13 points AnodicElegy 1 day ago 9 comments

silverFork 20 hours ago | parent

Interesting : "some also alluded to the idea that iron had democratized violence"

delichon 13 minutes ago | parent

Tin was far more scarce than iron. Iron weapons aren't any better than bronze ones, just easier to source and make. This guy makes a case that iron weapons caused the Bronze Age Collapse.

https://x.com/s8mb/status/2103126253012226363

yathern 7 minutes ago | parent

Your twitter link is a summary of the linked article - from the editor-in-chief - in case someone else sees "this guy" and assumes it would be a different take than the one in the featured article.

sourdecor 21 minutes ago | parent

I thought this was a cool fact about the Bronze Age: "According to a new study, it's possible that all iron-based weapons and tools of the Bronze Age were forged using metal salvaged from meteorites".[0]

[0]: https://www.sciencealert.com/bronze-age-artefacts-have-meteo...

lefty2 18 minutes ago | parent

Interesting fact, you only could come third in the Olympics during the bronze age

bryanlarsen 5 minutes ago | parent

Gold has been used for 40,000+ years and silver started being smelted at about the same time as bronze.

jmyeet 5 minutes ago | parent

This is a thesis and it's not a new one.

It's true that when iron was first smelted and the first steel was made, it was structurally different to the Bronze economy. Iron is abundant and local. It doesn't require the same trade network (of copper and tin).

I'm surprised this article doesn't mention the Uluburun shipwreck [1]. It's archeologically important because it provides primary evidence of how extensive Bronze age trade networks were.

At best the author is theorizing not why the Bronze age collapse happened but why the empires and trade networks of that era didn't come back. But that's a different question.

We also have direct primary evidence from this time of the Sea Peoples [2]. To this day nobody really knows where they came from or why. Many modern scholars believe they may have been refugees themselves, possibly from natural disasters or droughts.

The most likely explanation for all this is that there was no single factor. All of these things likely contributed. It's still unclear why the collapse was so extensive and relatively sudden. That's not really satisfying but we've had fragile systems before that have collapsed suddenly and violently. Look at the outbreak of World War One as one major example.

One of my favorite phrases here is Outside Context Problem [3], which originates from the Iain M. Banks Culture novel Excession (love this book). It pretty accurately describes the collapses that happened in the Americas in the colonial era.

[1]: https://www.re-thinkingthefuture.com/case-studies/a9360-lost...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Peoples

[3]: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OutsideContextPr...

ericmay 3 minutes ago | parent

Fun article. I think that there is a lot of interesting information here that would help explain what we saw with the Bronze Age Collapse, though I would submit that this is just another of the various items that probably led to the collapse. Maybe a drought occurs, folks turn to iron weapons, and then take over another town or village for their resources, and so on.

This could lead to supply chain collapses and such. Maybe just general destabilization and raids and such sort of collapsed the larger empires. But at the same time, those larger empires would also have had access to iron, so why couldn't they by matter of numerical superiority, access to greater resources, tactics and military organization, and more simply overwhelm smaller armies or bands utilizing the same technology and restore order or at least defend themselves?