What do you think?
Rate this book
Turning Points in Ancient History
After 1177 B.C.: The Survival of Civilizations
In this gripping sequel to his bestselling 1177 B.C., Eric Cline tells the story of what happened after the Bronze Age collapsed—why some civilizations endured, why some gave way to new ones, and why some disappeared forever
At the end of the acclaimed history 1177 B.C., many of the Late Bronze Age civilizations of the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean lay in ruins, undone by invasion, revolt, natural disasters, famine, and the demise of international trade. An interconnected world that had boasted major empires and societies, relative peace, robust commerce, and monumental architecture was lost and the so-called First Dark Age had begun. Now, in After 1177 B.C., Eric Cline tells the compelling story of what happened next, over four centuries, across the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean world. It is a story of resilience, transformation, and success, as well as failures, in an age of chaos and reconfiguration.
After 1177 B.C. tells how the collapse of powerful Late Bronze Age civilizations created new circumstances to which people and societies had to adapt. Those that failed to adjust disappeared from the world stage, while others transformed themselves, resulting in a new world order that included Phoenicians, Philistines, Israelites, Neo-Hittites, Neo-Assyrians, and Neo-Babylonians. Taking the story up to the resurgence of Greece marked by the first Olympic Games in 776 B.C., the book also describes how world-changing innovations such as the use of iron and the alphabet emerged amid the chaos.
Filled with lessons for today's world about why some societies survive massive shocks while others do not, After 1177 B.C. reveals why this period, far from being the First Dark Age, was a new age with new inventions and new opportunities.
At the end of the acclaimed history 1177 B.C., many of the Late Bronze Age civilizations of the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean lay in ruins, undone by invasion, revolt, natural disasters, famine, and the demise of international trade. An interconnected world that had boasted major empires and societies, relative peace, robust commerce, and monumental architecture was lost and the so-called First Dark Age had begun. Now, in After 1177 B.C., Eric Cline tells the compelling story of what happened next, over four centuries, across the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean world. It is a story of resilience, transformation, and success, as well as failures, in an age of chaos and reconfiguration.
After 1177 B.C. tells how the collapse of powerful Late Bronze Age civilizations created new circumstances to which people and societies had to adapt. Those that failed to adjust disappeared from the world stage, while others transformed themselves, resulting in a new world order that included Phoenicians, Philistines, Israelites, Neo-Hittites, Neo-Assyrians, and Neo-Babylonians. Taking the story up to the resurgence of Greece marked by the first Olympic Games in 776 B.C., the book also describes how world-changing innovations such as the use of iron and the alphabet emerged amid the chaos.
Filled with lessons for today's world about why some societies survive massive shocks while others do not, After 1177 B.C. reveals why this period, far from being the First Dark Age, was a new age with new inventions and new opportunities.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published April 16, 2024
385 people are currently reading
5790 people want to read
About the author
Eric H. Cline
37 books527 followersDR. ERIC H. CLINE is the former Chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations and current Director of the Capitol Archaeological Institute at The George Washington University. A National Geographic Explorer, NEH Public Scholar, and Fulbright scholar with degrees from Dartmouth, Yale, and the University of Pennsylvania, he is an active field archaeologist with 30 seasons of excavation and survey experience in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Cyprus, Greece, Crete, and the United States, including ten seasons at the site of Megiddo (biblical Armageddon) in Israel from 1994-2014, and seven seasons at Tel Kabri, where he currently serves as Co-Director. A three-time winner of the Biblical Archaeology Society's "Best Popular Book on Archaeology" Award (2001, 2009, and 2011) and two-time winner of the American School of Archaeology's "Nancy Lapp Award for Best Popular Archaeology Book" (2014 and 2018), he is a popular lecturer who has appeared frequently on television documentaries and has also won national and local awards for both his research and his teaching. He is the author or editor of 20 books, almost 100 articles, and three recorded 14-lecture courses. His previous books written specifically for the general public include "The Battles of Armageddon: Megiddo and the Jezreel Valley from the Bronze Age to the Nuclear Age" (2000), "Jerusalem Besieged: From Ancient Canaan to Modern Israel" (2004), "From Eden to Exile: Unraveling Mysteries of the Bible" (2007), "Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction" (2009), "The Trojan War: A Very Short Introduction" (2013), "1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed" (2014), “Three Stones Make a Wall: The Story of Archaeology" (2017), and “Digging Up Armageddon” (2020). He has also co-authored a children's book on Troy, entitled "Digging for Troy" (2011). For a video of his "Last Lecture" talk, go to http://vimeo.com/7091059.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 131 reviews
December 17, 2024
I acknowledge that I was very negative about Cline’s first book “1177 BC, the Collapse of Civilization” (here): although his detailed account was quite nuanced, he completely missed the mark with the title, the introductory chapters and his conclusion. Yes, there definitely was something going on in the Late Bronze Age (between 1200 and 1100 bce), in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean. But no, this was not a collapse of civilization, not completely in that area, and certainly not outside of it. With this sequel, “After 1177 bc”, Cline actually proves me right (not that he necessarily had to): this book is full of nuances on his previous book. Shall we say: progression of insight?
More in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
More in my History account on Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show....
Read
October 31, 2024This sequel to 1177 B.C. describes the centuries following the Late Bronze Age Collapse up to the end of the eighth century B.C.—the Iron Age. How did the Egyptians, Levantines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Anatolians, Neo-Hittites, Cypriots, Minoans, and Greeks fare after the collapse? The first five chapters explain how these populations navigated after the "great storm," marked by drought, famine, earthquakes, internal revolts, invasions, severely reduced trade, the dissolution of elites, and the collapse of much architecture.
Compared to other civilizations, the Egyptians had a mediocre recovery. The world’s first recorded strike took place here after the country was impoverished by the repelled invasion of the Sea Peoples, and Ramses III was murdered by his own clique. Egypt withdrew from Israel. Occasionally, Egypt's military strength resurged, but the glory days of the 18th Dynasty were definitively over.
Assyria initially struggled with the conditions of the Late Bronze Age Collapse, but after about two centuries, they were back to plundering, reaching ever greater heights of power. Babylonia took an additional century to recover but eventually prospered as well.
The Phoenicians benefited from the power vacuum in the region caused by the destruction of Ugarit. They developed extensive trade networks stretching from Cyprus to North Africa to Iberia. However, over time, they had to repeatedly pay tribute to the Assyrians to avoid destruction. Cyprus transitioned from large-scale copper production to large-scale iron production. Although some settlements disappeared during the collapse, they ultimately managed quite well.
The Hittites in Anatolia disappeared from the stage for good and were replaced by, among others, the Urartians and Phrygians. Anatolia experienced centuries of drought and lacked major rivers like the Nile, Tigris, or Euphrates, which made irrigation difficult and led to long-standing poverty in the region. The Hittites did, however, survive in their former conquests of Carchemish and surrounding areas, in present-day southeastern Turkey and Syria. Here, kings continued to bear the names of their illustrious Anatolian predecessors and are referred to as the Neo-Hittites. This region actually fared quite well.
The Greeks and Minoans were hit hard and faced hardships for centuries but eventually managed to find their footing again. Cline argues that the term "dark age" is no longer appropriate for this era. This is because 1) the poverty and isolation of the Greeks and Minoans were not as severe as previously assumed, and 2) there is increasing information about this period, meaning that scholars are no longer "in the dark."
The final chapter draws connections and uses a framework from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to examine how these states dealt with change. Cline also notes that every society experiences cycles of growth and decline, interconnectedness, and isolation. This was true several times for the Egyptians, with periods of growth interspersed with the first, second, and now third intermediate periods, for the Romans, and also for the societies of the LBA.
One weaker aspect, in my opinion, is that, as in the previous book, the author draws parallels with the present day, suggesting that our civilization may also be on the brink of collapse. I personally disagree. I believe that we are wealthier than ever and supported by the scientific method, which these earlier societies didn’t use. Another aspect that could have been toned down was the listing of kings from various realms. Despite these minor points, this book is, in my view, a success. I found the comparisons between the many civilizations fascinating, and I certainly learned a lot from reading it.
