Active Reading – Drews – 1-7, 21-30, Chapters 5-6

 Briefly summarize what appears to have happened at the site of Mycenae.

◦ Much of the citadel was damaged (as well as a good amount of the surrounding lands).
Later, the granary of the city caught fire. For those who remained, they were not doing so as
a ‘kingdom’ of any great size, if at all.
 What are the pro/cons to the “ironworking” theories? What are the pros/cons to the drought
theory?
◦ The pros for the ironworking theory are that it allows for all sorts of explanations about who
exactly had the iron, and what they did with it, and what effects that had to cause the
catastrophe, while the core idea of “ironworking appears around this time, so it might have
been a cause of the collapse” remains, however the cons of the theory are the simple fact
that archaeological evidence shows that iron use did not become common until over a
century after the catastrophe.
◦ The pros for the drought theory are that such an event is viable to have happened, and that
there is no real evidence of any sort of migration into Greece, ergo that Mycenaean Greece
was “not destroyed but abandoned”, as well that a drought is completely within the realms
of possibility to have caused the catastrophe as we understand it. The cons, however, come
in the form of there being no real evidence of such a climate shift, and in fact, evidence such
as the destruction of food and food containers in the area, as well as no mention of famine
or drought in the records we have prior to the catastrophe, poke holes in it.
 Was Drews fair in his evaluation of these theories? Do you find either viable?
◦ I think the issues of the ironworking theory are the most atrocious, given the complete
anachronistic nature of iron becoming common only long after the catastrophe. Droughts
can come on quickly enough that we may simply not have records of it, but even to that end,
I don’t think that it would be the singular cause of the collapse, that rather it was likely a
combination of multiple issues over a short period of time that broke the camels back
◦ I think Drews may have been a bit more dismissive of them than I would have, given what
evidence I have for and against them from his presentation, but I also know that I can tend
to not be as dismissive of outlandish ideas as might be warranted, so perhaps my instincts
are off in this regard.