MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Way Out West (Pre-History)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

If you think this terrain is "mountainous" in the sense you originally conveyed -- the Welsh being protected by the Cambrian mountains -- then you must suffer from vertigo.

This Offa's Dyke? Or is there another one?



Watch out for that step, it's a... well... not much of a doozy.

Send private message
DPCrisp


In: Bedfordshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

We have the similar eruption of Thera in 1600 BC that brought on the collapse on Minoan Crete.

Except that they carried on for another hundred years... {and, what with a Greek Dark Age controversy, might not have disappeared at all}. The most noticeable change was the appearance of maritime themes on fine pottery: which a fortiori means they were still producing fine pottery.

The warriors clear out the natives then settle down to farm the land they've taken.

Huh? Professional warriors is what I heard. Ruling élite. The right to do your own hard graft isn't booty or spoils-of-war in anyone's language. You must be talking about someone else.

I do take on board the views of academics because I don't believe that they are systematically setting out to lie to me.

It's the system that is lying to you. And saying so is not a hollow reflex action: we've been dissecting some examples with you... and plenty more besides.

I think the evidence from China surely carries some clout here.

Reminds me of those letters about the vicious Vikings slaughtering every last man... oh... except for me... Anyway they plundered everything... but came back a little while later and took it all again.

"One could also envisage the destruction of the ships on which Minoan power depended, and the longer term disruption of agriculture by a heavy overlay of ash."

Since Minoan power depended on the ships, one could envisage them not all being in port at the same time. Bits of the beach have been found up the hillsides, as if washed in by the tsunami, but no ships: so they seem to have been in a fit state to clear up.

One could also envisage a short term disruption of agriculture followed by bumper crops from that rich volcanic soil.

One could envisage a lot of people in the Eastern Mediterranean feeling a short, choking darkness to be a small price to pay for having a blanket of soil for once: sent from Heaven, no less.

It does explain how a much larger population could be decimated as crop yields fell.

That assumes everyone is on the edge of subsistence... while everything we know about Britain just before the Romans and just before the Vikings says we revelled in surplus.

if things were that bad in China how much worse things must have been in the Aegean.

How much worse is that, Duncan? Is there definitely a gradient of ill effects spread out in all directions from the volcano? Or is it more like a cloud of ill effects that passes over and gives everyone the same level of grief, from which they soon recover? Or something else? Given that different layers of the atmosphere go in different directions at different rates... and weather patterns extend for thousands of miles in circulating patterns... and that the majority of super-computing resources go into modelling of the atmosphere and they're still not very good at it... I wouldn't like to guess at the correlation between China's experience and the Aegean's. {See what I mean about doubt having a basis: a reasonable doubt?} It seems to me it will be evidence one day: when we have a better idea of what goes on.

"The sun was dark and its darkness lasted for eighteen months; each day it shone for about four hours; and still this light was only a feeble shadow ... the fruits did not ripen and the wine tasted like sour grapes."

Volcanic ejecta have been observed to take about 2 weeks to form a uniform band around the Earth: so it was probably much the same for everyone during these 18 months. If Byzantium was making wine, writing things down, going to the market and counting change, life was probably pretty close to normal around the North Sea, too.
Send private message
Duncan


In: Yorkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

This Offa's Dyke? Or is there another one?

Neither is this the sort of meadow country that Mick has referred to. It's clearly not mountainous in the sense even of the Cuillin Ridge or the Snowdon Horseshoe BUT it is rugged terrain. Whether we accept a Germanic or a 'Celtic' invasion hypothesis the fact remains that the Welsh are protected by the Cambrian mountains. The distinctive feature of Wales per se is its mountains. Just like that other mountain bastion of former 'Celtic' settlement, Cumbria. Being an avid Mountaineer I do spend a lot of time in these places and am not going to be told that the terrain is unimportant when it comes to defensibility. England, as we know, is not at all mountainous and was a walk in the park for conquerors. The mountainous locations suggest that these areas were refuges from eastern invasion.

At the same time back on the island of Crete...

Excavations have clearly demonstrated that Minoan hegemony was replaced by Mycenaen. The eruption of Thera and the Tsunami that followed would have considerably weakened the Minoan navy. I didn't say it destroyed every last ship. The Tsunami would have deposited salt water in the fields, the very same kind of salt that the Romans sowed the fields of Carthage with so that they could grow no crops.