Compared to other civilizations, the Egyptians had a mediocre recovery. The world’s first recorded strike took place here after the country was impoverished by the repelled invasion of the Sea Peoples, and Ramses III was murdered by his own clique. Egypt withdrew from Israel. Occasionally, Egypt's military strength resurged, but the glory days of the 18th Dynasty were definitively over.
Assyria initially struggled with the conditions of the Late Bronze Age Collapse, but after about two centuries, they were back to plundering, reaching ever greater heights of power. Babylonia took an additional century to recover but eventually prospered as well.
The Phoenicians benefited from the power vacuum in the region caused by the destruction of Ugarit. They developed extensive trade networks stretching from Cyprus to North Africa to Iberia. However, over time, they had to repeatedly pay tribute to the Assyrians to avoid destruction. Cyprus transitioned from large-scale copper production to large-scale iron production. Although some settlements disappeared during the collapse, they ultimately managed quite well.
The Hittites in Anatolia disappeared from the stage for good and were replaced by, among others, the Urartians and Phrygians. Anatolia experienced centuries of drought and lacked major rivers like the Nile, Tigris, or Euphrates, which made irrigation difficult and led to long-standing poverty in the region. The Hittites did, however, survive in their former conquests of Carchemish and surrounding areas, in present-day southeastern Turkey and Syria. Here, kings continued to bear the names of their illustrious Anatolian predecessors and are referred to as the Neo-Hittites. This region actually fared quite well.
The Greeks and Minoans were hit hard and faced hardships for centuries but eventually managed to find their footing again. Cline argues that the term "dark age" is no longer appropriate for this era. This is because 1) the poverty and isolation of the Greeks and Minoans were not as severe as previously assumed, and 2) there is increasing information about this period, meaning that scholars are no longer "in the dark."
The final chapter draws connections and uses a framework from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to examine how these states dealt with change. Cline also notes that every society experiences cycles of growth and decline, interconnectedness, and isolation. This was true several times for the Egyptians, with periods of growth interspersed with the first, second, and now third intermediate periods, for the Romans, and also for the societies of the LBA.
One weaker aspect, in my opinion, is that, as in the previous book, the author draws parallels with the present day, suggesting that our civilization may also be on the brink of collapse. I personally disagree. I believe that we are wealthier than ever and supported by the scientific method, which these earlier societies didn’t use. Another aspect that could have been toned down was the listing of kings from various realms. Despite these minor points, this book is, in my view, a success. I found the comparisons between the many civilizations fascinating, and I certainly learned a lot from reading it.
November 26, 2024
After. 1177 B.C.
describes what is known about human civilization in the eastern Mediterranean and Levant during the years following the Bronze Age collapse. Cline's previous book, 1177 B.C., gave an account of conditions throughout this same region during the late Bronze Age and the evidence of its relatively sudden end. In a sense this new book is a sequel.
The era covered by this book is popularly referred to as civilization's first dark age, but scholarly researchers along with this book distance themselves from the term dark age. Nevertheless, I will show my lack of being a credentialed scholar by saying that "dark age" is a descriptive term for this era when comparing it to the late Bronze Age. Cline would prefer the simply call this era the early Iron Age.
When Cline was covering the late Bronze Age in his earlier book he could describe the Near East and eastern Mediterranean region as a general whole. But in this book he needs to provide separate chapters for the various regions to explore how they individually handled the new conditions. Then he concludes by ranking the relative resilience of the various regions. I've listed them below according to their order of resilience per Cline.
1. More than simply resilient--Canaanites of the central Levant and Cyprus
Both of these regions transformed and flourished amid the chaos. The Canaanite societies of the central Levant transformed so much that we now call them Phoenician to mark this shift. They spread their standardized version of the alphabet. Meanwhile the inhabitants of Cyprus became leaders in the transition to iron as the predominate metal of the age.
2. Very resilient--Assyrians and the Babylonians
Assyrians and the Babylonians both coped and adapted as necessary, adjusting to the new situation or situations in which they found themselves. This included dealing with either old enemies, for example the Elamites in the case of the Babylonians or new adversaries such as the Arameans and the Urashians in the case of the Assyrians.
3. Resilient but just barely--Egypt
Although Egypt survived it was never the same again, nor did it ever rise to the powerful position that it had once held during the New Kingdom period. In other words they were able to cope and continue to exist, but failed to really make the transition properly
4. Not resilient--Crete and the Mycenaeans of mainland Greece
This region failed to really cope adapt or transform from the societies that they had once been. But nevertheless, their cultural continuities did not disappear altogether.
5. Vanished--Hittites and southern Canaanites
Hittites and their empire essentially failed to navigate the change to the Iron Age and yielded their territory to new kingdoms. The southern Canaanite land became parts of new kingdoms that emerged in the region including Israel, Judah, Philistia, Edom, Ammon, and Moab.
It is during this early Iron Age that Israel and Judah emerged on the world scene, thus some of the references in the Bible, particularly I & II Kings, is a source to consider for the history of this era.
The era covered by this book is popularly referred to as civilization's first dark age, but scholarly researchers along with this book distance themselves from the term dark age. Nevertheless, I will show my lack of being a credentialed scholar by saying that "dark age" is a descriptive term for this era when comparing it to the late Bronze Age. Cline would prefer the simply call this era the early Iron Age.
When Cline was covering the late Bronze Age in his earlier book he could describe the Near East and eastern Mediterranean region as a general whole. But in this book he needs to provide separate chapters for the various regions to explore how they individually handled the new conditions. Then he concludes by ranking the relative resilience of the various regions. I've listed them below according to their order of resilience per Cline.
1. More than simply resilient--Canaanites of the central Levant and Cyprus
Both of these regions transformed and flourished amid the chaos. The Canaanite societies of the central Levant transformed so much that we now call them Phoenician to mark this shift. They spread their standardized version of the alphabet. Meanwhile the inhabitants of Cyprus became leaders in the transition to iron as the predominate metal of the age.
2. Very resilient--Assyrians and the Babylonians
Assyrians and the Babylonians both coped and adapted as necessary, adjusting to the new situation or situations in which they found themselves. This included dealing with either old enemies, for example the Elamites in the case of the Babylonians or new adversaries such as the Arameans and the Urashians in the case of the Assyrians.
3. Resilient but just barely--Egypt
Although Egypt survived it was never the same again, nor did it ever rise to the powerful position that it had once held during the New Kingdom period. In other words they were able to cope and continue to exist, but failed to really make the transition properly
4. Not resilient--Crete and the Mycenaeans of mainland Greece
This region failed to really cope adapt or transform from the societies that they had once been. But nevertheless, their cultural continuities did not disappear altogether.
5. Vanished--Hittites and southern Canaanites
Hittites and their empire essentially failed to navigate the change to the Iron Age and yielded their territory to new kingdoms. The southern Canaanite land became parts of new kingdoms that emerged in the region including Israel, Judah, Philistia, Edom, Ammon, and Moab.
It is during this early Iron Age that Israel and Judah emerged on the world scene, thus some of the references in the Bible, particularly I & II Kings, is a source to consider for the history of this era.
Read
November 28, 2024In 2014 Eric H. Cline (George Washington University, US) scored a bestseller with his “1177 BC, the Year Civilization Collapsed”, a book that still is widely read. Cline became one of the most popular archaeologists and historians of antiquity of the past decades. And that is quite understandable: in these dark times, following the euphoria of the fall of the Iron Curtain, it is appealing to find a similar period in the past in which disrupting events took place and a lot of certainties disappeared. “Historia magister vitae”: it is still doing well, and Cline clearly rode that wave, in fact, he also made crude use of it.
In his 1177bc book he highlighted how in the Late Bronze Age (the end of the second millennium bce), after a period of initial globalization, there was a ‘system collapse’, when one civilization and culture after another perished, followed by a long Dark Age. In my review of that book (here ) I made it clear that Cline was exaggerating, to say the least. Nowhere does he make it clear that in 1177 bc (or even thereabouts) civilization in general collapsed; on the contrary, his detailed description made it obvious that this view should be taken with a grain of salt. But in his title, his introduction and his conclusion, he ignored those nuanced findings.
