Are there larger cycles than saeculums? It seems like a larger pattern in the range of anywhere from 800-1200 years might be possible divided up into four seasons of its own. The first Egyptian dynasty was founded around 3050 BC and the beginning of the bronze age in Mesopotamian dynastic period is estimated to have begun only a century later and the first Helladic period in Ancient Greece only a century after that.. This makes it plausible that all three dynasties were founded around the same time.


A thousand years later, Mesopotamia transitioned to the middle Bronze age, Greece to the Cyladic. Whole new empires in Mesopotamia like the Babylonians and Assyrians were founded in addition to Egypt beginning its Middle Kingdom period and the oldest known Chinese dynasty, the Xia dynasty is believed to have been founded.


A thousand years late seen the end of the Mycenaeans along with the Greek bronze age, and the end of the Mesopotamian bronze age as they entered the iron age.


Ancient China may have begun their Zhou dynasty around the same time but the transition from Ancient china to dynastic China did not begin until 221 BC with the founding of the Qin Dynasty. 1069 BC may have ushered in Egypt's Third Intermediate Period but Egypt's Classical Antiquity did not begin until 332 BC with the Hellenistic rule of Egypt in it Ptolemaic Period.


After Egypt with it's five millenniums of history, Ancient Rome might be the next best source for discovering cycles longer than saeculums, especially seasons in a longer cycle due to it being relatively more recent and familiar to western scholars. The Roman Kingdom is believed to be founded in 753 BC, the Roman Republic 509 BC, the Roman Empire 27 BC, the founding of Eastern Rome in 330 AD, the fall of Western Rome in 480 AD, and the fall of Eastern Rome in 1453 AD.


The middle ages was another thousand year period that bordered the fall of Rome and the founding of modern Europe with the Renaissance. A thousand years or so seems like the length of a larger cycle with dramatic changes every quarter way through it. I am not a scholar of any sort so I am having trouble noticing patterns in larger cycles and was hoping some of you people might notice larger cycle patterns and discuss it.


Breaking down the Anglo-Saxon Empire might show at least the seasons of a larger cycle but not likely the whole larger cycle since we are currently still living in it. Please share any similarities and differences in patterns you notice with the current Anglo-Saxon Empire period with other long periods of history.

Originally Posted by polargirl

Are there larger cycles than saeculums?

Here's one:

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...706#post465706

More on it:

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...024#post467024

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...431#post467431

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...598#post467598

[QUOTE=Mikebert;470916]Here's one:

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...706#post465706

/QUOTE]

Sorry I had to delete some of your links in your quote due to limits on new members.

Thank you for the links. They are mostly about mega awakenings. If only there was something on mega crises that founded huge empires and even mega highs and unravelings would be interesting.

While it is true that the Anglo-Saxon thread of civilization is currently on the ropes, it is also true that within that thread lies a smoldering ember. That ember is not of the traditions of Locke, (A) Smith et al. It is an older thing entirely. It is illiberal and draws more from Celtic and Northern European Antiquity (e.g. Saxon, Viking, Norman, etc) sources than from the Roman ones. We see where the ember momentarily burst into flame at times (the various British Civil Wars and Revolutions) but never quite came to lead. With a final breakdown of the Enlightenment, we may see a more drastic outcome. A new, more brutish version, which is overtly anti democratic and perhaps an absolute monarchy, may arise. Given the ever expanding power vacuum within the official leading institutions, and the likely anti corporate backlash, which would send corporatism to its death, a moment of opportunity will assert itself throughout the English speaking world. Egged on by the depredations of Neo-Islamism, Pan Slavism and Pan Hanism, the West and its leader, the Anglosphere, could easily come to be led by a warrior king, and with that, the full cycle will have completed.

Rising from the ashes, the Phoenix of a new Camelot.

I invite you to check out the cycle of civilization:
http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...549#post343549

http://philosopherswheel.com/fortunes.htm

And thanks for asking. It's good to see someone interested in a longer view.

A thousand years or so seems like the length of a larger cycle with dramatic changes every quarter way through it.

Exactly corresponds to my theory. Every 500 years a "civilization conjunction" occurs; half way through is the opposition; two cycles is 1000 years.

