What if the Late Bronze Age Collapse never Happened? How would this not happening affect the Balkans, the Land of Punt, Yemen, Elam, Libya and Nubia?

How would this also impact the Nordic Bronze Age, the Italian Peninsula and Western Europe, the Indus Valley, the Caucasus, Crimea/the Black Sea coast and Anatolia? plus Afghanistan? (I mentioned these places because when discussing this alternate history timeline, I rarely* see anyone talking about how the Late Bronze Age Collapse not happening affects these locations ^^^.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus–Mesopotamia_relations
I think if the Bronze Age Collapse never occurred, then the Balkans would be influenced by the Mycenaean Greeks e.g. the Illyrians and Dacians would most likely use Linear B-derived scripts in their writing. If the Etruscans mirror the Rome of our timeline, they could take over a portion of Western Europe and we might then see a ''Rasennaic language family'' based on the Etruscan Language instead of the Romance languages. In addition, perhaps the Etruscan language could become a prestige language like Latin in our timeline. A possibility also is that the Minoans could have survived for a longer period of time like building colonies in North Africa and having a cold war-esque rivalry with mainland Mycenaean Greece. I think Nomadic Pastoral peoples like Iranian pastoralists would take over the Iranian Plateau and perhaps become Semi-Elamized (depending on how long Elam survives and it's overall cultural impact on the Iranic peoples). I also think the city of Wilusa would have become a major trading hub in Western Anatolia and built colonies around the Black Sea coast/southern Ukraine influencing the peoples that live there. Potentially at least one Wilusan colony could become a self-governing mercantile state and break off from Wilusa' grasp becoming the ''Carthage of the Black Sea'' developing a unique architecture and infastructure. The Balkans could be mostly under joint Illyrian-Dacian control (with a pretty massive Illyrian empire or Dacian state for instance) and could prevent South Slavic migrations into the Balkans at least for a while restricting them to just the Northern Balkans. I am not entirely sure what would have happened to the Thracians in this timeline, but it's possible that they could have built a thriving and strong civilization of their own with heavy Mycenaean Greek/Illyrian/Dacian influence (and maybe some Wilusan commercial influence too) in the Eastern Balkans. (Of course I assume that they aren't just culturally, linguistically and demographically assimilated into the Dacians.) In this ATL (Alternate Timeline) Southern Ukraine and Crimea, we could see Wilusa-based trade city-states and kingdoms with trading links to the Hittites and Wilusa. The peoples of this ATL Southern Ukraine would have developed their own civilizations based off Wilusa and maybe the Hittites. Since the Hittites had the first known constitutional monarchy, maybe some kingdoms then around the Black Sea coast and Southern Ukraine in general would be constitutional monarchies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittites#Government
In terms of Political Development, I believe Monarchies would be more predominant so the emergence of Republics in Europe would probably be delayed for a long time, but I could be wrong. The Nordic Bronze Age culture/people would have further developed their commercial connections with Mycenaean Greece so when they adopt a writing system (assuming they don't independently develop their own), it would be a modified Linear B script that they would use. As for Western Europe, they would have been a boom in cultural exchange between it and the Eastern Mediterranean while more continued connections between the Mycenaeans and the Nordic Bronze Age culture would have accelerated technological advancements and social stratification in Northern Europe. Though the Indus Valley Civilization had already collapsed by the time of the Bronze Age Collapse, a more stable Eastern Mediterranean could have indirectly benefited the inhabitants of the Indus Valley through the creation of new trade routes or technological innovations that would have eventually reached South Asia. The Caucasus could be a pretty significant trade corridor and with a more stable Eastern Mediterranean, regional players in the Caucasus and Black Sea regions might have emerged as strong trading centers, potentially rivalling established powers. So there would have been more prosperous Caucasian polities such as an earlier Georgian Kingdom for example. Mycenaean warfare tactics and weaponry could also be adopted too by whoever they end up influencing and Punt (which I assume was a Proto-Somali civilization) might have remained more independent or even developed a stronger political identity becoming more influential and wealthier via more trade relations with Nubia and Egypt. Yemen, another crucial trading partner of the Eastern Mediterranean, could have seen a continuation of established trade routes including a more powerful Sabaean Kingdom probably. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabaeans) In Libya, the late bronze age collapse being averted would likely have hastened the rise and development of complex societies there with Egypt-influenced Libyan Amazigh kingdoms worshipping Egyptian deities like Ra and the Garamantes would be more influential too maintaining trade connections/cultural-religious contacts with Egypt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garamantes
Along with everything that has been said, literacy would be spread faster as well around the Mediterranean Sea and conceivably in the Red Sea coast as well. Who knows, maybe even a free exchange of ideas and inventions would have feasibly happened accelerating technological development and this alternate Earth timeline could be even more advanced than our own. Afghanistan, located in the eastern fringes of this interconnected world, played a crucial role in the Bronze Age as a source of tin, a key ingredient for bronze metalworking. So if the Collapse didn't happen, then the Bronze Age cultures of Afghanistan would have more contact with the Iranian Peoples and Elamites potentially developing an earlier state-level civilization based on the ''Elamite model'' of governance.
Anyways, what do you guys think would have happened?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Libya

A Grand Strategy wargame based on this alternate timeline would be very cool.
 