It was therefore with great eagerness that I started the sequel, this “After 1177 bc”. And I soon saw that, even more than in his first book, Cline himself nuances the view of a collapse of civilization. In detail he discusses the evolution in successive cultural areas from the 12th to the 8th century bce, and now it is striking that he remains much more on the surface, and almost always speaks in a conditional tone ("it could be that...", "maybe", "possibly"). The boastfulness of the first book has been much more toned down. And that is of course to his credit. Again, his account is sometimes very detailed and he stays close to the concrete results of archaeological finds and insights. I therefore have much less of a problem with this book than with the previous one.
Other readers may find that Cline now raises many more questions than he provides answers, but that is just the way it is in historical research, certainly on antiquity. It also reflects the reality that we do not really know how to assess the entire period 1200-800 BCE: as an absolute decline, and therefore a Dark Age (quod non), or as - just like in the millennia before and after - a period of continuous transformation, adaptation to new circumstances and the creation of new forms of society? Cline also clearly struggles with this, and that is only normal. Perhaps science, through new discoveries, new methods and the normal process of advancing insight, will one day bring more clarity. But sometimes we must simply accept that we will never have complete clarity in certain historical realities. After all, isn't that something we also have to learn to deal with in our own lives?
In his 1177bc book he highlighted how in the Late Bronze Age (the end of the second millennium bce), after a period of initial globalization, there was a ‘system collapse’, when one civilization and culture after another perished, followed by a long Dark Age. In my review of that book (here ) I made it clear that Cline was exaggerating, to say the least. Nowhere does he make it clear that in 1177 bc (or even thereabouts) civilization in general collapsed; on the contrary, his detailed description made it obvious that this view should be taken with a grain of salt. But in his title, his introduction and his conclusion, he ignored those nuanced findings.
It was therefore with great eagerness that I started the sequel, this “After 1177 bc”. And I soon saw that, even more than in his first book, Cline himself nuances the view of a collapse of civilization. In detail he discusses the evolution in successive cultural areas from the 12th to the 8th century bce, and now it is striking that he remains much more on the surface, and almost always speaks in a conditional tone ("it could be that...", "maybe", "possibly"). The boastfulness of the first book has been much more toned down. And that is of course to his credit. Again, his account is sometimes very detailed and he stays close to the concrete results of archaeological finds and insights. I therefore have much less of a problem with this book than with the previous one.
Other readers may find that Cline now raises many more questions than he provides answers, but that is just the way it is in historical research, certainly on antiquity. It also reflects the reality that we do not really know how to assess the entire period 1200-800 BCE: as an absolute decline, and therefore a Dark Age (quod non), or as - just like in the millennia before and after - a period of continuous transformation, adaptation to new circumstances and the creation of new forms of society? Cline also clearly struggles with this, and that is only normal. Perhaps science, through new discoveries, new methods and the normal process of advancing insight, will one day bring more clarity. But sometimes we must simply accept that we will never have complete clarity in certain historical realities. After all, isn't that something we also have to learn to deal with in our own lives?
April 28, 2024
After 1177 BC by Eric H. Cline (published 2024)
Read date: 25 April 2024
Rating: 2.5 stars
This book provides a very broad overview of the current knowledge that deals with the transition between the Bronze Age and Iron Age across a large area stretching from the Aegean to the Eastern Mediterranean and beyond to Mesopotamia. Cline attempts to tell the tale of what happened to various civilizations after the Bronze Age Collapse, ostensibly to find out which civilizations survived the collapse (or didn't survive) and why. The book is organised more or less chronologically by region: Egypt, Levant, Israel; Assyria and Babylonia; Phoenicia and Cyprus; Anatolia and Northern Syria, and the Aegean Region.
Cline spends much ink describing the discovery of various archaeological findings and inscriptions, making suppositions and speculating, and listing a vast plethora of kings, princes and other rulers and their successors. There is a brief summary at the end of each chapter, which was much more useful than all the disjointed archaeological minutiae, in which any narrative history got hopelessly lost.
The main and lasting impression I got from this convoluted text was that those who had the means to do so, raided or waged war against their neighbours. Sometimes they were successful and managed to accumulate an empire, other times, they lost and became even more distant footnotes in history. There was a mega-drought and famine, so presumably stealing whatever food and goods were available by whatever means was a matter of survival? Cline never actually says why there was an outbreak of war or why/how this was different from the Bronze Age warfare.
The chapter dealing with Cyprus and the Phoenicians I found more interesting than the other chapters. Cline provides more information (but not much more) about the new iron technology, and the alphabet and their dissemination, and continued trade. Apparently the Cypriots and Phoenicians appeared to be resilient as well as innovative after the Collapse. They were already with a decentralised trading environment, and business presumably just carried on as usual. The Phoenicians took advantage of the demise of the port cities along the Levant to win control of the trade routes across the Mediterranean, spreading their version of the alphabet and exchanging trade goods. The Cypriots did the same in terms of spreading iron goods and iron technology.
Cline keeps mentioning new innovations, but never mentions exactly what innovations other than briefly mentioning "iron technology" (new weapons?, better weapons?, different types of warfare?, better ploughs? different farming methods/technology,? farming different food? we never find out) and the "alphabet" (while having an easy-to-learn alphabet that could be used for any language was newish, the concept of writing was not).
Civilizations or groups of people that survived the Bronze Age Collapse had to adapt and adjust to the changing environment/situation. Those that could not, were subsumed by those that could. The reasons for surviving in one form or another are as various as the reasons for the collapse. Cline also has nothing to say about the type of terrain or the geography of a region in terms of surviving and developing new societies, other than mentioning the drought and that things improved when the drought ended.
I did not find this book nearly as compelling or interesting as its predecessor (1177 B.C). It is well researched, but not so well written, lacks clarity, and is all a bit too vague.
NOTE: The introduction and end matter is read by the author (who is a stilted and bland narrator!). The meat of the book is read by John Chancer who is a pretty decent narrator from the little bit I listened to. I ended up reading the ebook.
Read date: 25 April 2024
Rating: 2.5 stars
This book provides a very broad overview of the current knowledge that deals with the transition between the Bronze Age and Iron Age across a large area stretching from the Aegean to the Eastern Mediterranean and beyond to Mesopotamia. Cline attempts to tell the tale of what happened to various civilizations after the Bronze Age Collapse, ostensibly to find out which civilizations survived the collapse (or didn't survive) and why. The book is organised more or less chronologically by region: Egypt, Levant, Israel; Assyria and Babylonia; Phoenicia and Cyprus; Anatolia and Northern Syria, and the Aegean Region.
Cline spends much ink describing the discovery of various archaeological findings and inscriptions, making suppositions and speculating, and listing a vast plethora of kings, princes and other rulers and their successors. There is a brief summary at the end of each chapter, which was much more useful than all the disjointed archaeological minutiae, in which any narrative history got hopelessly lost.
The main and lasting impression I got from this convoluted text was that those who had the means to do so, raided or waged war against their neighbours. Sometimes they were successful and managed to accumulate an empire, other times, they lost and became even more distant footnotes in history. There was a mega-drought and famine, so presumably stealing whatever food and goods were available by whatever means was a matter of survival? Cline never actually says why there was an outbreak of war or why/how this was different from the Bronze Age warfare.
The chapter dealing with Cyprus and the Phoenicians I found more interesting than the other chapters. Cline provides more information (but not much more) about the new iron technology, and the alphabet and their dissemination, and continued trade. Apparently the Cypriots and Phoenicians appeared to be resilient as well as innovative after the Collapse. They were already with a decentralised trading environment, and business presumably just carried on as usual. The Phoenicians took advantage of the demise of the port cities along the Levant to win control of the trade routes across the Mediterranean, spreading their version of the alphabet and exchanging trade goods. The Cypriots did the same in terms of spreading iron goods and iron technology.
Cline keeps mentioning new innovations, but never mentions exactly what innovations other than briefly mentioning "iron technology" (new weapons?, better weapons?, different types of warfare?, better ploughs? different farming methods/technology,? farming different food? we never find out) and the "alphabet" (while having an easy-to-learn alphabet that could be used for any language was newish, the concept of writing was not).