Here's an outline:

Reviewing the pattern then; we have the conjunctions, which correspond to crucial turning points in the times of transition:

1892------- Modern art, atomic physics, fall of European empires, etc.
1399------- Early Renaissance, Great Schism, first explorers, Turk invasions, Aztecs, etc.
905-------- Cluniac reforms, early European dynasties, Fall of Tang Dynasty, Fall of Mayans, Viking and Magyar invasions, etc.
411 A.D.--- Fall of Rome, fall of Tsin, barbarian invasions, Mayan cities, Ghana.
83 B.C.---- Sulla, Roman civil wars/conquests, Baghavad-Gita, etc.
577 B.C.--- Axis Age of enlightenment, Neo Babylonia, Celtic expansion, etc.
1071 B.C.-- Fall of New Kingdom in Egypt, Dorian invasions, Israel and Judea founded, fall of Shang and rise of Chou dynasty in China, etc.
1565 B.C.-- New Kingdom of Egypt founded, civilizations of Mycenae and Minoan Crete began, Shang Dynasty, Aryan invasions in India, Olmecs.
2058 B.C.-- Middle Kingdom of Egypt founded, Fall of Ur to Semitic invasions (probably after 2000 B.C.), Old Palace Crete, Chinese Hsia Dynasty.
2552 B.C.-- Old Kingdom of Egypt founded, Great Pyramids built, Ur & Akkad founded.
3045 B.C.-- Narmer founded Egypt, Sumerian cities, Indus Valley civilization.

One hundred years later came the Golden Age or Renaissance:

2000------- New Age Renaissance, global and green awakening.
1500------- Discovery of New World; High Renaissance of Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, Durer, etc.; Moguls, Suleiman, Ming China, etc.
1000------- Ottonian and Byzantine Renaissance, Sung China, Tamil India, etc.
520 A.D.--- Byzantine golden age, Mayan golden age, Hindu revival, Benedictine Order, Theodoric, etc.
10 A.D.---- Roman golden age, Sun pyramid, Mahayana Buddhism, Christ, etc.
470 B.C.--- Greek golden age, Greek and Roman Republics, Persian Empire, Buddhism, Benares, Chinese classic age, etc.
970 B.C.-- Israeli golden age (David and Solomon), Assyria, Korea, etc.
1470 B.C.-- Crete golden age (Minos), Egyptian golden age of Thutmose III, etc.
1960 B.C.-- Babylon, Rock tombs of Egypt built, etc.
2460 B.C.-- Ur golden age, Great Pyramid paintings.
2950 B.C.-- Sumerian golden age.

More details at the website.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

While it is true that the Anglo-Saxon thread of civilization is currently on the ropes, it is also true that within that thread lies a smoldering ember. That ember is not of the traditions of Locke, (A) Smith et al. It is an older thing entirely. It is illiberal and draws more from Celtic and Northern European Antiquity (e.g. Saxon, Viking, Norman, etc) sources than from the Roman ones. We see where the ember momentarily burst into flame at times (the various British Civil Wars and Revolutions) but never quite came to lead. With a final breakdown of the Enlightenment, we may see a more drastic outcome. A new, more brutish version, which is overtly anti democratic and perhaps an absolute monarchy, may arise. Given the ever expanding power vacuum within the official leading institutions, and the likely anti corporate backlash, which would send corporatism to its death, a moment of opportunity will assert itself throughout the English speaking world. Egged on by the depredations of Neo-Islamism, Pan Slavism and Pan Hanism, the West and its leader, the Anglosphere, could easily come to be led by a warrior king, and with that, the full cycle will have completed.

Rising from the ashes, the Phoenix of a new Camelot.

What is actually going to rise will be quite different. Pessimistic and backward-looking views usually turn out to be wrong. Over-optimism does too. But we do move forward. That's what looking at "larger cycles" from the longer view reveals.

It is clear where we are in history. The entire concept of particular national, racial or religious civilizations is OVER. There IS no "anglosphere, no neo-Islam or pan-slavism;" no "East or West." That world died forever in the trenches of the Great War. The new global civilization is what those soldiers died to bring into being, and the League of Nations was its beginning.

We'll still have nations, and for a while anyway, different races and religions. But there is one civilization, Planet Earth. That's the project of this civilization cycle that began 121 years ago. There is no other. We are all one people on one Earth, our home that is what we need to renew. Any other conception is irrelevant, and an often-deadly distraction. The Nazis tried to resurrect that old world you speak of, and created history's greatest cautionary tale. The direction of the future is directly opposite to that.

People want to be free, and that's the future. There will be no warrior king. Kings, and wars, belong to the world that died in the Great War. Innovation is rampant, and sooner or later, once the temporary 2010s Republican and DINO blocks fall, the USA will be in the vanguard again in its government as well as its technology. Those who aren't ready to move in the 2020s will be shunted aside in nothing flat. We'll be on our way.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

While it is true that the Anglo-Saxon thread of civilization is currently on the ropes, it is also true that within that thread lies a smoldering ember. That ember is not of the traditions of Locke, (A) Smith et al. It is an older thing entirely. It is illiberal and draws more from Celtic and Northern European Antiquity (e.g. Saxon, Viking, Norman, etc) sources than from the Roman ones. We see where the ember momentarily burst into flame at times (the various British Civil Wars and Revolutions) but never quite came to lead. With a final breakdown of the Enlightenment, we may see a more drastic outcome. A new, more brutish version, which is overtly anti democratic and perhaps an absolute monarchy, may arise. Given the ever expanding power vacuum within the official leading institutions, and the likely anti corporate backlash, which would send corporatism to its death, a moment of opportunity will assert itself throughout the English speaking world. Egged on by the depredations of Neo-Islamism, Pan Slavism and Pan Hanism, the West and its leader, the Anglosphere, could easily come to be led by a warrior king, and with that, the full cycle will have completed.

