1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed (Turning Points in Ancient History)

The historian writing about the Aegean Bronze Age faces an uncomfortable choice. They can take a point of view and make a compelling narrative but only at the cost of simplifying or ignoring the scanty and contradictory evidence. Or they can delve into the complexities and the current arguments in the field at the cost of providing a confused turmoil into which the reader is lost. Eric Cline does very, very well at charting a course between those extremes; he makes it possible to follow the story while exposing and exploring the counter-evidence and competing theories. The late bronze age in the Aegean, as he describes so eloquently in the opening chapter, is a frighteningly familiar world; wide-spread nets of trade and economic interdependence, a complex weave of diplomatic relationships, the pressures of environmental change and a growing undercurrent of violence. In what seems like a blink over half the great players were seemingly wiped from the map (although all may not be as it seems there). One can't help thinking of the phrase "Too big to fail" and wondering if there is a warning here for us. It is also a fascinating, vibrant time. And a time in which foundational legends were being laid; set in this time, though not neccessarily happening in it, are the Greek myths, the Homeric epics that shape so much of the self-perception of the Western world, the events of Exodus...and this is also the height of Egypt's power, the New Kingdom, from where also comes so many of the stories and myths which would be recorded and elaborated in the Ptolemiac. The book is long, but still too short for the subject. Fortunately it is packed with citations. And dense, too; I am on my fourth or fifth reading and I'm still finding new things to explore. As with all history, but particularly history of the Ancient World, archaeology and the associated fields have seen incredible advances over the past years. Even Egyptology, buttressed by the volume of texts (and the historical accidents that made them translatable rather early on) is changing paradigms almost daily. In my humble, amateur opinion, it isn't worth reading a history written more than twenty years ago unless you are interested in the history of history. Fortunately, then, this is a recent book by someone who is active in the field. He honestly explores outmoded concepts such as the Dorian Invasions and manages to give both a historical perspective and ways in which the concept is still useful in a more modern conception. Oh, right. And it is incredibly readable for the amateur and the non-specialist. This is a serious history, make no doubt about it (the pages and pages of citations should tell you that). But it is fully accessible to any reader.

"1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed," by Eric H. Cline, is a short and engaging book of archeological evidence and theory that kept me so glued to the pages that I finished it in one day. Unfortunately, I found the book as disappointing as it was fascinating. It wasn't what I thought it would be. Nevertheless, I was pleased with what it did contain and that's why it is getting four stars. Let me explain. This book does an excellent job of setting forth the raw summarized archeological evidence supporting the concept that virtually all Late Bronze Age civilizations in the Aegean, the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Near East collapsed beginning in 1197 BC (with the Sea Peoples' successful invasion of Egypt) and continuing like a wave of disintegration across the basin over the many decades. What followed was a mini-dark ages lasting many centuries before civilization once again rebounded in the Iron Age. Cline's book summarizes the primary source evidence demonstrating how these Late Bronze Age civilizations were dependent on a highly complex system of regional trade in luxury items, foodstuffs, essential raw materials, ideas, and specialized high-technology experts. He also presents evidence showing how this system broke down and collapsed as the result of a "a concatenation of events, both human and natural--including climate change and drought, seismic disasters known as earthquake storms, internal rebellions, and `systems collapse' that brought this age to an end." As to an overall theory for this process, the author believes that the answer can be found by applying "complexity theory" to the evidence. I whole-heartedly agree! But this is exactly the point at which the author completely failed me. In my estimation, Cline did a very poor job of showing the evidence in support of that idea. I certainly don't pretend to be an expert in the science of complex adaptive systems, but it soon became clear to me that I may have actually read more on this new science than he has. The author did a very fuzzy job of describing how the evidence might support the application of complexity theory to this particular situation. In particular, the author could have presented evidence from related sciences in support of this idea. I wanted to see evidence from archaeobotany (the study of plant remains), zooarchaeology (the study of faunal remains), archaeopedology (the study of soil and uses of the soil), and paleoclimatology (the study of ancient climates). In my estimation, we won't fully understand these events until their evidence is given equal weight. Two years ago, I did a college-level independent study and report on the collapse of the Bronze Age Mycenaean civilization. So, I am well-acquainted with the evidence pointing toward complexity theory as the root cause. At that time, I read evidence concerning deforestation, erosion, drought, soil fertility depletion, and other environmental causes that may have been significant causal factors behind the rebellions and the emergence of the "Sea Peoples." I don't see this evidence in Cline's book...just brief mention that some of this may be involved. Perhaps this quote might help. It comes from one of the major scholars studying and applying complexity theory to a wide number of issues. The scholar is Yaneer Bar-Yam. He is head of the New England Complex Systems Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He says: "A networked society behaves like a multicellular organism; random damage is like lopping a chunk off a sheep. Whether or not the sheep survives depends on which chunk is lost. And while we are pretty sure which chunks a sheep needs, it isn't clear--and may not even be predictable --which chunks of our densely networked civilization are critical, until it's too late. When we do the analysis, almost any part is critical if you lose enough of it. Now that we can ask questions of such systems in more sophisticated ways, we are discovering that they can be very vulnerable." The actual text of Cline's book is only 177 pages in length, so it is a fairly small book that can be read in a brief amount of time. The rest of the book consists of detailed notes, a glossary of important ancient people in the book, and a bibliography. I enjoyed it. I learned a great deal. I would definitely recommend it together with the caveats I've noted above.

