Author(s): John Haldon, Neil Roberts, Adam Izdebski, Dominik Fleitmann, Michael McCormick, Marica Cassis, Owen Doonan, Warren Eastwood, Hugh Elton, Sabine Ladst?tter, Sturt Manning, James Newhard, Kathleen Nicoll, Ioannes Telelis and Elena Xoplaki

Published by: The MIT Press

翻譯；神尾智代

This article, which is part of a larger project, examines cases in which high-resolution archaeological, textual, and environmental data can be integrated with longer-term, low-resolution data to afford greater precision in identifying some of the causal relationships underlying societal change. The issue of how environmental, especially climatic, disruptions affect human societies and political systems has begun to attract a great deal of attention from the scientific community and the general public. Recent studies suggest that one possible result of certain climatic events is an increase in violence over contested resources - a conclusion that has significant consequences for, at least, policymakers, investment bankers, insurance companies, and the military.

????????? 這篇文章是一個更大項目的一部分，研究了高分辨率考古、文本和環(huán)境數(shù)據(jù)可以與長期、低分辨率數(shù)據(jù)相結合的案例，以便更準確地識別一些潛在的社會因果關系。改變 環(huán)境，尤其是氣候的破壞如何影響人類社會和政治系統(tǒng)的問題已開始引起科學界和公眾的極大關注。最近的研究表明，某些氣候事件的一個可能結果是對有爭議的資源的暴力行為增加——這一結論至少對決策者、投資銀行家、保險公司和軍隊產生了重大影響。

The series of important articles about the climate and environment of the Roman Empire and early medieval Europe that this journal has recently published makes a significant, and accessible, contribution to the debate about the influence of environmental factors on human society. This article focuses on the Byzantine world - in particular, Anatolia, which for several centuries was the heart of that world - through regional and microregional case studies, addresses some of the challenges raised in those discussions, and promotes further collaboration between historians, archaeologists, and climate scientists.

????????? 該雜志最近發(fā)表的關于羅馬帝國和中世紀早期歐洲氣候和環(huán)境的系列重要文章，為關于環(huán)境因素對人類社會影響的辯論做出了重要且易于理解的貢獻。本文重點關注拜占庭世界——特別是幾個世紀以來一直是那個世界中心的安納托利亞——通過區(qū)域和微觀區(qū)域案例研究，解決了這些討論中提出的一些挑戰(zhàn)，并促進了歷史學家、考古學家、 和氣候科學家的研究。

HISTORIOGRAPHY, METHOD, AND INTERDISCIPLINARITY

歷史學、方法和跨學科

More and more historians are trying to integrate environmental explanations into the established explanatory models, sometimes with consider able differences in interpretive outcomes. Witness, for example, Ellenblum's account of the collapse of certain eastern Mediterranean political systems in the eleventh through twelfth centuries, and Raphael's discussion of extreme weather events in the later medieval and early modern periods. Bulliet's discussion of the decline of Iranian cotton production during the eleventh century draws a causal association between the rise of cotton production and the spread of Islam and a declining Iranian agriculture triggered by a significant cooling of the climate that lasted for over a century. This development was associated with the arrival of Turkish nomadic groups in Iran, establishing a political dominance that lasted for centuries, as well as with the lucrative, but temperature-sensitive, cross-breeding of different types of camel. White's work on climate and crisis in the Ottoman Empire also goes be yond the traditional textual sources of most historians. He observes that historians pay far too little attention to the ways in which social and economic structures respond to climatic change and state systems deal with short-term crises.

????????? 越來越多的歷史學家試圖將環(huán)境解釋整合到已建立的解釋模型中，有時在解釋結果上存在明顯差異。例如，Ellenblum 對 11 世紀到 12 世紀某些東地中海政治體系崩潰的描述，以及拉斐爾對中世紀晚期和現(xiàn)代早期極端天氣事件的討論。 Bulliet 對 11 世紀伊朗棉花產量下降的討論將棉花產量的增加與伊斯蘭教的傳播與持續(xù)一個多世紀的氣候顯著降溫引發(fā)的伊朗農業(yè)衰退之間的因果關系聯(lián)系起來。這一發(fā)展與土耳其游牧民族到達伊朗有關，建立了持續(xù)幾個世紀的政治主導地位，以及利潤豐厚但對溫度敏感的不同類型駱駝的雜交。懷特關于奧斯曼帝國氣候和危機的著作也超越了大多數(shù)歷史學家的傳統(tǒng)文本來源。他觀察到，歷史學家對社會和經(jīng)濟結構如何應對氣候變化以及國家體系應對短期危機的方式關注得太少。