Civilizations or groups of people that survived the Bronze Age Collapse had to adapt and adjust to the changing environment/situation. Those that could not, were subsumed by those that could. The reasons for surviving in one form or another are as various as the reasons for the collapse. Cline also has nothing to say about the type of terrain or the geography of a region in terms of surviving and developing new societies, other than mentioning the drought and that things improved when the drought ended.
I did not find this book nearly as compelling or interesting as its predecessor (1177 B.C). It is well researched, but not so well written, lacks clarity, and is all a bit too vague.
NOTE: The introduction and end matter is read by the author (who is a stilted and bland narrator!). The meat of the book is read by John Chancer who is a pretty decent narrator from the little bit I listened to. I ended up reading the ebook.
April 24, 2024
This is not a book for those of us with a keen but casual interest in history. Cline stays much more in the weeds than Tom Holland or Mary Beard. And, as he admits about the period (12th century bce to about the 8th), there are few weeds to work with. Most chapters too often read like endnotes with very many details of what mummy was buried where and which heir followed which king. Only at the end of the chapters is there a brief summation. The book struggles not to be technical and academic, but in the end it is. For hardcore fans of the Bronze and Iron Ages, I’m sure this book will satisfy, but if you are looking for any “day in the life” accounts or riveting tales of conquest or palace intrigue, those have apparently been lost to history for this period in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East.
August 1, 2024
Although I'm an outsider to the field, Archaeology, like many academic disciplines, is prone to heated debates - ones that often devolve into petty squabbles. It may also be a field where debates are harder to settle given that relevant primary sources are quite obviously shaped by the survivorship bias. In other words, we only have what we've found of what has persisted. Of course, multiple different lines of primary sourcing telling the same story is typically the best way to confirm our theories about the past. Unfortunately, they don't always tell the same story. Our window but an aperture. Nonetheless, we've done an impressive job of reconstructing the past even if some of it is fiction.
One of the historical moments of special interest to archaeologists and historians is the Late Bronze Age (12th century BC). It is of note because of what appears to be a catastrophic breakdown in the world order at the time. And yes indeed, there was in fact a world economy and many sophisticated civilizations to collapse at this time in the regions surrounding the Mediterranean and into the Near East.
Our author, Eric H. Cline, previously penned 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed to explore the factors that precipitate this mysterious collapse, bringing about a so-called 'Dark Age' according to traditional historical accounts of this time. He's returned with a sequel that tries to revise this 'Dark Age' narrative so as to explore the factors that causes some regions and peoples for weather the collapse successfully while others suffered. After 1177 B.C. is also an attempt to bring a gap between Bronze Age and Iron Age scholar, who he believes have had trouble connecting across these epochs.
To what extent Cline's project is successful is difficult to determine. This is partly a function of my ignorance. It is also a function of the organization of the text. Cline is stuffing a lot into a short book and the text gets convoluted and fragmented with litanies of archaeological artifacts. Cline jumps between incredibly specific details and very general commentary in jarring fashion even when the book is quite well organized by the regions of interest. There is simply a lot of context and meaning that Cline sees that cannot be made clear to non-specialist readers. It doesn't always help that some of the generalized commentary seems itself cribbed from pop social science books (e.g. NNT's Antifragile or Diamond's Collapse) rather than drawing from systematic original analyses comparing the differential fortunes of early Iron Age regions. I'm happy to see academics in conversation with these ideas, but they make for thin explanations when just transposed on a preferred fact pattern of the past.
Cline justifies the usefulness of studying Late Bronze Age collapse and the aftermath as an exercise in understanding what we may need to do today to prevent imminent collapse or respond to unforeseen catastrophe. I'm not sure I see a ton of lesson in the deep past other than identifying likely sources of risk, but all of these are already well-described. Alternatively, it is refreshing to see academics acknowledge that human civilization often has been pretty robust to catastrophe. For those looking for a comprehensive look at the social science of catastrophe I recommend Niall Ferguson's Doom and Peter Turchin's work on Cliodynamics. The more systematic approaches appear a more fruitful way to answer such questions.
Despite the shortcoming, Cline has undoubtedly done an impressive job of compressing four centuries of history on the collapse responses of the interconnected Late Bronze Age world and the civilizations it (re)birthed: Phoenicians, Philistines, Israelites, Neo-Hittites, Neo-Assyrians, and Neo-Babylonians. These groups adapted to their new circumstances, transforming themselves and, in some cases, laying the foundations for future empires.
One of the historical moments of special interest to archaeologists and historians is the Late Bronze Age (12th century BC). It is of note because of what appears to be a catastrophic breakdown in the world order at the time. And yes indeed, there was in fact a world economy and many sophisticated civilizations to collapse at this time in the regions surrounding the Mediterranean and into the Near East.
Our author, Eric H. Cline, previously penned 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed to explore the factors that precipitate this mysterious collapse, bringing about a so-called 'Dark Age' according to traditional historical accounts of this time. He's returned with a sequel that tries to revise this 'Dark Age' narrative so as to explore the factors that causes some regions and peoples for weather the collapse successfully while others suffered. After 1177 B.C. is also an attempt to bring a gap between Bronze Age and Iron Age scholar, who he believes have had trouble connecting across these epochs.
To what extent Cline's project is successful is difficult to determine. This is partly a function of my ignorance. It is also a function of the organization of the text. Cline is stuffing a lot into a short book and the text gets convoluted and fragmented with litanies of archaeological artifacts. Cline jumps between incredibly specific details and very general commentary in jarring fashion even when the book is quite well organized by the regions of interest. There is simply a lot of context and meaning that Cline sees that cannot be made clear to non-specialist readers. It doesn't always help that some of the generalized commentary seems itself cribbed from pop social science books (e.g. NNT's Antifragile or Diamond's Collapse) rather than drawing from systematic original analyses comparing the differential fortunes of early Iron Age regions. I'm happy to see academics in conversation with these ideas, but they make for thin explanations when just transposed on a preferred fact pattern of the past.
Cline justifies the usefulness of studying Late Bronze Age collapse and the aftermath as an exercise in understanding what we may need to do today to prevent imminent collapse or respond to unforeseen catastrophe. I'm not sure I see a ton of lesson in the deep past other than identifying likely sources of risk, but all of these are already well-described. Alternatively, it is refreshing to see academics acknowledge that human civilization often has been pretty robust to catastrophe. For those looking for a comprehensive look at the social science of catastrophe I recommend Niall Ferguson's Doom and Peter Turchin's work on Cliodynamics. The more systematic approaches appear a more fruitful way to answer such questions.
Despite the shortcoming, Cline has undoubtedly done an impressive job of compressing four centuries of history on the collapse responses of the interconnected Late Bronze Age world and the civilizations it (re)birthed: Phoenicians, Philistines, Israelites, Neo-Hittites, Neo-Assyrians, and Neo-Babylonians. These groups adapted to their new circumstances, transforming themselves and, in some cases, laying the foundations for future empires.
March 9, 2025
A follow-up to
1177 BC
, which I liked when I read it seven years ago but would probably be more annoyed by if I reread it today. In this one, Cline goes over the places affected by the Late Bronze Age collapse broadly region by region, looking at such subsequent developments in the early Iron Age as are visible in archaeology.
The way he goes about this is mostly straightforwardly academic, but sometimes tediously straddles the boundary with broad-audience writing—much is made of dispelling the notion that the early Iron Age was a dark age, but his definition of "dark age" is explicitly straight out of Merriam-Webster and bears no resemblance to that used by people in the field, i.e. a period for which we don't have any written sources. (Sometimes he goes well beyond that boundary—the musical Hamilton is quoted twice.) Occasionally this leads to sloppiness I find hard to tolerate—as in his discussion of the famously archaeologically invisible Dorian invasion, where he seems to think the only reason people have for believing it is Thucydides and not the fact that there are suddenly Dorians in the Peloponnese, or in his offhand characterisation of early Iron Age Israelites as "unique in this period as practitioners of monotheism"—but most of it is pretty solid; it's not until the final chapter, in which he tries to come up with an actionable explanation for why some societies went under and others actually thrived and misappropriates the ecologist C.S. Holling's "adaptive cycle" to do it, that things go fully off the rails. Some of this was present in 1177 BC as well—a desperate need to turn the LBA collapse into lessons for today's society—but the fact that COVID happened in the meantime seems to have turned Cline's thirst for "relevancy" up to 11.
