says that he's not in a position to provide advice for what we should do, but seems to suggest that when history runs its course, it is likely that good things come from the destruction, citing the Alphabet and monotheism as coming after the 1200-1000 BC collapse (end Bronze Age) and fresh growth coming after a large forest fire.

I think the forest fire at the end could have been left out. While I like the optimism he was trying to relay, I think that some could take it is a reason for actively trying to light the powder keg by causing further destabilization in order to bring about a renewal.

Also, the problem with comparing the dark ages then to what would happen today is that they weren't that bad:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Dark_Ages

Trade was not relied on as much as it is now for food, material to build shelter, fuel for transportation, etc.

Many countries today could not become self-sufficient without a great deal of death and disease if trade routes were cut off.

And, our civilization is more at risk because we rely on electronics and electricity. If a large portion of the electronic equipment were rendered unusable by a well-coordinated set of strong EMP's/nukes going off (unlikely), a very large coronal mass ejection (more likely), or cyberattack on the electrical grid (most likely), that would disable our water, food production, hospitals, and heating/cooling. Few have the resources they need to survive or even physical books to teach themselves anything that would be useful (plants in their area that are safe to eat, how to build weapons and hunt, how to find fresh water, remedies for disease using local plants). Many have not made social connections with neighbors.

Note: EMP/CME cannot be mitigated by storing an extra phone or computer in a Faraday cage, even if you were to have a few bikes to generate electricity for it. What are you going to do with it other than use a text editor to store recipes for roasted squirrel and dandelion stew?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3838433/The-D...

http://www.federaltimes.com/articles/emerging-focus-on-cyber...

If any of those things happen, you'll need clean water. In addition to storing some water, you'll need a renewable supply. Though distillation is the best technique, some other options are discussed here:

http://www.practicalsurvivor.com/emergencywaterfiltration

Aside from reading how to make a filter yourself with mosses, carbon, and stones, this is one that's recommended: Sawyer Products SP191 Point Zero Two Bucket Purifier Assembly Kit with Faucet Adapter

As for shelter and heating/cooling, some interesting ideas here like using a tent indoors: https://dengarden.com/home-improvement/How-to-keep-warm-in-t...

More ideas:

http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-37923.h...

http://urbansurvivalsite.com/ways-to-stay-cool-without-power...

Go solar, assuming the related equipment isn't damaged:

http://news.energysage.com/cheapest-solar-panels-price-per-w...

http://fortune.com/2016/06/13/solar-to-get-crazy-cheap/

Monotheism is not a good thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com