Late Bronze Age Collapse • Hacker News Board

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#271

Post by mannykannot » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:19 AM UTC

lou1306 wrote: post #266

wisty wrote: post #263

I saw a slghtly odd youtube video by a small creator who thinks it was at least partly because the gods stopped talking to people. No, hear me out. Obviously they weren't real, but the Youtuber said (based on sources) people used to talk to the gods, like you might talk to a cat. And the gods spoke back (and we all know cat owners who insist the cat is replying). As societies became more sophisticated, this stopped.…

Is this the old "breakdown of the bicameral mind" theory? I don't know. I think that tin trade routes breaking down + rise of iron-wielding civilisations are more plausible.

It looks very much like it: Julian James, 'The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind' (see [1]), which influenced Neal Stephenson's writing of Snow Crash.

Scott Alexander wrote a critique of it beginning "Julian Jaynes’ The Origin Of Consciousness In The Breakdown Of The Bicameral Mind is a brilliant book, with only two minor flaws. First, that it purports to explains the origin of consciousness. And second, that it posits a breakdown of the bicameral mind. I think it’s possible to route around these flaws while keeping the thesis otherwise intact..." [2]. A response (which I have not yet read) can be found here [3].

[1] https://www.julianjaynes.org/about/about-jaynes-theory/overv...

[2] https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/01/book-review-origin-of-...

[3] https://www.julianjaynes.org/2023/09/04/fact-checking-scott-...

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#272

Post by ludicrousdispla » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:24 AM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #124

nchmy wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

its been a while since ive read a comment somewhere that I am so completely bewildered by. I understand about half the words, and none of the references, that you wrote. Hope your teeth are doing better now!

Caturday -> Saturday enjoyed with or similar to a cat LBA -> probably supposed to be LBAC, Late Bronze Age collapse Civ -> Civilization, a series of historically inspired strategy games, where you play as the historical leader of a civilization through the ages of human development Hatshepsut -> an Egyptian Pharaoh who is one of the leaders you can play as in Civ VII Deity -> the name of the highest difficulty level…

merry time -> maritime

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#273

Post by suddenlybananas » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:25 AM UTC

marking-time wrote: post #134

The study of the LBAC is compelling these days because of the similarities to our present day situation. Other commenters have noted the the possibility of AI driven collapse, but another possibility is our dependence on oil. Bronze is the combination copper+tin. Copper is common in earths composition, but tin is much more scarce. The scarcity of tin necessitated the expansive trade networks to acquire the resource.…

There's nothing wrong with using AD/BC instead of CE/BCE. They're identical and one even saves a character!

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#274

Post by mannykannot » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:35 AM UTC

evanjrowley wrote: post #8

lordleft wrote: post #7

Beware the Sea Peoples

In an alternate timeline, The Sea Peoples are Romans sailing to England, the Anglo-Saxons, the Normans. Things became fuzzy when the English themselves became other civilization's Sea Peoples.

And don't forget the Vikings, who may provide the best analogy to the Sea Peoples.

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#275

Post by JohnMakin » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:47 AM UTC

pocksuppet wrote: post #140

Amorymeltzer wrote: post #26

Patrick Wyman—of the Tides of History podcast—just put out a new book, Lost Worlds , which is worth a read if this is your bag. The basic premise is that the way ancient history is typically taught, "that we moved linearly from foraging to farming, and then from country farmers to city-dwelling, tax-paying subjects of kings and emperors," is essentially wrong. He goes on: >All of those developments occurred in an ord…

It's important that we learn about this so we don't repeat it. Sadly, we are repeating it. Perhaps it's impossible to prevent the cycle because it can only be prevented by those who benefit from it.

The elites and ones in power were the ones most decimated by the bronze age collapse, so this reasoning feels flawed.

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#276

Post by Brendinooo » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:56 AM UTC

krapp wrote: post #216

Brendinooo wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Impossible things by definition didn't happen. Can things happen that are possible via mechanisms you don't understand, or are incapable of grasping because of your sensory/intellectual limitations? >You're just asking people to assume what the Bible says about the supernatural is real I don't think that's what happened there. >offering the lack of scientific evidence as supporting evidence for the Bible No, the poi…

>Can things happen that are possible via mechanisms you don't understand, or are incapable of grasping because of your sensory/intellectual limitations? Possibly, but I fully believe science is capable of explaining these mechanisms, because thus far science has been able to explain everything that theists claimed was supernatural in nature, while no evidence has been found to justify belief in the supernatural. So t…

>So this is, at best, an argument that scientific models are incomplete (which no one would disagree with) but not that scientific models are invalid, or that the supernatural is real.

One could imagine God parting a sea with scientific mechanisms we know nothing about.

> Claims alone don't prove anything

You can be convicted for murder "beyond a reasonable doubt" on claims alone.

>First, demonstrate that two dimensional people exist, otherwise it's a nonsense question.

Okay, I respect that. Thought of a better one later.

How would you explain what it means to be human to an ant? How would you get it to understand thermodynamics or whatever?