If you stop after chapter 5, though, it's a decent book.
The way he goes about this is mostly straightforwardly academic, but sometimes tediously straddles the boundary with broad-audience writing—much is made of dispelling the notion that the early Iron Age was a dark age, but his definition of "dark age" is explicitly straight out of Merriam-Webster and bears no resemblance to that used by people in the field, i.e. a period for which we don't have any written sources. (Sometimes he goes well beyond that boundary—the musical Hamilton is quoted twice.) Occasionally this leads to sloppiness I find hard to tolerate—as in his discussion of the famously archaeologically invisible Dorian invasion, where he seems to think the only reason people have for believing it is Thucydides and not the fact that there are suddenly Dorians in the Peloponnese, or in his offhand characterisation of early Iron Age Israelites as "unique in this period as practitioners of monotheism"—but most of it is pretty solid; it's not until the final chapter, in which he tries to come up with an actionable explanation for why some societies went under and others actually thrived and misappropriates the ecologist C.S. Holling's "adaptive cycle" to do it, that things go fully off the rails. Some of this was present in 1177 BC as well—a desperate need to turn the LBA collapse into lessons for today's society—but the fact that COVID happened in the meantime seems to have turned Cline's thirst for "relevancy" up to 11.
If you stop after chapter 5, though, it's a decent book.
July 13, 2024
Cline set himself an ambitious target when he started on this book. He set out to survey the states and cultures of the eastern Mediterranean after the late Bronze Age collapse, to see how they fared, then take what he learned from the survivors and develop recommendations to make modern states more resilient. Unfortunately, I think he mostly failed at this ambition. This is not because of lack of ability or research. The situation is too complicated and there is not enough data. Most of the states he discusses had little or no writing. The archeological data is scant. Cline tries to find a narrative but, as he mentions in the last chapter, the closer you look at this period, the more confused it becomes. It's like examining an Impressionist painting closely - up close it's a jumble of dots, but far away it's a perfect picture. All we can really say is that there was an inflection point and the world changed significantly after the collapse.
Cline wasn't able to determine a grand unified theory of recovery, so he essentially presents a survey of the archeology of the Levant, Syria, Turkey, and Greece, along with an overview of the history of Egypt and Assyria, during the early Iron Age. He then spends the last chapter pulling some conclusions from the pile of facts. Overall, the information comes off a little jumbled. There are lots of sidebars and digressions. I'm not sure it was useful to reconstruct the names and genealogies of the kings of Byblos, for example. I'm not convinced by the analysis either. For example, he concludes that the northern Canaanites represent the anti-fragile class of states because they transformed into the Phoenicians and prospered after the collapse. But, it seems to me they were in the right place at the right time. The states that dominated the trade routes disappeared and the Phoenicians stepped in. Isn't that just luck?
I wish Cline had changed his goal once he realized it wasn't achievable. I wanted an overview of the early Iron Age world, not just the Eastern Mediterranean. I wanted to learn about more about societies further afield during this period. For example, what was happening in Babylonia, Iran and even Central Asia? What about China? I would've also have appreciated a detailed discussion of the consequences of the collapse for the Iron Age. We get a little of that, for example the new kingdoms, like Israel in the Levant, but I wanted more. I'm fascinated by the Steppe nomads and would like to see how the collapse of the bronze age trade networks affected them.
To summarize, I recommend this book if you are interested in archeology of the Mediterranean and near east, or ancient history of same area. There are a lot of good tidbits about those topics. For the rest, I recommend reading Cline's first "1177" book. The record is more complete and you get more out of it. If you do read this book, start with the "Author's note and acknowledgements" at the end of the book. He describes the constraints from the publisher and the issues with the data. It helped me understand his process and the final product better.
Cline wasn't able to determine a grand unified theory of recovery, so he essentially presents a survey of the archeology of the Levant, Syria, Turkey, and Greece, along with an overview of the history of Egypt and Assyria, during the early Iron Age. He then spends the last chapter pulling some conclusions from the pile of facts. Overall, the information comes off a little jumbled. There are lots of sidebars and digressions. I'm not sure it was useful to reconstruct the names and genealogies of the kings of Byblos, for example. I'm not convinced by the analysis either. For example, he concludes that the northern Canaanites represent the anti-fragile class of states because they transformed into the Phoenicians and prospered after the collapse. But, it seems to me they were in the right place at the right time. The states that dominated the trade routes disappeared and the Phoenicians stepped in. Isn't that just luck?
I wish Cline had changed his goal once he realized it wasn't achievable. I wanted an overview of the early Iron Age world, not just the Eastern Mediterranean. I wanted to learn about more about societies further afield during this period. For example, what was happening in Babylonia, Iran and even Central Asia? What about China? I would've also have appreciated a detailed discussion of the consequences of the collapse for the Iron Age. We get a little of that, for example the new kingdoms, like Israel in the Levant, but I wanted more. I'm fascinated by the Steppe nomads and would like to see how the collapse of the bronze age trade networks affected them.
To summarize, I recommend this book if you are interested in archeology of the Mediterranean and near east, or ancient history of same area. There are a lot of good tidbits about those topics. For the rest, I recommend reading Cline's first "1177" book. The record is more complete and you get more out of it. If you do read this book, start with the "Author's note and acknowledgements" at the end of the book. He describes the constraints from the publisher and the issues with the data. It helped me understand his process and the final product better.
May 9, 2025
Un sumario muy interesante de la evolución de las entidades del Mediterráneo Oriental y Mesopotamia tras las convulsiones del final de la Edad de Bronce. Creo que Cline tiende a sobreproyectar y saca algunas con conclusiones un tanto endebles, pero me parece una buena continuación de su anterior libro.
December 23, 2024
So the problem I have with Cline's writing, because this also relates to Before 1177 B.C., is that he will have a really interesting idea or thesis and then he doesn't prove it or even vaguely write about it. I remember certain parts of Before 1177 B.C. where I would think the book was about to get interesting and then it flatlines which was sad to me because his Throughline episode was a banger.
A lot of this book was like "Now we haven't been able to prove that this event happened or these people even existed, but in the BIBLE, right...?" Which got REALLY frustrating after like the fifth time. Also he doesn't exactly define what he means by "collapse" and later in the book he puts them into categories by this chart's definition and it isn't consistent with his own argument. Egypt, for example. He ranked it really low on the chart, but of the civilizations he used in the book, it is the only one to be known by the same name/region consistently since that time period.
A lot of this book was like "Now we haven't been able to prove that this event happened or these people even existed, but in the BIBLE, right...?" Which got REALLY frustrating after like the fifth time. Also he doesn't exactly define what he means by "collapse" and later in the book he puts them into categories by this chart's definition and it isn't consistent with his own argument. Egypt, for example. He ranked it really low on the chart, but of the civilizations he used in the book, it is the only one to be known by the same name/region consistently since that time period.
October 3, 2024
Very interesting and I agree with the author when he says this may end up being very timely information. When it comes down to it, I found the first 1177 book a bit more interesting, but there was still a lot of cool stuff in this. Maybe a bit too dry for the average armchair historian but perfectly readable for those of us who are really into ancient history.
February 15, 2025
Glad it all worked out.
June 20, 2024
Quite a letdown after its predecessor, perhaps reflective of what’s happened to academia in the intervening decade.
September 10, 2025
After 1177 B.C.—A Lament and a Rebirth
What followed the fateful year of 1177 B.C. is a historian’s reverie—a rich, tangled aftermath where once-mighty kingdoms around the Eastern Mediterranean, brimming with grandeur, trade, armies, and centralized might, crumbled into dust. These were the civilizations that lit the world with gold, ink, and iron, and yet they fell, seemingly all at once. The reasons for their fall have long stirred scholarly imagination—drought, war, migration, rebellion, collapse. But what of what rose from the ruins?