The problematical relationship between environmental and social history has been noted before in critiques of reductionist models. Rosen is particularly clear on this matter, pointing to the many different strategies that societies might use to overcome significant environmental challenges or shifts in their circumstances. Historians understand causal relationships from the point of view of multiple interrelated social, economic, and political factors, whereas climate scientists think in terms of environmental impacts on agriculture, warfare, demographics, and long-term stability. Those who study ancient climates have a range of tools at their disposal - proxy data deriving from such biological and geological climate archives as tree rings, stalagmites, and marine and continental sediment sequences. Historians can misconstrue or misuse these environmental data, generalizing from limited datasets or misappropriating low-resolution data: Insensitivity to both limitations in data and limitations in interpretation are pitfalls for everyone.

????????? 環(huán)境史和社會史之間的問題關系之前已經(jīng)在對還原論模型的批評中提到過。羅森在這個問題上特別清楚，指出社會可能會使用許多不同的策略來克服重大的環(huán)境挑戰(zhàn)或環(huán)境的變化。歷史學家從多個相互關聯(lián)的社會、經(jīng)濟和政治因素的角度來理解因果關系，而氣候科學家則從環(huán)境對農業(yè)、戰(zhàn)爭、人口統(tǒng)計和長期穩(wěn)定的影響方面考慮。研究古代氣候的人可以使用一系列工具——來自樹木年輪、石筍以及海洋和大陸沉積物序列等生物和地質氣候檔案的代理數(shù)據(jù)。歷史學家可能會誤解或濫用這些環(huán)境數(shù)據(jù)，從有限的數(shù)據(jù)集進行概括或濫用低分辨率數(shù)據(jù)：對數(shù)據(jù)限制和解釋限制不敏感是每個人的陷阱。

By contrast, the higher-resolution evidence deployed by historians and archaeologists, though sometimes facilitating detailed narrative accounts of events or indirectly reflecting adjustments in economic activity, the nature of warfare, or the quality and quantity of harvests and crops, can nevertheless suffer from a consider able degree of uncertainty and subjectivity. In some cases, scholars have only recently begun to study the data sources - such as the archaeobotanical evidence and the stable-isotope records from archaeological materials - that are relevant to a particular climate. Apart from the methodological issues involved and the difficulties associated with reconciling qualitative with quantitative data, the best way around these problems is for the different specialists to work together with a common project in mind.

????????? 相比之下，歷史學家和考古學家部署的更高分辨率的證據(jù)，雖然有時有助于對事件的詳細敘述，或間接反映經(jīng)濟活動、戰(zhàn)爭性質或收成和作物的質量和數(shù)量的調整，但仍可能受到 考慮到一定程度的不確定性和主觀性。在某些情況下，學者們最近才開始研究與特定氣候相關的數(shù)據(jù)來源——例如考古植物學證據(jù)和考古材料的穩(wěn)定同位素記錄。 除了所涉及的方法問題和協(xié)調定性數(shù)據(jù)與定量數(shù)據(jù)相關的困難之外，解決這些問題的最佳方法是讓不同的專家一起工作，同時考慮一個共同的項目。

Until recently, archaeologists who investigate the earliest hu man societies have tended to be far more familiar with these matters than have those who study historical periods with written re cords. Current debates about a major period of aridity in the Mediterranean between c. 2300 and 2000 B.C.E. (the so-called 4.2 ka event), for example, depend largely upon archaeological data to infer societal adaptations to drought (although the phenomenon appears also to be evident in a range of palaeoclimatic records). They are usually based on a different approach to the subject than historians normally adopt. Questions of chronological resolution and scale remain a major challenge for prehistoric studies (though increasingly refined, as shown by the 4.2 ka event), but the techniques developed in fields outside the traditional scope of historians can offer new insights about the Roman and medieval worlds.

