Register to reply

Why civilizations rise and fall?

by jd12345
Tags: civilizations, fall, rise
Share this thread:
jd12345
#1
May7-13, 09:38 AM
P: 260
Yes, yes I did my homework - I googled this and got many results but none seem to answer my query.

I am not a historian so bear with me.
I had a picture in my mind that civilizations seem to appear after we discovered agriculture and thereafter each civilization advanced and continued to transform till today.
But it seems that civilizations do appear but get destroyed after sometime. They do not continue forever.
I am confused as we do not see this today right? In modern history all the empires/countries are stable, right?

Why is this behavior?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Local education politics 'far from dead'
First grade reading suffers in segregated schools
Violent aftermath for the warriors at Alken Enge
Ryan_m_b
#2
May7-13, 10:08 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,406
What makes you think that everything in the modern day is stable? The British Empire ended less than a century ago, the USSR fell apart just a few decades ago. There are nations around now that didn't exist in our grandparents time and vice versa.

To give a present day example Scotland will vote in the next few years on whether or not to secede from the UK effectively ending the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and creating a new set of societies.
Evo
#3
May7-13, 02:17 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,474
Just look at eastern Europe and all of the new countries that have emerged in the last 50 years. Czechoslovakia was a country until 1993. Look at Africa. Half of the countries didn't exist with their current names when I was in school.

Greg Bernhardt
#4
May7-13, 02:21 PM
Admin
Greg Bernhardt's Avatar
P: 9,329
Why civilizations rise and fall?

Read a newspaper, nothing is stable in the world :)


On a related note, this is a wonderful wonderful read on why/how civilizations rise and fall.

A Short History of Progress
http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-.../dp/0786715472
Ryan_m_b
#5
May7-13, 04:45 PM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,406
Quote Quote by jd12345 View Post
But it seems that civilizations do appear but get destroyed after sometime.
Re-reading this I just wanted to reply to this last point, rarely do civilisations get destroyed in the literal sense. Generally it is a progress of change, even when significant much remains the same. The French Revolution didn't destroy France but it did radically change the nation politically and culturally. Similarly if a nation/empire splits into smaller nations its not a de novo creation of cultures out of the ashes of old. Institutions, physical and cultural, still remain and of course the people will still be there.

Of course there are examples of cultures being decimated, usually over time. The Carthaginian empire after the Punic wars or any number of native people's genocided/displaced by European colonialism for example.
jim hardy
#6
May7-13, 05:40 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
jim hardy's Avatar
P: 3,518
Another book , to complement Greg's:

http://www.amazon.com/The-March-Foll.../dp/0345308239

author Barbara Tuchman now tackles the pervasive presence of folly in governments through the ages. Defining folly as the pursuit by governments of policies contrary to their own interersts, despite the availability of feasible alternatives, Tuchman details four decisive turning points in history that illustrate the very heights of folly in government: the Trojan War, the breakup of the Holy See provoked by the Renaissance Popes, the loss of the American colonies by Britain's George III, and the United States' persistent folly in Vietnam. ...
She likens behavior of too-large organizations to a "lemming instinct" .
phys2
#7
May8-13, 04:52 AM
P: 24
Well, every civilisation is different, culturally, from each other so it is hard to find a general system of how a civilisation develops. I did a course on Ancient Greece at university and my final essay was on how the Greek system of government, the polis, developed. To sum up 5000 words in a sentence, I argued that the egalitarian nature of farming was an important factor in the development of Greek system of rule. One of my sources was Victor Davis Hanson - specifically his book called 'the Other Greeks', a fascinating read which I would suggest that you have a look at.
SteamKing
#8
May8-13, 07:32 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 6,331
Your assertion: " In modern history all the empires/countries are stable, right?"

In the twentieth century alone, the German empire, the Austro-Hungarian empire, and the Russian empire all fell as a consequence of engaging in World War I. The Japanese empire was dissolved after World War II, and the Soviet Union dissolved as a result of the Cold War.
phys2
#9
May8-13, 08:20 AM
P: 24
In the twentieth century alone, the German empire, the Austro-Hungarian empire, and the Russian empire all fell as a consequence of engaging in World War I. The Japanese empire was dissolved after World War II, and the Soviet Union dissolved as a result of the Cold War.
What makes you think that everything in the modern day is stable?
I think that that modern day democracies are pretty stable. I mean, you do get protests and economic crisis, but certainly not what you would associate with the breakup of the USSR or the demise of empires.