That question—what came after—is where this almost-scholarly book shines. Bolstered by hundreds of citations, it walks the reader carefully through the smoke and echoes of the Bronze Age’s demise and into the early hum of the Iron Age. If you've ever been told the ‘Sea Peoples’ were the faceless villains who sank entire kingdoms, prepare to be disabused of that simple tale. History, as it turns out, is rarely that neat.
The author takes us region by region, mapping the tangled web of decline and resilience. It’s a noble attempt to lend clarity to an era where clarity itself is scarce. Yet, even so, the interdependence of these ancient realms makes tidy divisions elusive. The great unraveling was not uniform—some kingdoms starved and fell; others, less touched by climate change, weathered the storm, their fields still fertile, their people still enduring.
Out of necessity, new forms of society and economy began to rise. Gone were the days when kings traded gold for glory or sought rare woods for temples and thrones. In the new age, trade shifted its purpose—from kings to commoners, from vanity to survival. Metals were still bartered, yes, but so too were grain, wine, bricks, and bread. Trade, once the domain of thrones, now coursed through the hands of merchants and farmers. It was trade for all—and in that shift, a kind of resilience was born. Complexity, not collapse, took root.
The author touches on this idea of complexity breeding robustness, though perhaps not as deeply as one might hope. Still, credit is due—for in those pages flickers the understanding that civilization, like a forest after fire, can regrow in richer, more diverse ways. Those who survived were often the nimble ones—those who had shed the burden of kings, or who built networks not of empire, but of exchange.
And as language followed trade, so too did the alphabet take root—no longer a tool of palaces, but a necessity for merchants, sailors, and scribes. Where once kings had little time for new tongues, now a common script became the lifeblood of commerce and connection, sowing the seeds of Europe’s future complexity.
Yet, as with most histories, the voices of the people—the farmers, wives, slaves, merchants, and builders—are largely silent. Their stories lie buried beneath the weight of monumental ruins and golden tombs. Archaeology still favors the elite; stone speaks louder than straw. But even in the margins, we sense their presence—the many hands that held civilization together when its rulers fell.
This book, though focused on the Western and Near Eastern world, left me wondering: what of the rest of the earth in that twilight age? While one world dimmed and rekindled its flame, what fires burned elsewhere?
What followed the fateful year of 1177 B.C. is a historian’s reverie—a rich, tangled aftermath where once-mighty kingdoms around the Eastern Mediterranean, brimming with grandeur, trade, armies, and centralized might, crumbled into dust. These were the civilizations that lit the world with gold, ink, and iron, and yet they fell, seemingly all at once. The reasons for their fall have long stirred scholarly imagination—drought, war, migration, rebellion, collapse. But what of what rose from the ruins?
That question—what came after—is where this almost-scholarly book shines. Bolstered by hundreds of citations, it walks the reader carefully through the smoke and echoes of the Bronze Age’s demise and into the early hum of the Iron Age. If you've ever been told the ‘Sea Peoples’ were the faceless villains who sank entire kingdoms, prepare to be disabused of that simple tale. History, as it turns out, is rarely that neat.
The author takes us region by region, mapping the tangled web of decline and resilience. It’s a noble attempt to lend clarity to an era where clarity itself is scarce. Yet, even so, the interdependence of these ancient realms makes tidy divisions elusive. The great unraveling was not uniform—some kingdoms starved and fell; others, less touched by climate change, weathered the storm, their fields still fertile, their people still enduring.
Out of necessity, new forms of society and economy began to rise. Gone were the days when kings traded gold for glory or sought rare woods for temples and thrones. In the new age, trade shifted its purpose—from kings to commoners, from vanity to survival. Metals were still bartered, yes, but so too were grain, wine, bricks, and bread. Trade, once the domain of thrones, now coursed through the hands of merchants and farmers. It was trade for all—and in that shift, a kind of resilience was born. Complexity, not collapse, took root.
The author touches on this idea of complexity breeding robustness, though perhaps not as deeply as one might hope. Still, credit is due—for in those pages flickers the understanding that civilization, like a forest after fire, can regrow in richer, more diverse ways. Those who survived were often the nimble ones—those who had shed the burden of kings, or who built networks not of empire, but of exchange.
And as language followed trade, so too did the alphabet take root—no longer a tool of palaces, but a necessity for merchants, sailors, and scribes. Where once kings had little time for new tongues, now a common script became the lifeblood of commerce and connection, sowing the seeds of Europe’s future complexity.
Yet, as with most histories, the voices of the people—the farmers, wives, slaves, merchants, and builders—are largely silent. Their stories lie buried beneath the weight of monumental ruins and golden tombs. Archaeology still favors the elite; stone speaks louder than straw. But even in the margins, we sense their presence—the many hands that held civilization together when its rulers fell.
This book, though focused on the Western and Near Eastern world, left me wondering: what of the rest of the earth in that twilight age? While one world dimmed and rekindled its flame, what fires burned elsewhere?
September 25, 2024
The Bronze Age Collapse and the development of the Early Iron Age has proven fundamental - and haunting - for Western civilization. It has proven no less interesting ever since we have explored these matters archaeologically.
Eric Cline well narrated the story of the Bronze Age Collapse in 1177 B.C. His highly anticipated sequel, After 1177 B.C.: The Survival of Civilizations, certainly delivers.
The author surveys our current understanding of the history of the Early Iron Age, from 1200 BCE until something like 700ish BCE, by considering archaeological discoveries and what later textual evidence can be brought to bear on this time period throughout the ancient Near East. The author wisely approaches the subject by general geographic area and not according to time.
There’s no doubt major changes took place in the couple of centuries following 1200 BCE throughout the region. No area remains unaffected.
But the level and duration of impact would vary significantly throughout the region. The southern Levant, including the area of Israel, seemed to have increased in population and saw the development of many small independent kingdoms; if anything, this area flourished during the Early Iron Age. Phoenicia and Cyprus took full advantage of the situation and developed their maritime exploits. Assyria and Babylon went through a period of relative instability, but by the 10th century BCE the king lists and records exist again, displaying a significant amount of continuity in Assyria, and despite a different population in Babylon, the societal traditions continued as they had in the Bronze Age.
Others did not fare as well. Egypt perhaps maintained the most cultural continuity, but the political and economic strength of the Late Bronze Age would never be replicated. They managed but never adapted, and thus were eliminated as a going concern in 525 BCE. The Hittite Empire completely disintegrated, but Neo-Hittite rulers persevered in Carchemish, and many of the Luwian speaking people continued to uphold Hittite culture and traditions for centuries; the Luwians and Aramaeans developed all sorts of little kingdoms throughout the northern Levant and eastern Asia Minor, all of which would eventually be overrun by Assyria.
Yet perhaps no group fell as spectacularly as the Mycenaean Greeks. Their palace civilization, or at least the highest echelons of it, were gone by the middle of the twelfth century BCE. Within two hundred years, many of the most prominent Mycenaean cities were depopulated. The author, as well as many others, remain dismissive of the “Dorian invasion” later Greeks spoke of at this time, but without a doubt there was significant population movement, and the population of central and southern Greece was cut in half. Archaic and Classical Greeks would still serve the same gods, or at least gods with the same names; they championed the Iliad and the Odyssey as their origin stories; they spoke a later version of Greek; but otherwise they maintained almost no continuity with the Mycenaeans, using a different alphabet and maintaining completely different political and economic structures, all of which developed during this Early Iron Age.
Previous generations spoke of this period as the Dark Age, and they meant it primarily in terms of the Greeks. Israel would never consider this period a Dark Age; if anything, it was their Golden Age, the halcyon days of David and Solomon to which they would ever aspire afterward. The author represents the current consensus view, however, that “Dark Age” was a bit too much as a description. Over the past few years there have been significant archaeological finds dating from this period of 1177-776 BCE, and these finds attest to a changed situation in Greece, but not entirely dismal. There is still trade with the Mediterranean world; there are still quality grave goods.
And so we do best to speak of it as the Early Iron Age without prejudice. As is often pointed out, the crisis of the collapse of the Bronze Age led to developments which allowed for the Classical world, and thus the world as we know it, to develop and flourish, and such would have been far less likely if the Bronze Age hegemons did not experience a time of collapse or retreat. It allowed for state creation in the Levant; it led to the development of the constellation of the Greek poleis and their constant competition.