Of course the Minoans struggled on but they were conquered by the Mycenaens because they were now too weak to resist.

The most noticeable change was the appearance of maritime themes on fine pottery: which a fortiori means they were still producing fine pottery.

Precisely. If your world has been turned upside down by the destructive power of the sea wouldn't you become kind of obsessed by it?

How much worse is that, Duncan? Is there definitely a gradient of ill effects spread out in all directions from the volcano? Or is it more like a cloud of ill effects that passes over and gives everyone the same level of grief, from which they soon recover?

No Dan, I don't think it was. Two thirds of the island of Thera was blown away. Thera itself was a major Minoan trading centre. So it was clearly pretty damn bad for them. Crete was hit by a Tsunami. It wasn't the long term atmospheric effects that did the real damage.

If Byzantium was making wine, writing things down, going to the market and counting change, life was probably pretty close to normal around the North Sea, too.

Byzantium, of course, wasn't founded yet but if you're referring now to the 540s again then there is clear evidence of falling population across Europe as a result of something. The British population in 1086 was around the two million mark yet in Roman times could have been as high as 4 million. Where did they all go? I have already quoted John of Ephesus to demonstrate that Constantinople suffered a huge loss of people (230,000) because of the plague. Or do you think the plague just targeted the Byzantines because they were literate and left everybody else alone? Perhaps it was divine retribution against the Orthodox Church brought on by Catholics in Rome.

My point throughout this little chat has been to point out that climatic events can clearly significantly reduce the population. For Roman Britain that means it would weaken the power to resist an Anglo-Saxon invasion. That's all. Just like a similar climatic event in 1600BC weakened the power of the Minoans to resist Mycenaen invasion. Now I won't go on about papers and I won't provide links to peer reviewed publications because I know yous guys 'ate 'em but the logic seems clear enough.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

'scuse me for butting in, reading your arguments with great interest but could you clear up a couple of points which I don't follow?

The Tsunami would have deposited salt water in the fields, the very same kind of salt that the Romans sowed the fields of Carthage with so that they could grow no crops.

How long would the effects of the salt last? A season or two? Surely not permanently?

The most noticeable change was the appearance of maritime themes on fine pottery: which a fortiori means they were still producing fine pottery.

Precisely. If your world has been turned upside down by the destructive power of the sea wouldn't you become kind of obsessed by it?

Isn't the point that Dan makes about the pottery rather than the maritime decorations? Don't we judge a civilisation to be thriving by the quality of its artefacts (regardless of the motifs thereon)?

My point throughout this little chat has been to point out that climatic events can clearly significantly reduce the population.

What does affect population increase/decrease really? It seems that the more 'advanced' affluent populations keep their numbers down and are nervous about their poor relations breeding... so a reduction or stabilisation in numbers could be a sign of prosperity couldn't it?
Send private message
Duncan


In: Yorkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

How long would the effects of the salt last? A season or two? Surely not permanently given that various regions suffer periodic flooding but agriculture continues nevertheless?

The South-east Asian Tsunami in 2004 is instructive here. According to the UN Food and Agriculture expert Daniel Renault: As a rough estimate, of the 40,000 ha of farmland hit by the tsunami in Sumatra, as much as 40% may be unusable for agriculture for years to come, if ever.

In addition much of the agricultural labour force was killed by the Tsunami and the fresh water supply was polluted.

Several of these effects would therefore be temporary whilst others would seriously weaken the economic base.

Isn't the point that Dan makes about the pottery rather than the maritime decorations? Don't we judge a civilisation to be thriving by the quality of its artefacts?

Indeed. My point was that the obsession with maritime themes is more significant than the pottery per se. It gives us an insight into the new relationship with nature. I'm not proposing a sudden end to Minoan civilisation, simply demonstrating that the eruption of Thera was of such impact that from there on in the Minoan star was falling and the Mycenaen star was rising.

What does affect population increase/decrease really? It seems that the more 'advanced' affluent populations keep their numbers down and are nervous about their poor relations breeding... so a reduction or stabilisation in numbers could be a sign of prosperity couldn't it?

Certainly but in the cases that we are discussing the fall in numbers would have weakened the economy and the military therefore opening the door to invasion.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

This is a typical exchange when paradigm matters are being discussed. Remember, Thera is only featuring here as an exemplar of the sixth century AD explosion. In other words one doubtful case is being used as buttress for another. As chat, this is fair enough and we have all learned useful things. But as evidence it demonstrates why Applied Epistemology demands examples from fully documented times. God knows that we have plenty of examples of fully documented natural catastrophes but, we can now say with some certainty, not a single example of a civilisation collapse. Or for that matter a population collapse of such severity and longevity that the course of history can be shown to be greatly affected one way or another.