Last edited:
Obligatory rant about GSG, especially of the Paradox style, and their evils. It would be Ireland or Britannia gameplay from I:R.
Without the LBC, you simply have a persistence of the old actors at the expense of the new ones, but it still doesn't change the mentioned areas' problems: low population, lack of resources and thus lack of economic complexity.
Without much later inventions, the Black Sea simply cannot sustain the same trading economy (and home agricultural yield) that 'made' Carthage; and the Dacians similarly aren't really 'ready for Empire' yet.
The richest areas remain those in the Middle East, and maybe Egypt remains under a Demotic dynasty, but beyond that, it's a butterflies' game that can result in a lot of different outcomes hard to parse from here.
 
Obligatory rant about GSG, especially of the Paradox style, and their evils. It would be Ireland or Britannia gameplay from I:R.
Without the LBC, you simply have a persistence of the old actors at the expense of the new ones, but it still doesn't change the mentioned areas' problems: low population, lack of resources and thus lack of economic complexity.
Without much later inventions, the Black Sea simply cannot sustain the same trading economy (and home agricultural yield) that 'made' Carthage; and the Dacians similarly aren't really 'ready for Empire' yet.
The richest areas remain those in the Middle East, and maybe Egypt remains under a Demotic dynasty, but beyond that, it's a butterflies' game that can result in a lot of different outcomes hard to parse from here.
What does GSG mean? And yeah, I didn't consider the Butterfly Effects too much.
 
Difficulty on avoiding of Bronze Era Collapse is that it was pretty complicated affect of climate change which had disastrous effect in Northern and North-Eastern Africa, lot of Middle East, Mediterranean region and Indus Valley. Some other nature disasters like volcano eruptions and severe earthquakes had too their role.

But if these not happen or are much milder Sea People probably not begin raid around Mediterranean and perhaps Indoeuropeans not push so much towards Europe. But there would be some instabilities in some old nations. Egyptian 20th Dynasty probably still would face long line of incompetent pharaohs after Ramesses III and IV even if Ramesses III's assassination is butterflied away (altough he probably wouldn't live long anymore taking that he had reigned already about 30 years and was already on his 60's). Hittites might still collapse due their internal troubles but it is possible that some strongman occur and unite Hittites again. Assyria and Babylon might have bit easier time assuming that Aramaic tribes not begin move around. There is too some intresting effects on Hebrew tribes. Indus Culture was probably already on decline so it probably would still collapse. Not then idea would Indo-Iranian tribes still take India or would it remain as Dravidian dominant.
 
Well why does the collapse not happen? Does a magic fish pop out of the Euphrates and say "Hey y'all, don't collapse on me"?
The collapse was inevitable, a combination of climate change, and complex states and trade routes collapsing as ironworking is discovered. Iron is a lot more plentiful and requires less social complexity to obtain and develop. Bronzeworking necessitates materials from hundreds of miles away, making maintaining peaceful trade routes critical. Iron is freaking everywhere, so trade routes collapse and violence increases (because trade routes don't need to be kept safe anymore, and other people's property should be our property now). Add environmental changes and shit's gonna collapse, yo. You can't stop it.
 
Well why does the collapse not happen? Does a magic fish pop out of the Euphrates and say "Hey y'all, don't collapse on me"?
The collapse was inevitable, a combination of climate change, and complex states and trade routes collapsing as ironworking is discovered. Iron is a lot more plentiful and requires less social complexity to obtain and develop. Bronzeworking necessitates materials from hundreds of miles away, making maintaining peaceful trade routes critical. Iron is freaking everywhere, so trade routes collapse and violence increases (because trade routes don't need to be kept safe anymore, and other people's property should be our property now). Add environmental changes and shit's gonna collapse, yo. You can't stop it.
I assume a slower transition to the Iron Age happens instead of a sudden collapse, also this is just a thought experiment for alternate historical discussion.
 
I assume a slower transition to the Iron Age happens instead of a sudden collapse, also this is just a thought experiment for alternate historical discussion.

Why anyone even guy with half of brain would ignore iron? It is such advanteous comparing to bronze. You can find iron from everywhere, it is much harder and iron sword is easier to keep sharp.

And another big factor was disastrous climate change. For that can't really do much. And another thing probably was too that everywhere just was too much of population so it hard search new places to move.
 
Top