The book concludes with the author’s assessments of the evidence as well as consideration according to the 2012 IPCC adaptation and resilience frameworks. This speaks to the modern obsession with the collapse of the Late Bronze Age: we are haunted by the prospect of our own collapse and fear it greatly. We would do well to become more adaptive and resilient, but it will likely have to be imposed on us by circumstances, and those circumstances will test and prove us as it did those in the days of the Late Bronze Age and afterward.
Eric Cline well narrated the story of the Bronze Age Collapse in 1177 B.C. His highly anticipated sequel, After 1177 B.C.: The Survival of Civilizations, certainly delivers.
The author surveys our current understanding of the history of the Early Iron Age, from 1200 BCE until something like 700ish BCE, by considering archaeological discoveries and what later textual evidence can be brought to bear on this time period throughout the ancient Near East. The author wisely approaches the subject by general geographic area and not according to time.
There’s no doubt major changes took place in the couple of centuries following 1200 BCE throughout the region. No area remains unaffected.
But the level and duration of impact would vary significantly throughout the region. The southern Levant, including the area of Israel, seemed to have increased in population and saw the development of many small independent kingdoms; if anything, this area flourished during the Early Iron Age. Phoenicia and Cyprus took full advantage of the situation and developed their maritime exploits. Assyria and Babylon went through a period of relative instability, but by the 10th century BCE the king lists and records exist again, displaying a significant amount of continuity in Assyria, and despite a different population in Babylon, the societal traditions continued as they had in the Bronze Age.
Others did not fare as well. Egypt perhaps maintained the most cultural continuity, but the political and economic strength of the Late Bronze Age would never be replicated. They managed but never adapted, and thus were eliminated as a going concern in 525 BCE. The Hittite Empire completely disintegrated, but Neo-Hittite rulers persevered in Carchemish, and many of the Luwian speaking people continued to uphold Hittite culture and traditions for centuries; the Luwians and Aramaeans developed all sorts of little kingdoms throughout the northern Levant and eastern Asia Minor, all of which would eventually be overrun by Assyria.
Yet perhaps no group fell as spectacularly as the Mycenaean Greeks. Their palace civilization, or at least the highest echelons of it, were gone by the middle of the twelfth century BCE. Within two hundred years, many of the most prominent Mycenaean cities were depopulated. The author, as well as many others, remain dismissive of the “Dorian invasion” later Greeks spoke of at this time, but without a doubt there was significant population movement, and the population of central and southern Greece was cut in half. Archaic and Classical Greeks would still serve the same gods, or at least gods with the same names; they championed the Iliad and the Odyssey as their origin stories; they spoke a later version of Greek; but otherwise they maintained almost no continuity with the Mycenaeans, using a different alphabet and maintaining completely different political and economic structures, all of which developed during this Early Iron Age.
Previous generations spoke of this period as the Dark Age, and they meant it primarily in terms of the Greeks. Israel would never consider this period a Dark Age; if anything, it was their Golden Age, the halcyon days of David and Solomon to which they would ever aspire afterward. The author represents the current consensus view, however, that “Dark Age” was a bit too much as a description. Over the past few years there have been significant archaeological finds dating from this period of 1177-776 BCE, and these finds attest to a changed situation in Greece, but not entirely dismal. There is still trade with the Mediterranean world; there are still quality grave goods.
And so we do best to speak of it as the Early Iron Age without prejudice. As is often pointed out, the crisis of the collapse of the Bronze Age led to developments which allowed for the Classical world, and thus the world as we know it, to develop and flourish, and such would have been far less likely if the Bronze Age hegemons did not experience a time of collapse or retreat. It allowed for state creation in the Levant; it led to the development of the constellation of the Greek poleis and their constant competition.
The book concludes with the author’s assessments of the evidence as well as consideration according to the 2012 IPCC adaptation and resilience frameworks. This speaks to the modern obsession with the collapse of the Late Bronze Age: we are haunted by the prospect of our own collapse and fear it greatly. We would do well to become more adaptive and resilient, but it will likely have to be imposed on us by circumstances, and those circumstances will test and prove us as it did those in the days of the Late Bronze Age and afterward.
February 22, 2025
It wasn't bad, but it also wasn't as compelling as the preceding volume.
My overall take was that discussing this topic in 2024/25 without mentioning aDNA studies is complete professional malpractice. Ancient DNA and genetic studies are just as important as archeology and written history in solving some of the unknowns that aren't answerable through traditional methods. Maybe Cline isn't confident enough in his understanding of aDNA to spend significant time on it (reasonable) or perhaps he feels that the studies and results thus far aren't conclusive enough to change our ideas so its not worth mentioning (less reasonable).
aDNA can conclusively answer questions about "Dorian invasions" or whether Israelites were nomads from the Arabian peninsula and when they actually first settled in Canaan, or whether Philistines were proto-indo-europeans from the Aegean region who replaced the existing Canaanite population or hybridized with them. These are all unknowns that Cline leaves completely open and unknowable, but in fact emerging science has, or will soon have, very clear answers to all of this. And Cline doesn't touch the topic. This would have been acceptable in 1995, but not in 2025.
My overall take was that discussing this topic in 2024/25 without mentioning aDNA studies is complete professional malpractice. Ancient DNA and genetic studies are just as important as archeology and written history in solving some of the unknowns that aren't answerable through traditional methods. Maybe Cline isn't confident enough in his understanding of aDNA to spend significant time on it (reasonable) or perhaps he feels that the studies and results thus far aren't conclusive enough to change our ideas so its not worth mentioning (less reasonable).
aDNA can conclusively answer questions about "Dorian invasions" or whether Israelites were nomads from the Arabian peninsula and when they actually first settled in Canaan, or whether Philistines were proto-indo-europeans from the Aegean region who replaced the existing Canaanite population or hybridized with them. These are all unknowns that Cline leaves completely open and unknowable, but in fact emerging science has, or will soon have, very clear answers to all of this. And Cline doesn't touch the topic. This would have been acceptable in 1995, but not in 2025.
December 25, 2024
It is, admittedly, harder to write a compelling narrative history of a period that's notable for the collapse of history than it is to write one about a period where kings seem to have spent all their time writing letters to each other and then setting fire to the warehouses where the clay tablets were kept so that they would be preserved forever, but I was hoping we'd at least give it a shot.
After 1177 is a weird book—it's got a kind of Ted Talky "this is how civilizations Survive and Thrive" gear and an incredibly dry "this is some information about archaeological finds, and the important thing is where they are and who did them" gear. 1177 had that stuff too, but it was also a great story.
Cline did the podcast and lecture circuit in the year leading up to After's release, and if you loved the first book I think it's worth seeking those out—he's a charming guy and I think radio hosts or the needs of a lecture bring out the best in this material.
After 1177 is a weird book—it's got a kind of Ted Talky "this is how civilizations Survive and Thrive" gear and an incredibly dry "this is some information about archaeological finds, and the important thing is where they are and who did them" gear. 1177 had that stuff too, but it was also a great story.
Cline did the podcast and lecture circuit in the year leading up to After's release, and if you loved the first book I think it's worth seeking those out—he's a charming guy and I think radio hosts or the needs of a lecture bring out the best in this material.
March 30, 2025
Très bon ouvrage dans l'ensemble qui n'offre pas qu'une lecture historique de l'effondrement mais qui en fait également une analyse philosophique avec des comparaisons avec l'époque actuelle et la capacité de résilience de notre société moderne.
Les premiers chapitres sont dédiés à plusieurs civilisations antiques et leurs capacités respectives à surmonter l'effondrement de 1177 avant Jésus Christ. Ces chapitres sont intrusctifs mais s'enfoncent parfois un peu trop dans le détail avec des précisions archéologiques très pointues, ce qui n'est pas vraiment la manière de traiter le thème centrale que j'aurais espèré :). Le livre reste toutefois très instructif et offre des éléments intéressants sur la compréhension du déclin des civilisations, de leur capacité à surmonter un événement traumatisant et des moyens à les anticiper plutôt que de simplement faire face.