And yet orthodoxy is always putting this forward. You only have to turn on the telly to be assured that some MesoAmerican society was doomed when El Nino moved north or something or other in the Indus Valley went kaput when the salt levels got yeah high or the Mongols burst out of Asia because of a spot of drought on the high plains or...or...or...We know why cultures collapse: another culture comes along and collapses them.

Of course the Minoans struggled on but they were conquered by the Mycenaens because they were now too weak to resist.

So this giant tsunami pulverised the Minoans but spared the nearby Mycenians. Some bastard tsunami, that. This is a straighforward offence under Occam Rules. If you have two civilisations at the same time and in the same place, sooner or later one will finish off the other. It don't take no Divine Retribution (which surely is the Ancient version of this type of explanation) to have the Mycenians destroy the Minoans, just the ordinary ups-and-downs of Great Power politics.

Same with the Anglo-Saxons. What need of plagues and famines? The Romano-Brits had just spent four hundred years being protected by the Roman army and the Roman army had just disappeared. The Anglo-Saxons had spent four hundred years honing their skills in the highly competitive environment of Germania. What took 'em so long?

'Course we need plague and famines and population collapse to get the language changed but that was something of an afterthought, I think we can agree.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ah so, finally, a fully documented example from 2004 AD no less.

According to the UN Food and Agriculture expert Daniel Renault:

Without wishing to impugn the gentleman's credentials, AE says that members of the Relief Industry tend to err on the side of Relief.

As a rough estimate, of the 40,000 ha of farmland hit by the tsunami in Sumatra,

That's nought point nought four seven three recurring per cent of Sumatra's farmland.

as much as

As in "as much as ten pounds of weight loss is guaranteed in the first month".

40% may be unusable for agriculture for years to come

So, even in the worst effected areas, the local famers will still be able to use most of their land.

if ever.

If I were you, farmers, I would use this unproductive land for non-agricultural purposes just like everybody else does.
Send private message
Duncan


In: Yorkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

We are here discussing the impact of natural disasters on population levels to explore the hypothesis that natural disasters could lead to a large scale fall in population therefore weakening the ability of a powerful civilisation to resist foreign invasion. In our British example this would present prima facie evidence of a large fall in population at the same time as large numbers of immigrant Anglo-Saxons were entering the country.

Remember, this discussion started with regard to the question of whether there was a parallel in Britain to the American example of disease that decimated native numbers. The original question revolved around how a small European elite could change the language of the millions of native Americans to Spanish and Portuguese.

I have clearly shown that there was a plague in Europe during the early 540s which would have similarly decimated the population. We have no idea how seriously Britain was hit relative to the Anglo-Saxon homelands. Nonetheless Anglo-Saxons did invade and quickly go on to form Kingdoms throughout the country. They must have been better placed than the Britons because they enslaved them or put them to the seax.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Duncan wrote:
Being an avid Mountaineer I do spend a lot of time in these places and am not going to be told that the terrain is unimportant when it comes to defensibility.

The error is in linking it exclusively to defensibility. In this case, I suggest it's more likely linked to desirability.

Think about the differences in culture required to adapt to life in distinct landscapes. That's more likely why the cultures divide at a demarcation defined by landscape morphology. Is it possible that we have fishermen, traders and herders (sheep, goats, cow?) in Wales and agrarian farmers in England? I'm just guessing.

England, as we know, is not at all mountainous and [as a consequence?] was a walk in the park for conquerors.

This is exactly the kind of thing we never let ourselves say.

Try forcing yourself to think only in terms of universal rules. If you don't have a rule that works everywhere, every time, then you don't have a scientific explanation. Remember your Isaac Newton! A great scientific theory is both simple and universal.

Unless every plain in history has proved indefensible then you can't judge any particular plain as such. Unless every patch of rough ground has proved insurmountable, you can't claim this particular bit a natural barrier to invasion (unless there's something special about this plain or rough patch from which you can extrapolate a universal law).

If you take on these restrictions -- that is, stop being an academic and become a scientist -- you'll find so much of what you've learned won't stand up to epistemological critique. But I bet you'll also find new and more satisfactory ways in which to put together much of the information you've collected over the years.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Duncan wrote:
We are here discussing the impact of natural disasters on population levels to explore the hypothesis that natural disasters could lead to a large scale fall in population.

