Civilisations that Collapsed

The Rise of Bronze Age Empires alongside Trading Networks

When considering the collapse of the Bronze Age civilisations in the Near East, historians tend to neglect the role of a group of people who had emerged over a period of a thousand years into a significant power in their own right – the maritime traders and the merchants that operated and controlled the overland routes.

By Nick Nutter | Last Updated 2024-06-14 | Civilisations that Collapsed

This article has been visited 164 times

Bronze Age Warfare

The Palace-Temple Economy Model

Following the climatic drying event that occurred in the region centred on the year 2200 BC, the communities in the eastern Mediterranean recovered quickly (Click here for an account of the 4.2k yr BP climate event).

There were still large areas of small-scale mixed farming, mainly in the hills and mountains but an aerial observer would also see vast areas of plain and steppe dedicated to the growing of cereals and smaller, although still significant, patches of olives and vines grown for internal consumption as well as export.

As the recovery began, the inescapable elite emerged, land grabbed the best acreage and imposed their will on the residents in the surrounding areas. Large scale cereal cropping was necessary to feed the ever-growing number of dependant labourers, artisans, officials, retainers, and sycophantic followers that inevitably attach themselves to powerful rulers, not to mention the often-required military.

The days of elites storing food during the good times and distributing it to those in need during the bad times disappeared after the 4.2k yr. BP climatic event. The ‘modern’ palace was an extractive institution that gained its wealth from taxes on trade goods, agricultural products, estates, compulsory labour, and turning raw materials into desirable commodities for export. Some bronze age rulers found it expedient to gather wealth through raids on neighbouring city states and later, palace-temples and later still the kingdoms and empires that had evolved. The booty so gained would frequently include captives, particularly skilled craftspeople, as well as foodstuffs and the usual precious metals and stones.

The urban communities that grew around these elite figures tended to concentrate on the plains and steppes. They depended on the pastoral communities that lay beyond in the surrounding hills and mountains for milk products and wool. Some of these lowland communities grew to become cities covering a hundred hectares with populations well into five figures but the norm was a medium to small town with a few thousand inhabitants and a correspondingly smaller administrative centre. Some of the cities were located near a coast and had a port within their orbits, a scenario that became synonymous with the Mediterranean.

In a remarkably short space of time these urban centres sprouted palaces and, to affirm the link between the ruling elite and the gods, temples. Palace-temples in the largest cities could be as large as a small village.

The palaces and temples became ‘sink holes’ for necessities as well as incoming wealth. The accumulation and storage of precious raw materials created an inflationary demand for those materials and the deposition of the same materials in elaborate elite graves removed them from circulation altogether, thus perpetuating the inflationary cycle.

Although the palace-temple system was autocratic, the rule of the elites was not total. Away from the city hub there was still room for entrepreneurial activity, some of which was taxed, but much of which went on below the radar. Barter on a local scale ensured the survival of the peasant farmers.

Fortunately we know quite a bit about one palace-temple economy due to the recovery of 17,000 cuneiform tablets dated to between 2400 BC and 2300 BC.

The Palace-Temple Economy of Ebla

Ebla was one of the earliest kingdoms in Syria and was situated about 55 kilometres southwest of present day Allepo. Ebla became an important trade centre and its kingdom, gained by conquest or purchase of surrounding autonomous towns and villages, and strategically arranged marriages, eventually covered an area of 10,000 square kilometres, larger than even the Nile Delta or Cyprus. Ebla had more than sixty vassal kingdoms and city-states, including Hazuwan, Burman, Emar, Halabitu and Salbatu.

The first Eblaite kingdom has been described as the first recorded world power and reached its peak about 2340 BC. It was bounded to the west by coastal city states, to the south by small city states along the Orontes river, and to the north and east by Mari and other major polities on the Euphrates.

The Ebla Tablets
During its partial excavation, over 17,000 cuneiform tablets, written in a local west Semitic language and Akkadian, cover the period 2500 BC to about 2300 BC. They record trade agreements, administration of the palace economy, politics and elite intermarriage with other polities.

