"history" in Weblog

While I was in Central America over New Year I found myself trying to place the Maya, the Olmec and the Aztecs into the timeline of world history. I don’t think I’ve ever seen them in context before - everything I’ve read deals with a single empire, civilisation or region. So I decided to draw a graph to find out. The result is Rise & Fall: The Historical Trajectory of Power & Politics.

Setting about Wikipedia with random abandon, looking up dates and following links I have creating an editorial list of the things I think are noteworthy. I’ve played it fast and loose with dates and inclusions. Broadly speaking: early entries are cultures; late ones are empires. There’s a fine line between them, when there’s any line at all. Cultures tended to be subsumed so their “end” is debatable; empires were conquered but have a tendency to decline so their end is also in question. What I’m trying to say is that this chart is just my interpretation. If you want to know more, have a read. If you decide I’ve made a mistake, drop me an email.

Out of curiosity I also decided to try to give some indication of the cultural legacy of the world’s powers. As a rough yardstick I’m using the number of Google search results for the quoted search “name culture”. This is skewed towards those whose names have continued - Chinese and Egyptian, for example - and against those who have died out - like the Mauryan and Bagan - but it’s an interesting measure.

A couple of features I like:

The straight line marking the end of the Phoenician, Kushite, Greek and Persian empires as the Romans rise.

The big gap between the Romans and the Spanish - the Dark Ages - while Asia and the Middle East flourish.

The Maurya, apparently a golden age for the Indian subcontinent, fading from Western memory and the chart.

Enjoy!

Rise & Fall: The Historical Trajectory of Power & Politics.