Great Empires Declined as Climate Changed

[Michael]

Great empires come and go, but it's not clear why some of them fell. New clues to the demise of two dynasties may have just emerged from a cave.

Evidence found in a cave near Jerusalem reveal increasingly dry weather from 100 A.D. to 700 A.D., a period that coincided with the fall of both Roman and Byzantine rule in the region.

The researchers are quick to point out that they have not discovered a cause-and-effect relationship, however.

"Whether this is what weakened the Byzantines or not isn't known, but it is an interesting correlation," said University of Wisconsin-Madison professor John Valley, who led the research. "These things were certainly going on at the time that those historic changes occurred."
Source (http://www.livescience.com/history/081206-byzantine-empire-decline.html)

This looks like an old theory come back to life. Climatologists have been trying to explain history with various weather-related explanations for years. Perhaps better science of weather is helping them to remake the same old arguments.

At best, I think weather is mostly only a 'contributing' factor. Changing weather patterns alone are rarely enough to account for major historical changes. They just tend to 'help' some secular trend along.

Anyone else think weather patterns play a major effect in history?

[Greendruid]

Absolutely.

Weather is the reason that food shortages and booms happen. Food shortages and booms are so closely tied to:

- morale
- health
- population
- mobility of military

I'd think that all of these would be extremely important in whether or not warfare was started, required, or continued.

[Michael]

Absolutely.

Weather is the reason that food shortages and booms happen. Food shortages and booms are so closely tied to:

- morale
- health
- population
- mobility of military

I'd think that all of these would be extremely important in whether or not warfare was started, required, or continued.
I respectfully submit that since the beginning of the 20th century, food shortages have all had political origins.

That being said, I can't think of any historical examples where weather had any influence on actual history. The Hundred Years War between medieval France and England for example includes the Great Plague - and there is zero evidence of the Plague affecting that war (other than killing off 1/4 of the troops at any given time). Fact is, the war fought right through that period without any noticable effect on the war itself. That is to say, the Hundred Years War wouldn't have changed one whit if you remove the effects of the Great Plague. The Plague had no effect on that war at all (which it should have if this theory was true).

In other words, I just don't see any actual evidence for this weather theory. It makes sence, but only in a meta-long-view with 20/20 hindsight.

[The Drunk Guy]

Source (http://www.livescience.com/history/081206-byzantine-empire-decline.html)

This looks like an old theory come back to life. Climatologists have been trying to explain history with various weather-related explanations for years. Perhaps better science of weather is helping them to remake the same old arguments.

At best, I think weather is mostly only a 'contributing' factor. Changing weather patterns alone are rarely enough to account for major historical changes. They just tend to 'help' some secular trend along.

Anyone else think weather patterns play a major effect in history?
I could see how they would have an effect. Loss of crops and the catastrophes that occur alongside extreme weather could cause problems with the more religious of the population. For example: the Evangelicals calling Hurricane Katrina an act of God.

I don't agree that this decided the outcome, but surely fueled it. The amiability of people who are desperate for change and blame natural cycles on the actions of man could allow for extreme policy changes that led to the eventual demise.

[partofme]

I could see how they would have an effect. Loss of crops and the catastrophes that occur alongside extreme weather could cause problems with the more religious of the population. For example: the Evangelicals calling Hurricane Katrina an act of God.

I don't agree that this decided the outcome, but surely fueled it. The amiability of people who are desperate for change and blame natural cycles on the actions of man could allow for extreme policy changes that led to the eventual demise.

Isn't it odd that hurricanes effect mostly the south which is the most religious region of the country?

[The Drunk Guy]

Isn't it odd that hurricanes effect mostly the south which is the most religious region of the country?
That is funny. Of course, that's just because God likes to "test" His followers. And by "test," He means "completely fuck up their lives and still demand cash on Sunday."

[Michael]

Isn't it odd that hurricanes effect mostly the south which is the most religious region of the country?
I think the two could have some relation. I'd expect that places around the globe that are MUCH MORE susceptible to natural disasters than other places would have higher than average religious activity.

If a hurricane comes through and wipes out your town - but spares you (in apparent answer to a prayer), that can easily be taken as a 'sign from God'.