The kings of Ebla had contacts with neighbouring kings, notably the powerful sovereigns of Mari and Nagar, and with the kings of more distant regions, like Kish in Mesopotamia and Hamazi in western Iran. Excavations at Ebla have uncovered the oldest example of a written peace treaty, the treaty between Ebla and Abarsal (this could be the same city-state as Aburru, mentioned in the Mari texts), as well as proof of matrimonial alliances between the local kings and certain of their allies.

From the tablets, it appears that the kings of Ebla allowed councils and assemblies to make policy decisions and that access to those councils was less constricted. The Ebla kings were also less powerful and self-glorifying in art and literature than their contemporaries. Similarly, the temples in Ebla, though substantial, were less grand than others in the Mesopotamian arena.

The economy was based on large scale cereal farming with vines and olives on higher ground. The elite were not shy in awarding vast tracts of land to their supporters; one queen of Ebla is recorded as giving a priestess land with 16,320 units of olives, 8,800 units of sowable land, 630 units of vineyard. Tens of thousands of sheep supplied wool to a textile industry mostly owned by the royal family and elites, altogether a few hundred people. Most of the products of industry were for export to other city states and polities, Mari was a major market for goods from Ebla, the remainder went to the elite, and filtered down through their retainers and servants. One of the perhaps unanticipated consequences was that the Ebla fashions of the time, dress and jewellery, took on a distinctly ‘palace’ look.

The archives also give us a view of daily activities. At any one time, there were 800 women weaving, grinding cereals and cooking, 500 smiths, 150 carpenters, 35 physicians, 30 musicians, and 14 barbers all supported by handouts from the palace.

The Ebla tablets offer a treasure trove of information about the Early Bronze Age in the region, including Canaan. Notably, they contain the earliest known mentions of "Canaanites," "Ugarit," and "Lebanon."

The tablets depict Ebla as a major trading hub. Economic records dominate the collection, detailing Ebla's commercial and political ties with other Levantine cities. They also meticulously log the city's imports and exports. For instance, the tablets reveal Ebla's production of various beers, including one seemingly named after the city itself, "Ebla."

Significantly, the tablets point to Ebla's role in establishing a complex trade network throughout northern Syria's city-states. This system, clearly documented in the texts, effectively united the region into a commercial community.

But it was trade in metals that brought in the greatest rewards. Silver was the value standard at the time with gold at Ebla being worth between two and five times that of silver, and copper about one twentieth the value of silver.

According to the archives, forty-five kilograms of gold and between two hundred and fifty and four hundred and fifty kilogrammes of silver passed through the palace on an annual basis with the largest shipments being 1.5 tonnes. Some of the silver and gold came from the peasant farmers who were expected to pay their taxes in metallic form, a clear indication that primary products such as corn, and manufactured products such as textiles, had a relevant metallic value, but most silver and gold came from trade. Ebla played the metal commodities market and was advantageously placed between Egypt, Mesopotamia and Anatolia to do so. In Mesopotamia the value of silver to gold was 10:1 and in Egypt the ratio was 1:2 to 1:1.35.

Ebla became what is termed a ‘palace-temple economy’, an economic model that would become common across the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East.

Ebla was destroyed between about 2400 and 2290 BC. The exact reason for the destruction is not known. One possibility is that the destruction was caused by an attack from Mari in revenge for an Ebla raid. The most likely reason is that the destruction occurred at the same time as Sargon of Akkad took over neighbouring Mari.

From City-States to Empires: A Shift in Power

During the third millennium BC, southern Mesopotamia witnessed a gradual shift in power dynamics. Initially, city-states like Ebla, Uruk under Enshakushana and Umma under Lugal-zagesi achieved temporary dominance over their neighbours. The cluster of city-states in the floodplains of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers comprised the Sumerian civilisation. Around 2340 BC, Sargon of Akkad established the world's first empire, uniting all Mesopotamian city-states and stretching its influence into eastern Syria.

