Thursday, October 28, 2010

Abrupt Civilization Change 2

Abrupt Falls

I.Parra

Modern man has kept a constant focus on certain historic moments. One of the most frequently observed is the collapse of the Roman Empire. This is curious because the Roman fall was very smooth. It started at around the III century A.D. and the last political signal as Roman State was sent to the History in the Vth century, when the Prefect of the Annona stopped the free distribution of bread to the Roman poor in 476 A.D.
Therefore the Roman collapse is not an Abrupt Collapse, it is just like many other collapses - a decline of territorial “imperium”, political unity. It is worth mentioning that Roman armies won most of the wars engaged against their German foe.
Another very important thing normally forgotten…or even never learned…is that the Roman Empire was divided into two sections several centuries before the collapse of the western area. The eastern section survived a long time after the western collapse until 1453. It is a fact that Constantinople was the capital of the surviving eastern Roman Empire. Its decline was also very smooth, and, paradoxically, Constantinople´s decline is related to Christian invasions and partial destruction made by war fleets and armies from Gene, Catalonia. One of these Christian attacks on the capital of the Holy Roman Empire was from Crusaders going to Jerusalem in 1205. In this way the final decline of Constantinople was a sum, such as that of the Western Roman Empire, of successive crises lasting dozens of years through, at least a couple of centuries.
Thus, when we talk or read about the Collapse of the Roman Empire we are before one of the best documented long declines of a political entity in known History.
If we look before the Roman glorious period and its smooth decline, we find the Greek-Hellenic-conglomerate of city-states federated under Alexander’s domain. The cause of this Pan-Hellenic federation under Alexander is the loss of power by Athens and Sparta. The former occurred in a very short span of time, and the latter through a political and military eclipse before the strength of the Macedonian king Phillipos, the father of Alexander.
I think the fall of Athens is full of interesting, useful, information, going well beyond its chronological frame, a glimpse of this phenomenon will follow:
The long war between Sparta and Athens lasted a grand total of 26 years from 431 to 404 B.C., and it marked the abrupt military decline of Athens. This war is well known through Thucydides book “The Peloponnesian War”, where a lot of interesting details of ancient war are shown for the very first time. For me the most useful information, derived from this detailed written source, is the abrupt decline of Athens because of its catastrophic naval expedition against Sicily in 415 B.C. The power of Athens was at its highest threshold, the continuous mutual attacks between Athenians and Spartan armies were of no consequence since both acted on different strategic spheres: the Athenians preferred to war at sea while the powerful terrestrial army of Sparta kept their battles on the ground. Therefore, quoting Thucydides, neither enemy destroyed the military might of their rival despite many long years of war. But Athens did step into a naval-terrestrial expedition into Sicily which foresaw that the strategic key to win against her enemy was by attacking one of the most rich and active rearguards of the Peloponnesus league, controlled by Sparta. The Athenian expedition ended in 415 with the complete destruction of the Athenian army, her soldiers were killed or enslaved. From this moment on, Athens lost not simply an army but a very qualified one: in this Sicilian expedition her soldiers were very well trained sailors and the operative core of her fleet. The final battle of Aegospotami in 405 was a paradoxical battle where the superior speed of the Spartan fleet trapped the Athenian ships lying in shore. In less than 10 years from the Sicilian catastrophe Athens lost military control of the Ionian sea, the access to the Hellespont, and most importantly, the leadership of the Dalian League. The late did mean the abrupt loss of any ability to reshape her former power among the Hellenic city-States. Athens, after her military and political Abrupt Change, did not disappear from either the maps or from the memory of men. But nothing was the same again for them. In this sense it is worth mentioning that some Abrupt Changes within the geopolitical sphere do not necessarily imply the physical smashing of cities, people and civil organisations. This kind of abrupt geopolitical change does not have to imply abrupt civilization change.
Is there any other example where such an Abrupt Change provoked physical destruction of cities and the dispersion of their inhabitants? Yes, indeed, and in our next post we are going to surf onto some key examples. 

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Abrupt Civilization Change 1

            Abrupt Civilization Change

I. Parra


What does “Abrupt Civilization Change” mean?
On one hand we could define it as significant technological change.  On the other hand we could explain it as temporal, where there are many very rapid, short intervals of change, during which modified social structures, economic dynamics, disruption of trade markets, and other movements occur.
How rapid must a change be to become an “Abrupt” Change?  It all depends upon the scale of observation.  From our point of view, that is, in an average Western life, “abrupt” could range from between 2 or 4 years up to 20 or 40 years.  Something big could be happening within a couple of statistical human generations spanning 25 years each.
During my 36 years living in Europe and my first 15 years growing up in South America - a lot of important things happened to me that could be considered Abrupt Changes, perhaps not on a “civilization” scale, but I suspect that many of these smaller events are part of much bigger changes.
Let me draw your attention to some of the major events that punctuated my and all of the lives of people living in this time.
The consolidation and the fall of the Soviet system; the rise of Chinese power as independent from Russian communists; the independence of dozens of African European colonies; massive changes in communications and transport; more and faster long distance “unwired” communications for voice, data and image; an increase in numbers of planes in the sky travelling at greater speeds; more high speed trains and in larger numbers; more destructive war systems and many more people inhabiting the planet – all consuming energy at a vast rate.
The list is actually much longer than this very synthetic flash abstract.  In further posts we will go deeper, showing you in greater detail the phenomena that participate in the processes of both technological and social change.
It is evident that during the last 50 years we have witnessed extremely rapid civilization change.  In the last hundred years the magnitude of consequences as a result of new technology has already accelerated massively from those of just 200 years ago.
Besides, in Archaeology the technological level of armies is seldom used to get insight into the corresponding technological level of the society sustaining that technology.  This is a common practice since the first professional archaeologist start some 120 years ago to explore old Asian cultures, such as Troy, Mesopotamia, Hittites, and the most well known of all old African cultures, that of Egypt.  Thus let us compare for a moment the modern armies with those of 100 years ago.  This comparison shall show radical differences, not only in fire power but also in logistics, drilling systems, communications and cultural level of soldiers.  The latter is not a minor point: in the mid 1800ths half of the European population was unable to read a newspaper.  When compared to modern armies a technological revolution is needed to explain not only the quality of changes but the quantity too.  This is an important matter when dealing with Abrupt Civilization changes: quantities matter a lot, that is quantities of people attained by such or such other qualitative change, quantities of objects, quantities of information and quantities of new technologies achieved and spread out in short time intervals.
All of this corresponds to an abridged synthesis of Abrupt Changes operating as positive exponential curves. How to start surfing on those changes promoting, preceding and causing Abrupt falls of complete civilizations, which are observed in relatively short intervals of time?
In the next post we are going to look at it in a bit more detail.  This is a very first approach to what we can point out as “positive” Abrupt Civilization Change.