Rising from the ashes, the Phoenix of a new Camelot.

England was a miserable backwater during much of the world golden age of 750-1575 ad, (500 to 1650 ad in east asia) while you point out the flaws in the current world order as well as the islamist threat (although your fear of chinese nationalism, while warranted is exaggerated in my opinion, the slavs however will far more likely be victims rather than aggressors over the course of the 21st century, due to them sharing borders with the arabs and asians). You mention locke and the dutch mercantile system in earlier posts, yet that was not a golden era for the world, in fact the mercantile system is what killed the golden age. The world would have been a far better place spiritually and ideologically had the catholic hapsburgs won the religious wars. One of the main tasks of the 21st century is to undo that defeat while still establishing a meritocratic order in the US and the west. This would have far more similarities with the roman empire, byzantine empire, spanish empire, pre-louis XIV france, as well as with some ideas from nonwestern examples such as the tang, song and ming dynasties in china, and the nara, heian ,kamakura and tokugawa periods in japan. The only english exampes that are compatible would be plantagenet, lancastrian and tudor england (with the tudors mostly henry VII and henry VIII's england, not so much afterwards).

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

What is actually going to rise will be quite different. Pessimistic and backward-looking views usually turn out to be wrong. Over-optimism does too. But we do move forward. That's what looking at "larger cycles" from the longer view reveals.

It is clear where we are in history. The entire concept of particular national, racial or religious civilizations is OVER. There IS no "anglosphere, no neo-Islam or pan-slavism;" no "East or West." That world died forever in the trenches of the Great War. The new global civilization is what those soldiers died to bring into being, and the League of Nations was its beginning.

We'll still have nations, and for a while anyway, different races and religions. But there is one civilization, Planet Earth. That's the project of this civilization cycle that began 121 years ago. There is no other. We are all one people on one Earth, our home that is what we need to renew. Any other conception is irrelevant, and an often-deadly distraction. The Nazis tried to resurrect that old world you speak of, and created history's greatest cautionary tale. The direction of the future is directly opposite to that.

People want to be free, and that's the future. There will be no warrior king. Kings, and wars, belong to the world that died in the Great War. Innovation is rampant, and sooner or later, once the temporary 2010s Republican and DINO blocks fall, the USA will be in the vanguard again in its government as well as its technology. Those who aren't ready to move in the 2020s will be shunted aside in nothing flat. We'll be on our way.

Neither republicans nor democrats will triumph, although the overall outcome of the current crisis should favor the democrats. The real game-changer would be later when the restorationist revolution/reformation which would sweep away the current institutional order and replace it with the meritocratic state, the civil military education system, the meritocratic ruling class, the dissolution of current racial and regional divides in america (although class divides would weaken only to a limited extent), the creation of the universal superstate uniting anglophone, latin american, and to some extent indian and african cultures, as well as the nessessary conquest and pacification of the middle east.

Many of the comments in this thread are members projecting their own political beliefs onto the academic discussion of large saecular cycles. This is thread derailing garbage posting which is almost spam. Mikebert has interesting links and Eric the Green has an interesting theory in post#4.

Lets please get back onto the topic.

Thankyou.

Been having trouble posting a link-about syncretic religions becoming new folk religions. Given a cosmopolitan planet, will we see new syncretic religions arising in different parts of the world? Will they become new folk religions, and if so, will they persist? It seems that the appearance of religions is tied to the 500 year thing.

Wiki article for Syncretism

The next 2T will have a full blown Internet. Imagine someone coming across a web site with links to both native American religion and Mongolian shamanism.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Been having trouble posting a link-about syncretic religions becoming new folk religions. Given a cosmopolitan planet, will we see new syncretic religions arising in different parts of the world? Will they become new folk religions, and if so, will they persist? It seems that the appearance of religions is tied to the 500 year thing.

Definitely. Any more questions?

I do. Sorokin wrote about different world views in relation to spiritual currents, such as Ideational and Idealistic. How would these relate to the above?

Sorokin wrote about "Great Systems" appearing if a society is a crossroads for different currents. For example, its Great System may be one of the great religions of the world, if that society is a crossroads for different spiritual currents. It occurs to me that the Internet might turn out to be a catalyst for such. When? 2T.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

I do. Sorokin wrote about different world views in relation to spiritual currents, such as Ideational and Idealistic. How would these relate to the above?