The Rise of Rival Kingdoms and the Power Shift

The 2nd millennium BC witnessed a shift from a single dominant power to a more balanced international landscape. No single kingdom held absolute sway, paving the way for the emergence of several powerful and stable states. These new powers dominated their regions and held varying degrees of control over vassal states, though these allegiances often fluctuated over time. Rivalries between the dominant kingdoms frequently arose over the hegemony of these vassal states, sometimes erupting into open conflict.

The Amorite Era (2004-1595 BC)

The first half of the 2nd millennium BC was dominated by the Amorite kingdoms. These kingdoms, flourishing from 2004 to 1595 BC, established a kind of common ground for political practices across a vast region stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Zagros Mountains. Mesopotamia and Syria witnessed the rise and fall of several dominant kingdoms. Initially, Isin and Larsa, successors to the Ur empire, held sway. However, Babylon eventually emerged as the dominant power under Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) and his successors, while Elam's attempts at regional dominance ultimately failed. In Syria, the kingdom of Yamhad (Aleppo) enjoyed a period of prominence, benefiting from the decline of its rivals Mari and Qatna during the 18th and 17th centuries BC.

The Rise of New Powers (17th-12th Centuries BC)

The Amorite period ended with the destruction by the Hittites of its two major kingdoms . The Hittites had consolidated their control over eastern Anatolia by the late 17th century BC. Concurrently, the Hurrians established increasingly powerful political entities, culminating in the formation of the Kingdom of Mitanni. These two emerging powers, along with Egypt, ushered in a new era characterized by larger, more powerful, and culturally diverse kingdoms. Several decades after the expulsion of the Hyksos between 1491 and 1480 BC, Egypt launched military campaigns into the Levant, expanding its empire until it bordered that of Mitanni.

This shift marked a new balance of power. Most of the former Amorite kingdoms became vassals to these new dominant forces, with the notable exception of Babylon, which remained a significant power under the Kassite dynasty (1595-1155 BC). The rulers of these dominant kingdoms were considered "great kings" amongst themselves, operating on an equal footing. By the 14th century BC, Assyria had replaced Mitanni as one of these major powers. Elam, particularly during the 13th and 12th centuries BC, could also be considered a significant player on the international stage.

A Note on Bronze Age Warfare

Warfare is a non-productive policy, costly to both the aggressor and defender in terms of materials, resources, and manpower. The aims of a bronze age aggressor were base, to increase their wealth and stock of necessities by plundering the defender. Their secondary aim was to increase their population tax base by taking captives or taking control of a population centre along with its rural outskirts. In the latter case, warfare often resulted in a decimated city and a ruined hinterland lacking sufficient urban or rural population to rejuvenate itself.

In many cases, the conquered city state became a vassal city state of the aggressor. In some instances, the defending king was re-instated on his throne. This policy sometimes worked and sometimes backfired. Vanquished vassal city states were expected to contribute wealth in the form of taxes and commodities, artisans and craftspeople, and armed forces, to the conquering city state.

The exception, fortunately rare even in the bronze age, was the elite ruler who was only concerned with personal aggrandisement and glory, for its own sake or to take his populations’ attention away from domestic problems.

Each city state and later, empire or kingdom, had to maintain a defence force of one form or another, to deter and, when necessary, defend, the homeland, itself a huge expense.

The Bronze Age Civilisations

Middle East about 1300 BC

By about 1300 BC, there were six major civilisations in the Middle East, the Mycenaean Civilisation, the Hittite Empire, the Middle Babylonian Kingdom, the Egyptian New Kingdom, the Kingdom of Mitanni, and the Middle Assyrian Kingdom. The Middle Elamite Kingdom would emerge later, about 1210 BC, by which time Mitanni had been subsumed into neighbouring civilisations.

In addition to the ‘traditional’ bronze age civilisations we must also add Cyprus and the Canaanite city states because they played a pivotal role in the rise and fall of the recognised bronze age civilisations.