Not "could" Duncan. Must. If you don't get an A follows B then you don't have knowledge. You just have a pleasant story.

And how many "coulds" and "possiblys" and "might haves" do you get to string along these days in academia before a theory collapses under its own weight?
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Tsunami would have deposited salt water in the fields, the very same kind of salt that the Romans sowed the fields of Carthage with so that they could grow no crops.

Whoah. Now you've gone and opened a huge can of worms -- something we've been talking about now off and on for a year or more.

Do you have any statistics on how much salt would be needed to rob soil of its fertility for even one year? Salt is one of the most soluble substances on the planet (it may be the most soluble -- I forget) and considering that phosphate (also known in the ancient world as "Salt" incidentally) as a modern fertilizer must be replaced every year because of its solubility, it is doubtful (to say the least) that "sowing fields with salt" would have any long-term impact.

Now I won't go on about papers and I won't provide links to peer reviewed publications because I know yous guys 'ate 'em but the logic seems clear enough.

It's just not rigorous enough.

The story makes sense Duncan. It could be true. But that's not the way we work here.
Send private message
Duncan


In: Yorkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ish, the certainty you crave does not exist in these matters. We must use imagination to fill in the gaps and then test possibilities against the facts that we know. The scientific method is a creative process as much as a logical one.

What I'm doing is testing the likelihood of these possibilities, as proposed by Mick:

Consider the parallels
1. The Europeans arrived in America in "boatloads" as per the Anglo-Saxons
2. The natives were numbered in their millions as per the Romano-Brits
3. Time frame is similar ie a few centuries
4. The European languages are overwhelmingly dominant yet the native languages do hold out in places as per English and 'Celtic'.

But now the differences
1. The Romano-Brits were culturally superior to the invaders, not the case with native Americans vis a vis the Europeans
2. The Indians were decimated by alien infectious diseases, not the case with the Romano-Brits.
3. The Spanish (though not I think the English or the French) had a deliberate programme of language imposition for relgious reasons; the Anglo-Saxons did not
.

Difference point 2 is what this has all been about. We must now consider whether differences 1 and 3 are sufficiently significant to overturn the parallels.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Duncan wrote:
...the certainty you crave does not exist in these matters.

There's a reason for that.

We...use imagination to fill in the gaps

That's it.

Now I don't mean to be sanctimonous but we do have an alternative methodology (a method that some of us have slowly been systematizing -- with very little encouragement from Mick I might add). I am attempting to explain the difference between this new method and that used by academia and show why it must establish more reliable results.

So let me be clear. Nothing is ever certain. Not even that A follows B. But we must demand of historiography the same scientific rigour (based on the application of discoverable principles) that we see in the hard sciences.

We pretend such rigour is impossible because we are uncomfortable not knowing -- and thus allow ourselves to "fill the gaps" with imagination. We must have the strength of mind to live with the gaps -- clearly identifiy them -- and work only with what we know.

Imagination is useful for developing hypotheses but "what might have been" is of no use to a properly formulated theory.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael has the zealotry of a...zealot. Although he overstates the case, he does state it. Applied Epistemology is supposed to follow this Ten Point Plan
1. It looks at the current orthodoxy
2. It points out (in a goodly proportion of cases) that the certainty proffered arises from constant authoritative repetition not the evidence
3. It assembles the anomalies arising from the orthodox account
4. If there are enough anomalies it comes to a judgement that therefore the orthodox account must be wrong (Ishmael is fond of Newtonian examples because just one anomaly -- the orbit of Mercury -- was enough to overthrow the whole system...sort of)
5. The human brain abhors a vacuum
6. Applied Epistemologists are human
7. Once an Applied Epistemologist is convinced that a given accepted theory is wrong, there is a vacuum
8. The Applied Epistemologist's brain immediately moves to fill the vacuum with a new theory that is eventually accepted by orthodoxy
9. Hundreds of years pass
10. A new generation of Applied Epistemologists consider this theory that has been around for hundreds of years....
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
9. Hundreds of years pass
10. A new generation of Applied Epistemologists consider this theory that has been around for hundreds of years
....

The whole point of AE is to prevent "hundreds of years" from "passing" before the paradigm shifts.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next

Jump to:  
Page 12 of 13

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group