Eric. H. Cline has written a very good and dense summary about the bronze-age civilisation and there development in the brooder backyard of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. As others have stated the bock is written in a scientific and comparatively fact-based style. Why I can imagine this isn't anybody's preference, I personally like that style, maybe because I'm a scientist too [my bad English is rooted in the fact I'm not a mother-tongue speaker]. It could also be questioned if a book like this has to be written for "the average Joe" because such a concrete topic in a non-poster child field of ancient history may not attract him actually. This maybe different if one writes a book regarding WW I or the Great Depression. I enjoyed the reading of the chapters about the development of the bronze-age societies. I'm not an expert here and gained much knowledge. While it is again a comparatively factual style it gives the reader a good insight about the political and economical developments which took place at these times. I would had liked to read a little more about the bronze age economy like the copper-tin cycle or the crops of the era, but that is a personal taste. The final chapter gives several reasons and possibilities for the downfall of the bronze-age societies and extends a pure nonspecific "multiple-cause" approach by the introduction of the complexity theory and the way complex systems tend to develop and fail finally. Especially how comparatively local and/or small "trigger" events finally lead to cascading disruptions of such systems. This is definitely the highlight of the book. I agree 100 % with the authors claim that it was that what finally happened. He discusses also the role of "core" system parts in these bronze-age (society) systems like the palatial-system where maybe some 1000 or 10.000 people controlled much of the goods, the informations and the distribution of them. In this specific capital I would have liked the author to go a little further - maybe even speculating - on the last days of the Bronze Age. Even in this "climax" chapter Cline stays very dense and factual. But that is - probably - the way Cline writes and things so all fine. However I have one point that is critical IMO for the understanding of history which Cline nearly doesn't mention and mostly ignores (maybe for the lack a factual data?): Demographic development. To understand history without understand demographics won't work. This aspect could be further divided into quantitative and qualitative aspects. I'm very aware that especially the second one has become a taboo in sciences to some degree, but at least the first one could've been touched. One example is "Secular Cycles" by Peter Turchin and Sergey A. Nefedov how show one very useful part how demographics drive history. They describe in detail how societies evolve from a pure and equal state to mature feudal states under resource constrictions. From historical data it is very clear that somehow when a civilisation "matures" even in historical times these civilisations tend to have comparatively low fertility - especially among the higher ranks but also in general compared to the "non-civilized" societies surrounding them. For ancient Greek and the (western)Roman empire this is very well documented, going as far as it can be seen that the core areas of a society typical peak first (like the Italian part of the Empire or the numbers of full free citizen in Sparta). Typically 150 +/-100 years before the demising or absorption of a society it often absorbs large numbers of immigrants until it finally destabilises internally. There are very different explanations and there maybe historical examples where demographics played a minor part and climate chance/ resource exhaustions played the mayor part (Maya, Eastern Island or Ângkôr Vôtt come to mind). But anyhow it is a key factor and deserves a much broader reflection - especially when the fall of societies is concerned. It is clear that most of the bonze-age civilizations where "mature" when the "Sea people" showed up. Of course from area to area things may have been different - Greek still on the rise, Egypt or Sumer already fare advanced. But like in the case of the Roman Empire while the "Barbarians" where definitely not the only or sole reason for the final curtain the disbalance between "fresh" and rapidly expanding societies with wave after wave nearing the borders and a mature, low-fertility and high immigrant (slaves, general) Empire was a critical factor in an already stressed complex system starting to disintegrate. Demographics also partly explain why the "complexity-level" of the palatial system was too high at the very end considering it was from an absolute perspective much lower than today's level. Even without tacking qualitative aspects of demographic development into account even the biggest palaces may have been run by 10.000 people. They don't had nearly the access to information 10.000 well-educated people today have. The maximum complexity-level and stability of a system run by only 10.000 people - how had only cuneiform script - Is very limited. Even on large OEM today has more engineering/scientific stuff than the total of the people running the most of the society at these times. Because of that [and maybe the individual level of the most educated people compared to today for whatever reasons (better Nutrition, full-scale education, genetics(?)] the maximum complexity in that times was of course much lower than what is possible today.

Great book! Eric H. Cline gives you all the facts on hand and the different opinions of other scholars to let you build your own opinion on what caused the collapse. The book takes you through the basic history of the major civilizations at the time in an entertaining and easy to navigate way.

海の民によるレバント文明の破壊の歴史です エジプトすら多大な影響を受けたのです

Ok

I love good ancient history books but most is written about classical Rome or Greece. 1177 is different. Very different and therefore refreshing. It deals with an earlier age of which not much is known. It’s really nice how it manages to tie together several Mediterranean concepts and cultures which includes quite a few that were fairly unknown to me, like the Hittites and the Cypriot peoples. And its really interesting to see how much evidence there is for all these cultures being interconnected. The book is well-written and never bored me. Plan to read it again at some stage as its so fascinating.