The Growth of the Trading Networks

All the bronze age ruling elite appreciated the negative impact of warfare to a greater or lesser extent. They developed interconnected trading networks that also functioned as channels for diplomacy. The coastal city-states provided the connection between the overland traders and the maritime merchants. Some of the city states housed colonists from other city states who functioned as freight forwarders and diplomatic missions on behalf of their mother polity, similar to foreign embassies and consulates found in major cities today.

These trading networks developed concurrently with the rise of the city states and the subsequent empires and kingdoms and were an integral part of that growth. One would not have happened without the other.

It was over these networks that people, ideas, news, knowledge, and commodities flowed. The networks help explain the synonymity of the physical structure and administration of the dozens of city states that were spread out across the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean. Only when the networks broke down was warfare likely, at least in theory.

Although the states nominally controlled the networks, they were operated by merchants and traders and their representatives some of whom were native to the state, some of whom were colonists. Many of these ‘companies,’ such as that at Kültepe-Kanesh, operated under little palatial scrutiny and were able to accumulate lucrative profits.

Merchants and traders are by nature peripatetic, moving around the land and seascape, crossing boundaries, by necessity multi-lingual, with allegiance primarily to themselves and their families. Over time these dominant individuals became less responsive to the control of the rulers whose territory they traversed or sailed between. The term ‘port power’ has been coined for this phenomenon at sea, perhaps ‘company power’ would suffice for this phenomenon on land.

The Mit Rahina Inscriptions

The amount of material that can be shown to have been imported that has been recovered by archaeologists from all the sites in the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East and all the cargoes recovered from shipwrecks by underwater archaeologists is only a tiny fraction of the total amount of trade goods going back and forth in the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean.

The ancient Egyptian king Amenemhat II, who ruled between 1929 and 1895 BC, had two of his state sponsored expeditions recorded on a granite block that was later reused as a base for a statue of Ramesses II at Memphis. It is known as the Mit Rahina Inscription.

One military expedition to the north, records the destruction of two towns, Luai, and Lasy. The whereabouts of these towns is not known. The returning expedition brought back 1554 prisoners as well as furniture, precious stones and raw and worked metals. The prisoners were apparently put to work building a pyramid for Amenemhat.

A second expedition, this time mercantile, to the Levant consisted of two ships. They brought back 231 lengths of Lebanon cedar wood, 23 kilogrammes of silver, 133 kilogrammes of bronze, 435 kilogrammes of copper, 19 kilogrammes of white lead, 37 bronze daggers decorated with ivory, gold and silver, 225 kilogrammes of emery wood, 73 fig trees, and 537 kilogrammes of grinding sand, precious stones, oils and resins, and spices such as cinnamon and coriander. There is also mention of sixty-five humans. It is unclear whether they were captives or skilled workers, part of an agreed exchange.

Bronze Age Shipwrecks

Cargo hold of Uluburun

Two bronze age shipwrecks also illustrate not only the quantities of goods in transit by sea but also the diverse source of those goods. It is likely that both were sponsored by merchants rather than a state.

The Uluburun sank between 1335 and 1305 BC off the coast of Türkiye. The Uluburun ship was a merchant vessel that was carrying at least twenty tonnes of cargo on its final voyage.

In the hold was 10 tonnes of Cypriot copper in the form of 348 ox hide ingots together with 1 tonne of tin ingots from the Mušiston mine in Uzbekistan and the Kestel mine in Anatolia, 150 Canaanite jars contained half a tonne of terebinth resin and oil, 350 kg of blue glass ingots from Egypt and an unknown quantity of fabric of which only a few red and purple threads remain, a consignment of elephant and hippopotamus tusks and carved ivories, blackwood or ebony from the Sudan, arrowheads, spearheads, maces, daggers, a lugged shaft-hole axe, four bronze swords (Canaanite, Mycenaean, and central Mediterranean types), a large number of tools included sickles, awls, drill bits, a saw, a pair of tongs, chisels, axes, a ploughshare, whetstones, and adzes, myrrh and frankincense, ostrich eggs, gold, silver and tin objects, a gold masked bronze goddess, several Cypriot storage pithoi, some containing jugs, bowls and lamps, Aegean pots, mainly stirrup jars, ritual vessels made from faience, thousands of beads, Baltic amber, a stone ceremonial axe from the Danube, musical instruments including a tortoiseshell lyre, bronze finger cymbals and an ivory trumpet, basketry, matting, rope, food plants such as olives, grapes, almond, figs, pomegranates, coriander, capers and safflower, orpiment used for tanning or dyeing, murex opercula used as a medicinal product, bone gaming pieces and fishing gear, 149 balance weights divided into sets to correspond to the different standards prevalent in the eastern Mediterranean and Levant, cylinder seals and scarabs, including one bearing the cartouche of queen Nefertiti, and a small folding writing board (a diptych) stored in a pithoi with a pristine wax surface ready to record a transaction.