I dunno, it just seems like your overall thrust here is that humanity came out of the ooze through natural selection with everything that it needs to understand the mysteries of the universe. If we cannot see, touch, taste, smell, hear, or think it, either directly or through our instruments, it is impossible, and therefore it cannot happen.

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#277

Post by astrobe_ » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 11:56 AM UTC

lou1306 wrote: post #266

wisty wrote: post #263

I saw a slghtly odd youtube video by a small creator who thinks it was at least partly because the gods stopped talking to people. No, hear me out. Obviously they weren't real, but the Youtuber said (based on sources) people used to talk to the gods, like you might talk to a cat. And the gods spoke back (and we all know cat owners who insist the cat is replying). As societies became more sophisticated, this stopped.…

Is this the old "breakdown of the bicameral mind" theory? I don't know. I think that tin trade routes breaking down + rise of iron-wielding civilisations are more plausible.

Yes. Civilizations relying on tin were basically quite vulnerable because tin is uncommon [1]. The coincidence between late bronze age collapse and the transition to iron age seems to be explained by the fact that once the disorganization no longer allows tin trade, makers turn to the second choice, iron.

Iron making was known during bronze age, but it was technically more challenging that tin+copper because it requires higher temperatures.

It's amusing to note that it lead to the development of the iron/steel making techniques, so much so that once the tin "was back", steel was cheaper, more reliable (from the logistics perspective) and better.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_sources_and_trade_during_a...

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#278

Post by Brendinooo » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 12:12 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #249

coffeecat wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We know the Exodus didn't happen because the supernatural elements described cannot have happened, ... Of course the supernatural events could have happened! Unless you're certain that: - matter exists (i.e., physicalism or dualism is the correct metaphysical worldview) - the universe is strictly a physics simulation - there's no God who's capable of fiddling with human affairs (or interested in doing so)

If you’re not a realist, just say so. Then we’ll know that there’s no point in engaging with your epistemology, because your epistemology also admits claims like “the Universe sprang into existence last Thursday,” or “I am the only entity that exists,” or “Jupiter doesn’t actually exists, it merely appears to exist.”

My epistemology admits that "the Universe sprang into existence last Thursday" could be true even if we might have no way of proving it; to me this is obviously far more correct than saying that it must not be true because we cannot prove it.

Doesn't mean I believe it's true, though: I think the point is more being willing to admit that humans might not be the pinnacle of existence, fully able to comprehend every mystery of the universe.

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#279

Post by Brendinooo » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 12:25 PM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #232

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this arises from one of two presuppositions: Either 1) the physical universe is all that exists, or 2) science is the only way to learn truth. (These two presuppositions are not strictly independent of each other.) These are presuppositions . They are assumptions that you make at the start of the game, that you build your interpretation of the world on. They are not empirically proven in any way. (For #2…

Well, I guess that makes a certain philosophical sense, but if we allow for the existence of an extra-physical god (or gods) that we can't test for, there's no reason to believe that one particular story is more likely than others. Maybe it was alien gods that built Pyramids, and the Hebrews took forty years to reach Jericho because they had to first go through a couple of Stargates.

>there's no reason to believe that one particular story is more likely than others

Sure there is. I could tell you that I am a mostly-anon web developer; I could also tell you I am President of the United States, or a founder of a prominent company that came out of YCombinator. For practical purposes you would evaluate my claims based on your wits and perhaps my comment history, and you would believe that one story is more likely than the others.

All are equally possible but not all are equally plausible.

I'm guessing you'd agree with that, but you'd disagree with what counts as credible evidence. Which I can understand. But the idea that you'd see "random guy on HN makes up a theory involving a fictional wormhole from a 90s television show" as no different from Biblical claims is troubling to me, most notably because the narrative itself doesn't make any claim that could be remotely construed to align with that.

Re: Late Bronze Age Collapse

#280

Post by arrrg » Sat, Jul 11, 2026, 1:42 PM UTC

marking-time wrote: post #149

upfrog wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author has been an established blogger since well before the modern AI boom. It is of course not impossible that their writing technique has changed, and they now use AI heavily, but preferring BC/AD over the alternative/not always clarifying which strikes me as incredibly weak evidence.

The lack of consistency in the usage is also telling. Also, perhaps the author simply a christian apologist. I am an archaeologist with 10+ years of experience, so now you know my bias.

Lack of consistency seems entirely normal to me for a blog post.

At a certain point the information is simply redundant. The meaning of the naked number can and will easily be inferred from context. You don’t even notice it. Both while writing and also while reading. A proper proof reading will catch that (maybe, though I myself am actually hilariously bad at proof reading and miss obvious stuff all the time, so being able to properly proof read and catch things always seemed like a super power to me) but I don’t think this blog author does that (and I don’t really expect it? It’s fine …)

It totally get that there are people who will be endlessly annoyed by that – I’m also annoyed by people using quotation marks the wrong way. But it doesn’t really impact readability of the context is clear enough (as it obviously is in this case).