Politicwatcher.
jd12345
#10
May8-13, 08:56 AM
P: 260
Reading all of your answers I have a doubt regarding "fall of empires". When books say that some civilization lasted so-and-so years what do they mean exactly?
Do they mean that that civilization was conquered after that many years, or did they migrate to other place or it divided into two-or-more empires or what?
Borek
#11
May8-13, 09:11 AM
Admin
Borek's Avatar
P: 23,393
Quote Quote by jd12345 View Post
When books say that some civilization lasted so-and-so years what do they mean exactly?
Probably something different each time.
SteamKing
#12
May8-13, 09:30 AM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 6,331
It depends. When the Roman Empire fell, it did so in distinct phases. The Roman Empire was originally centered on the Italian peninsula, grew to include most of western Europe, parts of eastern Europe, Greece, Asia minor, and the shores of the Med. It split in two, with the western empire ruled from Rome and the eastern portion from Byzantium. The western empire fell first in the 5th century A.D., but the eastern did not fall until 1453, almost a thousand years later. The latter fall certainly caused large numbers of Byzantines to migrate west, which was one of the reasons for the start of the Renaissance in Europe, as these migrants brought with them a large amount of literature from the ancient world which had been lost or forgotten in the west. In both cases, the capital cities, Rome and Byzantium, were sacked with a great loss of life.

In more recent times, the years after World War II saw great displacements of populations from eastern Europe to the west. Prussia, which at one time controlled the southern Baltic coast, ceased to exist, and most Germans living there were driven west by the Russians. The borders of Poland were also shifted west from their original location of 1918-1939 to their present locations. As a result, much of the territory in the western part of present day Poland once belonged to Germany (principally Prussia and Silesia), and when the Poles moved in, the former German inhabitants were expelled.

There is no one answer to your question. At various times, all of the things you mentioned (conquest, migration, division, etc.) have happened. History can often tell us what happened and when it happened, but the reasons why a certain empire or polity fell are more elusive.
jd12345
#13
May8-13, 11:38 AM
P: 260
Quote Quote by Greg Bernhardt View Post
Read a newspaper, nothing is stable in the world :)


On a related note, this is a wonderful wonderful read on why/how civilizations rise and fall.

A Short History of Progress
http://www.amazon.com/Short-History-.../dp/0786715472
I'll definitely have a look on that.


Anyways thank you all - I got my answers
Ryan_m_b
#14
May8-13, 12:04 PM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,406
Quote Quote by phys2 View Post
I think that that modern day democracies are pretty stable. I mean, you do get protests and economic crisis, but certainly not what you would associate with the breakup of the USSR or the demise of empires.

Politicwatcher.
Modern democracies have not been in existence very long to give us a good amount of precedents to work with. Sure a lot of western democracies now were western democracies a century or so ago but they were radically different, the UK had only recently given the vote to non-land owning men. A radical notion at the time.

Democracies are different in that they have an inbuilt mechanism for peaceful regime change and so won't necessarily go through as dramatic change as historical examples, rather they can change slowly over time. This is still change though. Two more things worth taking into account are that democratic nations can still end in that they split into other nations (Scotland potentially leaving the UK for example, ending the UK) and that there may be failure modes of democracy yet to be realised.
Borek
#15
May8-13, 12:52 PM
Admin
Borek's Avatar
P: 23,393
Quote Quote by Ryan_m_b View Post
democratic nations can still end
turning into dictatorship.
jim hardy
#16
May8-13, 02:45 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
jim hardy's Avatar
P: 3,518
..and that there may be failure modes of democracy yet to be realised.
They can choke on their own bureaucracy.
Parkinson warned of this in his books "Parkinson's Law" and "The Law of Delay". He predicted that by about 2050 100% of the population would work for the government with nobody left to produce anything.

My opinion: What should have been in the constitution is a "sunset clause" whereby all laws expire after, say, two generations(~forty years?).

What that would achieve:
1. Lawmakers would be occupied maintaining, renewing and fine tuning existing inventory of laws instead of heaping half baked and useless new ones onto the heap.
2. Lawmakers would be knowledgeable as to what laws exist already and might encourage their enforcement.
pongo38
#17
May8-13, 04:49 PM
P: 696
"civilization" is a vague concept. It could at one extreme mean military control, or civil organisation; or it might be construed around the ideas of civilized values that are generally upheld. To my mind, civilization should include the strong helping the weak, and the absence of corruption. So not much hope there then.
SteamKing
#18
May8-13, 07:50 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 6,331
Jim Hardy wrote:

"My opinion: What should have been in the constitution is a "sunset clause" whereby all laws expire after, say, two generations(~forty years?)."

Good Lord! You could never get anything done ever again. Talk about re-inventing the wheel. Guaranteed employment for politicians and lawyers, though. Everybody else would be screwed.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Rise and fall of capillary action General Physics 2
Linear rise and fall edges. Electrical Engineering 2
Rise/Fall Time Sine Wave Precalculus Mathematics Homework 3
Will the barometer reading rise or fall ? Advanced Physics Homework 3
Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise And Fall Current Events 1