?????????? 直到最近，研究最早人類社會的考古學家往往比研究有文字記錄的歷史時期的考古學家更熟悉這些問題。目前關于公元前 2300 年和 2000 年（所謂的 4.2 ka 事件） 之間的地中海主要干旱時期的爭論。例如，在很大程度上取決于考古數(shù)據(jù)來推斷社會對干旱的適應（盡管這種現(xiàn)象在一系列古氣候記錄中似乎也很明顯）。 它們通?；谂c歷史學家通常采用的不同的主題方法。年代分辨率和規(guī)模問題仍然是史前研究的主要挑戰(zhàn)（盡管越來越精細，如 4.2 ka 事件所示），但在歷史學家傳統(tǒng)范圍之外的領域開發(fā)的技術可以提供關于羅馬和中世紀世界的新見解。

Historians of more recent periods, especially those who focus on cultural or socio-economic history, are often resistant to thinking about climate as a causal element. This reluctance frequently carries the (not always unreasonable) excuse that such explanations reduce human history to climate history, thus ignoring both social complexity and multi-causality, but it just as frequently reflects a disinclination to deal with the bewildering complexity of scientific evidence and methodologies. What is more, due to differences in the quantity and scope of the available evidence, climate study of the late-antique and medieval Middle East is considerably different from that of early modern Europe. Although valuable written evidence is available, in many cases it is insufficient to infer specific reactions to the extreme weather events associated with climate fluctuations. Wherever there is also a lack of high-quality palaeo-climatic data, attempts to establish firm links between climate and society become complicated.

????????? 最近時期的歷史學家，尤其是那些關注文化或社會經(jīng)濟歷史的歷史學家，往往拒絕將氣候視為因果因素。這種不情愿經(jīng)常帶有（并非總是不合理的）借口，即這種解釋將人類歷史簡化為氣候歷史，從而忽略了社會復雜性和多重因果關系，但它同樣經(jīng)常反映出不愿意處理科學證據(jù)和方法的令人眼花繚亂的復雜性.更重要的是，由于現(xiàn)有證據(jù)的數(shù)量和范圍的差異，對古代和中世紀中東的氣候研究與早期現(xiàn)代歐洲的氣候研究有很大不同。盡管可以獲得有價值的書面證據(jù)，但在許多情況下，不足以推斷對與氣候波動相關的極端天氣事件的具體反應。只要缺乏高質量的古氣候數(shù)據(jù)，在氣候和社會之間建立牢固聯(lián)系的嘗試就會變得復雜。

The interest of historians and archaeologists in merging palaeoclimatic data with traditional historical sources has been growing since the 1980s, when the now-classic volume edited by Rotberg and Rabb appeared. Virtually every period and region has been drawn into the discussion, and a number of individual studies, as well as larger projects, have brought specialists from different fields and disciplines together with a view toward analyzing particular pre-modern historical periods in specific regions of the world.

????????? 自 1980 年代以來，歷史學家和考古學家對將古氣候數(shù)據(jù)與傳統(tǒng)歷史資料相結合的興趣與日俱增，當時由 Rotberg 和 Rabb 編輯的經(jīng)典著作出現(xiàn)。幾乎每個時期和地區(qū)都被卷入了討論中，一些單獨的研究以及更大的項目將來自不同領域和學科的專家聚集在一起，以分析世界特定地區(qū)的特定前現(xiàn)代歷史時期。

During the last few years, historians and archaeologists of the Roman world have begun to focus on the relationship between climate/environment and the Empire's ascendance, thereby raising a series of broader questions about the causal connections between political and social-cultural evolution and climate. In Rome's case, they have demonstrated a distinct parallel between a period of stable climatic conditions and the Empire's rise and consolidation, and between a subsequent period of climatic instability - the prevalence of highly variable climatic conditions on a decadal scale and the breakdown of the imperial economy and the state that it supported. Although the climatic effects are distinct regionally between the eastern and western parts of the Empire and among sub-regions - the precise nature of the causal relationships between environmental, political, social-economic, and cultural developments remains to be elucidated. Historians of the Byzantine world have followed suit, although they have a great deal more work to do.

