It probably should be noted that history gets really fucky before the Iron Age.
Bronze age collapse means that most of the writing and tradition before the year 1000BCE has been lost. Furthermore, the concept of history itself was only invented in 500BCE or so by Herodotus. So the fragments of ‘history’ found before that time is basically religion.
The problem with Religion in trying to understand earlier stuff is that it’s filled with myth and mythology. We can say that a city exploded some time in that period (Given the Hebrew story of Soddom and Gamora) , which other religions at the time concur with. But the exact means at which that happened is lost to time
Asking about Bronze Age tactics is almost as relevant to asking a Dinosaur expert what color the dinos were.
No Bronze Age expert has any idea how tactics back then worked. All we have are a bunch of old armor and old weapons. We don’t know their organization, their supply lines, their capabilities or philosophies. People probably killed each other and had wars but we don’t know how.
The period between 4000BCE and 1000BCE is extremely mysterious. To the point that the few documents we find we don’t even know how to read. So even if someone invented history at that time, we won’t know how to read it today.
We do have some idea from preserved writing and depictions contemporary with the Bronze Age. The evidence is much less plentiful than in later societies, though, which, themselves, are often hotly debated due to the paucity or vagueness of available evidence.
The period between 4000BCE and 1000BCE is extremely mysterious. To the point that the few documents we find we don’t even know how to read. So even if someone invented history at that time, we won’t know how to read it today.
We can read hieroglyphics and most forms of cuineform.
I’d argue that hieroglyphics and cuneiform are exceptions to the norm. They only cover the largest of ancient civilizations with the largest troves of writing.
IIRC, stuff like Indus River Valley writing has never been decoded.
It probably should be noted that history gets really fucky before the Iron Age.
Bronze age collapse means that most of the writing and tradition before the year 1000BCE has been lost. Furthermore, the concept of history itself was only invented in 500BCE or so by Herodotus. So the fragments of ‘history’ found before that time is basically religion.
The problem with Religion in trying to understand earlier stuff is that it’s filled with myth and mythology. We can say that a city exploded some time in that period (Given the Hebrew story of Soddom and Gamora) , which other religions at the time concur with. But the exact means at which that happened is lost to time
Asking about Bronze Age tactics is almost as relevant to asking a Dinosaur expert what color the dinos were.
No Bronze Age expert has any idea how tactics back then worked. All we have are a bunch of old armor and old weapons. We don’t know their organization, their supply lines, their capabilities or philosophies. People probably killed each other and had wars but we don’t know how.
The period between 4000BCE and 1000BCE is extremely mysterious. To the point that the few documents we find we don’t even know how to read. So even if someone invented history at that time, we won’t know how to read it today.
We do have some idea from preserved writing and depictions contemporary with the Bronze Age. The evidence is much less plentiful than in later societies, though, which, themselves, are often hotly debated due to the paucity or vagueness of available evidence.
We can read hieroglyphics and most forms of cuineform.
I’d argue that hieroglyphics and cuneiform are exceptions to the norm. They only cover the largest of ancient civilizations with the largest troves of writing.
IIRC, stuff like Indus River Valley writing has never been decoded.
The Rosetta Stone came in very handy.