That seems like a different question; we discussed this before. It is clear we have entered a global society, so syncretic is the new norm. How idealistic it might be is less clear. The 20th century showed trends away from the materialist trends that preceded it (I forget Sorokin's term for it). We are still fairly materialistic, but the long-term trend is certainly the other way. Perhaps syncretism might imply a more balanced era.

But I doubt the internet can be a catalyst for spirituality. That remains a low-tech pursuit. It does disseminate awareness of different cultures, so it is a stimulus for syncretism; as are lots of other similar trends (Joseph Campbell mentioned air travel, for example).

Concievably, with multiple spiritual currents, you can have a society with at least three different spiritual world views: Ideational, Idealistic, and mystical.

In ancient cultures there have also been amalgams in the visual arts.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

That seems like a different question; we discussed this before. It is clear we have entered a global society, so syncretic is the new norm. How idealistic it might be is less clear. The 20th century showed trends away from the materialist trends that preceded it (I forget Sorokin's term for it). We are still fairly materialistic, but the long-term trend is certainly the other way. Perhaps syncretism might imply a more balanced era.

But I doubt the internet can be a catalyst for spirituality. That remains a low-tech pursuit. It does disseminate awareness of different cultures, so it is a stimulus for syncretism; as are lots of other similar trends (Joseph Campbell mentioned air travel, for example).

This could have been lifted right out of a Thomas Friedman book. Then there is harsh reality. There are degrees of this harsh reality. At the most extreme are the obvious fiends who seek outright destruction of modernity, Taliban, etc. That one's a no brainer to comprehend. We must destroy them.

The tougher nut to crack wears a business suit and on the surface appears part of the global village. They are connected (e.g. "the electronic herd") and to the uninitiated can pass for being global citizens. But things are not always what they seem. Back in the 90s I spent some time in the "Former" East Bloc and PRC (for work stuff). Living in such places one becomes aware of certain undercurrents. Some of those undercurrents harken back to the Yuan Dynasty and other "barbarian" instances. You have people like Alex Dugin and even to a degree Putin and some of the CCP younger cadres, who embrace what is loosely referred to as "National Bolshevism." It's essentially Nazism based on the newer pan movements. Pan Hanism and Pan (Eastern) Slavism are the most typical pan movements in question.

This fits right in with Eurasianism. Hitler and Stalin would be proud.

All of this is a serious fly in the ointment of true globalism. I gave globalism are really good go, back when I still believed in the crap of Fukuyama.

Well, history did not end. War did not end. War will never end. People are what they are. It is in our DNA.

I think part of the illusion comes out of 2T-young Prophets may believe in total fellowship. Given a cosmopolitanism outlook, aging Prophets may gloss over cultural differences, and ignore conflicts between groups. On the other hand, Globalization is real-in the form of a race to the bottom.

Conceivably an alliance of convenience could form between the West and a grouping based on the Orthodox Church. (Or even a pan-Slavic grouping). Islam could become a common enemy, or even China. This may not be idealistic, but recall who allied with the Soviet Union during WWII.

Meanwhile in Nigeria, we have a refrain of "Onward Christian Soldiers:"

http://news.yahoo.com/specifics-elus...202733998.html

A global village? Not.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

All of this is a serious fly in the ointment of true globalism. I gave globalism are really good go, back when I still believed in the crap of Fukuyama.

Well, history did not end. War did not end. War will never end. People are what they are. It is in our DNA.

Well that's probably true, if some of the posts here on this forum (and other forums) are any indication.

Humans have a lot to learn. However, globalization is a reality, as of the 20th century. People can continue to be stupid; it's in our DNA. But in addition to DNA, also we have learning capacity. It helps us adapt to realities. It takes a long time for humans and their DNA to learn what the reality is, but that doesn't change the reality. The walls have fallen between peoples and cultures, and there's no turning back. The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. History will not end, but war will. In some places, war has ended. We can walk or drive the streets in peace. In some places, it has not. Some people are more stupid than others. But we learn and we grow.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Conceivably an alliance of convenience could form between the West and a grouping based on the Orthodox Church. (Or even a pan-Slavic grouping). Islam could become a common enemy, or even China. This may not be idealistic, but recall who allied with the Soviet Union during WWII.

All societies have some idiots who think in those terms. All societies also have some sensible people who don't.

What we have now are conflicts boiling up here and there, because some few folks still think they can lord over others. There are no clashes of civilizations. It won't happen. That day is past.

Don't know how international politics will play out. We may see a situation similar to the International Age. Those countries that thrive may be those that have the option to sit on the side lines-and have the wisdom to do so (like ancient Babylon).