The Cape Gelidonya shipwreck dates to about 1200 BC, about a hundred years after the Uluburun. It also sank off the Turkish coast. Whereas the Uluburun cargo could be described as general cargo, that of the Gelidonya was more orientated to the transport and trading of metals.

A major part of the cargo consisted of copper ingots; forty of these, including ten of which are only half preserved, are the so-called “ox-hide” shape and more than twenty were round “bun” ingots. Twenty-seven of the ox-hide ingots bore foundry marks, most, if not all, of which indicate a Cypriot origin. With the copper ingots was found several piles of white, powdery material, identified by Turyag Laboratories of Izmir as tin oxide.

Bronze implements were abundant: chisels, knives, hoes, flat and double - axes, axe-adzes, picks, hoes or plough shares, spear- heads, bracelets, awls, bowl rims and handles, and a bronze mirror, hammer, spade, and a kebab spit. Several of the tools bore marks which seem to be Cypro-Minoan. Some of these objects were intact, but many were broken and found in groups with ingot fragments, indicating that they were being transported not for their functional use but for the metal of which they were made, in other words, scrap metal.

The vessel also contained personal items belonging to the captain and crew that indicated links with Syria and Cyprus.

A full account of the Uluburun, Gelidonya and other bronze age shipwrecks is in the Bronze Age Shipwrecks in the Mediterranean Sea series of articles.

The Kanesh Archive

Donkey caravan

Just as the tonnage of freight in transit at sea at any one time was considerable, so too was that carried by overland caravans.

Kültepe-Kanesh was a city state in the middle of Anatolia. The city contained a large Assyrian karum, or colony, who organised the Assyrian trading network in Anatolia. The karum was composed of families that hailed from Assur, some 775 kilometres away. There were over twenty such karums in Anatolia alone. Kültepe became a key centre of culture and commerce between Anatolia, Syria, and Mesopotamia. The private archives of the karum merchants have yielded 23,500 clay tablets and envelopes to date. They cover the period 1920 – 1850 BC.

One tablet even details the formation of a 'limited company'. A merchant by the name of Amur Ishtar, oversaw the formation of an association between twelve merchants. The total fixed capital was 15 kilogrammes of gold that would be held for a period of twelve years. Profits from trading ventures were shared in a 1:3 ratio, one share to Amur, the rest divided between the merchants. A get out clause stipulated that, if a shareholder wanted to withdraw his capital before the end of the twelve years, he would receive 4 kilogrammes of silver for every kilogramme of gold invested. This tablet could be proof of the first company formation in the world?

The merchants ran donkey caravans trading gold and silver from Anatolia for textiles from Mesopotamia and tin from Uzbekistan. The caravans were enormous. One is recorded as consisting of 200 to 250 donkeys, each carrying sixty kilogrammes of metal or textiles. The journey took between thirty-five and forty days. It has been calculated that, over the seventy years covered by the records, over one hundred kilogrammes of silver and a thousand large, heavy textiles were moved annually.

It is interesting that tin was being exported into the Mediterranean area from Uzbekistan as early as 1920 BC. Clearly tin from Anatolia was not sufficient to meet increasing demand.

Ancient Maritime and Land Based Trade Routes in the Mediterranean Basin

More information about the development of maritime and land based trade networks can be found here.

---