Les premiers chapitres sont dédiés à plusieurs civilisations antiques et leurs capacités respectives à surmonter l'effondrement de 1177 avant Jésus Christ. Ces chapitres sont intrusctifs mais s'enfoncent parfois un peu trop dans le détail avec des précisions archéologiques très pointues, ce qui n'est pas vraiment la manière de traiter le thème centrale que j'aurais espèré :). Le livre reste toutefois très instructif et offre des éléments intéressants sur la compréhension du déclin des civilisations, de leur capacité à surmonter un événement traumatisant et des moyens à les anticiper plutôt que de simplement faire face.
Read
April 20, 2025i think reviews of this are a bit harsh. Even though Cline's 1177 BC was quite enjoyable especially in hindsight of COVID, you couldn't help but see he was setting the reader up for a sequel. I am glad.
While each chapter weighs differently in quality (I say this as a bronze-age dilettante), I think overall Cline offers an engaging and thoughtful follow-up for each of the mediterranean powers discussed in the first book. Even though one must be wary when applying "lessons from history", I really enjoyed his discussion of resiliency theory and Taleb's idea of "anti-fragility" and how those concepts can be applied to our world system.
The question "are we Mycenaeans or Phoenicians" is of utmost importance, especially as the current unipolarity of the US-led world order is being chipped away. I do think the demise of the US empire is better for the stability of world, irrespective of that, we in the states are certainly the mycenaeans. As Cline so artfully points out, does the collapse require an Event? Or are we sitting in our palaces, overextended and under-prepared, primed for that multiplicity of crises (which could be half a world away) to throttle us asunder into the wine dark sea?
I really wish we did not live in the stupidest country.
While each chapter weighs differently in quality (I say this as a bronze-age dilettante), I think overall Cline offers an engaging and thoughtful follow-up for each of the mediterranean powers discussed in the first book. Even though one must be wary when applying "lessons from history", I really enjoyed his discussion of resiliency theory and Taleb's idea of "anti-fragility" and how those concepts can be applied to our world system.
The question "are we Mycenaeans or Phoenicians" is of utmost importance, especially as the current unipolarity of the US-led world order is being chipped away. I do think the demise of the US empire is better for the stability of world, irrespective of that, we in the states are certainly the mycenaeans. As Cline so artfully points out, does the collapse require an Event? Or are we sitting in our palaces, overextended and under-prepared, primed for that multiplicity of crises (which could be half a world away) to throttle us asunder into the wine dark sea?
I really wish we did not live in the stupidest country.
March 28, 2025
Es handelt sich um den Folgeband zu dem Werk, in dem der Verfasser eine vernetzte bronzezeitliche Welt im Ostmittelmeerraum und im vorderen Orient und deren kulturellen Zusammenbruch schildert. Im vorliegenden Band geht es dann um die weitere Entwicklung. In vielen Details ist das Werk bestimmt gut recherchiert und gut geschrieben, und doch bleibt ein Störgefühl. Es wird deutlich, dass die Entwicklung nach 1177 v. Chr. in der Region durchaus nicht einheitlich war. Ich denke, soweit übergreifend auf Niedergang und Überleben von Zivilisationen abgestellt wird, ist es richtig, übergreifende Faktoren zu untersuchen, aber der Autor neigt mir etwas zu sehr zu ahistorischen Verallgemeinerungen. Klimaveränderungen können eine Subsistenzwirtschaft mit zarten Ansätzen internationaler Kontakte destabilisieren, das glaube ich gerne. Aber wie vernetzt war die Welt wirklich?
May 30, 2024
في سنة 1177 قبل الميلاد انهارت ممالك العصر القديم بتتابع سريع لينتهي العصر البرونزي ويبدأ العصر الحديدي. للمؤلف كتاب سابق اسمه : عام 1177 سنة نهاية الحضارة يسرد فيه الأحداث التي تسببت بسقوط تلك الممالك. هذا الكتاب يتابع المؤلف فيه ��بعات السقوط للمنطقة بعد عام 1177. من جميع الحضارات التي كانت موجودة قبل هذا العام لم يسلم إلا المملكة المصرية ولكنها أصبحت شبح لما كانت عليه سابقا. أما الحضارة المسينية والكريتية والحيثيون والكنعانيون فقد انتهوا من الوجود وجاء بعدهم شعوب أخرى بأسماء أخرى. يتتبع المؤلف كل حضارة على حده ويناقش أسباب انهيارها. يرى المؤلف أنه ليس كل الحضارات انتهت بنفس المستوى فبعضها بقي متماسك ولكن ضعيف كما حصل لمصر وبعضها اختفى تماما كما حصل مع الحيثيين والمسينيين، أو انفصل إلى شعوب أخرى كما حصل للكنعانيين. يقول المؤلف أن من بقي وتطور بعد هذا الانهيار هم البابليون والأشوريون، فقد توسعوا بعد الانهيار وتطورت حضارتهم والتي اخرجت لنا الدولة الأشورية التي حكمت الشرق القديم ثم تبعتها الدولة البابلية الجديدة والتي واصلت فتوحاتها لكل الشرق.
الكتاب جيد ولكن لتفهم السياق تحتاج أن تقرأ الكتاب الأول لنفس المؤلف.
الكتاب جيد ولكن لتفهم السياق تحتاج أن تقرأ الكتاب الأول لنفس المؤلف.
June 2, 2024
A book club read that was probably more skim than read because it didn’t make sense. Countries responded differently after a regional collapse. My one take away was a corrected understanding of “dark ages.”
August 31, 2024
Everything is a cycle. Sometimes the edges are hard to find - but cycles have beginnings, middles and ends. Every new beginning is some other beginning's end, yeah. Hubris is thinking that it won't happen in the blip of time you live in, to the society/civilization/geography/political system you subscribe to.
January 4, 2025
Eric Cline's 'After 1177 BC' is the follow up book to his original '1177 BC' and picks up where his first book left off. It takes readers through the centuries following the collapse of the Late Bronze Age looking at each region/empire and their experience in the recovery as opposed to his first book's total chronological approach.
The book provides fascinating detail throughout, painting the picture of a world recovering from crisis in different ways. It also helps shed light on the debates surrounding the term "dark ages" and whether or not such a broad, generalised term should be applied to the centuries before the classical era.
While the book is informative and very well written with great pops of humour, this sequel was far more dense that its predecessor. While the breaking up of chapters into smaller segments helped to keep me grounded in the discussion, I often felt like I was drowning in a sheer overload of information that, at times, could feel like tangents that didn't fully assist his overall assessment of the period.
Overall, highly recommend the book to anyone interested in the period and ready to put in the effort to understand the at times dense archaeological and scientific analysis of his writing.
The book provides fascinating detail throughout, painting the picture of a world recovering from crisis in different ways. It also helps shed light on the debates surrounding the term "dark ages" and whether or not such a broad, generalised term should be applied to the centuries before the classical era.
While the book is informative and very well written with great pops of humour, this sequel was far more dense that its predecessor. While the breaking up of chapters into smaller segments helped to keep me grounded in the discussion, I often felt like I was drowning in a sheer overload of information that, at times, could feel like tangents that didn't fully assist his overall assessment of the period.
Overall, highly recommend the book to anyone interested in the period and ready to put in the effort to understand the at times dense archaeological and scientific analysis of his writing.
July 5, 2024
Another fantastic book by Eric H. Cline. Comprehensive, fascinating, insightful and wonderfully written! Loved every page of this book.
January 10, 2025
A good follow up to the amazing 1177BC.
August 5, 2025
en realidad me faltó por leer un poquito pero ya me tocaba dárselo a jose, pero chachi!!!
September 8, 2024
Relentlessly systematic breakdown of a very cloudy historical period replete with maps, tables and even a dramatis personae. Take on the early Middle Ages in Europe next!
September 13, 2024
This being a school book of course I wouldn’t have normally read this. However, this has broadened my knowledge in this field and about the history of the Mediterranean after the fall of 1177 B.C. Lots of historical facts and king talk. But now it’s connecting to when I read my Bible about who was who and where they were during this time. Overall I really enjoyed.
4/5⭐️
4/5⭐️
Displaying 1 - 30 of 131 reviews