????????? 在過去的幾年里，羅馬世界的歷史學家和考古學家開始關注氣候/環(huán)境與帝國崛起之間的關系，從而提出了一系列關于政治和社會文化演變與氣候之間因果關系的更廣泛的問題。在羅馬的案例中，他們證明了氣候條件穩(wěn)定時期與帝國崛起和鞏固之間的明顯相似之處，以及隨后的氣候不穩(wěn)定時期——十年間氣候條件高度變化的普遍存在與帝國的崩潰之間的明顯相似之處。經(jīng)濟和它所支持的國家。盡管帝國東部和西部地區(qū)以及次區(qū)域之間的氣候影響在區(qū)域上是不同的，但環(huán)境、政治、社會經(jīng)濟和文化發(fā)展之間因果關系的確切性質仍有待闡明。拜占庭世界的歷史學家也紛紛效仿，盡管他們還有很多工作要做。

Historians of eastern Roman (Byzantine) Anatolia must grapple with a limited written record and rely on as wide a range of sources as possible; archaeology and environmental sciences are key. The integration of three types of archive offers significant ad vantages. The subject invites interdisciplinary cooperation, as well as the construction of relatively general models of climate/ environment/society interaction. It is precisely the bringing of cli mate and environment into the existing models of social, eco nomic, and political change in Byzantine Anatolia that promises to expand our understanding of this historical society.

????????? 東羅馬（拜占庭）安納托利亞的歷史學家必須努力解決有限的書面記錄，并盡可能依賴廣泛的來源； 考古學和環(huán)境科學是關鍵。 三種存檔類型的集成提供了顯著的優(yōu)勢。 該主題邀請跨學科合作，以及構建相對通用的氣候/環(huán)境/社會相互作用模型。 正是將氣候和環(huán)境引入拜占庭安納托利亞現(xiàn)有的社會、經(jīng)濟和政治變革模型，有望擴大我們對這個歷史社會的理解。

Historians are just as likely to reject arguments based on cli mate and environment on reductionist grounds as they are to mis understand them and misuse their underlying data. They also need to be careful with, and critical about, temporal resolution - for ex ample, high-resolution data capable of annual to decadal association versus centennial data, which is much less causally specific. Is sues of scale can easily confuse or lead to misunderstandings. What a climate scientist might see as a "crisis" lasting a mere century, a historian might regard as a long period of change and social, political, and economic transformation. Different disciplines have different styles: Scientists seek to reduce causality to simple terms, such as temporal coincidence or statistical correlation, whereas historians deal with complex processes and are wary of oversimplification.

?????????? 歷史學家可能會以還原論為由拒絕基于氣候和環(huán)境的論點，因為他們可能會誤解并濫用其基礎數(shù)據(jù)。 他們還需要謹慎對待時間分辨率并對其提出批評——例如，能夠產生年度到十年關聯(lián)的高分辨率數(shù)據(jù)與百年數(shù)據(jù)相比，其因果關系要少得多。 規(guī)模的訴訟很容易混淆或導致誤解。 氣候科學家可能將其視為持續(xù)僅僅一個世紀的“危機”，而歷史學家可能將其視為長期的變化和社會、政治和經(jīng)濟轉型。 不同的學科有不同的風格：科學家試圖將因果關系簡化為簡單的術語，例如時間巧合或統(tǒng)計相關性，而歷史學家則處理復雜的過程并警惕過度簡化。

Neither climate scientists, historians, nor archaeologists are in a position by themselves fully to integrate the vast range of data necessary for a multicausal analysis that explains rather than simply describes. More local and regional studies are needed to test methodologies, collect multidisciplinary data, and ultimately derive holistic interpretations. This article can be understood in the context of Past Global Changes (pages) focus 4 projects (http://www.pages-igbp.org/science/foci/focus-4)," Past Human-Climate Ecosystem Interactions," rightly arguing that this interrelationship becomes clear through a comparison of regional-scale reconstructions of environmental and climatic processes with evidence of past human activity. Our study also links to IHOPN (The Integrated History and Future of People on Earth).

????????? 無論是氣候科學家、歷史學家還是考古學家，他們都無法完全整合進行解釋而不是簡單描述的多因分析所需的大量數(shù)據(jù)。 需要更多的地方和區(qū)域研究來測試方法、收集多學科數(shù)據(jù)并最終得出整體解釋。本文可以在過去的全球變化（頁面）焦點 4 項目（http://www.pages-igbp.org/science/foci/focus-4）的上下文中理解，“過去的人類-氣候生態(tài)系統(tǒng)相互作用”，正確通過將環(huán)境和氣候過程的區(qū)域尺度重建與過去人類活動的證據(jù)進行比較，這種相互關系變得清晰。我們的研究還與 IHOPN（地球上人類的綜合歷史和未來）相關聯(lián)。

未完待續(xù)