Ecology of the Classical World?

[Queequeg]

I'm watching The Leopard, a classic epic about the war of Italian Unification set mostly in Sicily.  I've been reading quite a bit of Roman-Dark Age history too, so I know that Sicily, Egypt, North Africa and Mesopotamia were the great breadbaskets of the Roman (and the last one mostly for the Parthian-Sassanian) Empire.

But "fertile growing region" is not what the modern has in mind when he thinks of Algeria, Tunisia, Palermo or, worst of all, Egypt post-Dam.  These are all virtual deserts, treeless and goat infested. 

Why is this?  I have a few ideas, but I'm wondering if anyone has any good info on this

1) They were good partially because they weren't heavily forested, barely civilized and extremely dangerous, like France, Germany, England or the modern Slavic countries.
2) Technology has moved forward allowing us to take advantage of certain advantages that more northerly climates have.
3) They were good, so they were overused.  I know that Diamond talked a bit about this (though not nearly as much as I would have liked) in Collapse; during the earliest Sumerian period the area was lush albeit somewhat unstable (and by the time agriculture came around largely devoid of game), but by the Ottoman period all the trees were harvested, the goats were let off the leash and the entire area became a wasteland, unable to sustain pre-Islamic population or economic levels.  I'm not sure this is the case of Sicily, so maybe the Berber-Mongol influence had something to do with it, or maybe the Arab love of goats ultimately balanced out the Arab agricultural revolution, and in the end coupled with salinization fucked over the whole region.

Also, is there some kind of nice comparison somewhere in the world with how the Mid-East and North Africa looked before people fucked it up? Maybe the more forested parts of Anatolia, or perhaps some part of Transoxiana?   Some part of Mexico?

[Queequeg]

Second question: could it be fixed?  Can we turn Arrakis into Rakis? 

[HVC]

I thought the main reason for it was that the weather got drier/hotter and so the sands moved in.

[Barrister]

It's a good question Ishmail.  I've wondered that myself at times - why the "fertile crescent" and such areas seemed so wildly unfertile today.  I've never seen a good answer though.

[jimmy olsen]

It's a good question Ishmail.  I've wondered that myself at times - why the "fertile crescent" and such areas seemed so wildly unfertile today.  I've never seen a good answer though.

I thought it was because of the Mongols?

[dps]

I think that the temperate zone has moved moved a bit northward of where it was 2-3000 years ago, but also that overgraving and poor agricultural practices are partly to blame.

[Viking]

The change in climate since antiquity are well documented. You can look up the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period on wikipeida. Deforestation and goats did have real effects, we icelanders know about the goat effect since sheep ripped up our very thin topsoil quite regularly.

[saskganesh]

wars had effects. the Mongols apparently ruined the aqueduct system in Iraq, Saladin trashed Galilee after Hattin, William the Bastard made county York near uninhabitable for a couple of decades, the Gothic/Byzantine war also destroyed aqueducts and reduced Rome  so much that the Forum was used as pasture. and so on.

in cases, the ecology could revive, but sometimes the balance was tipped and simply could not recover, especially when there was no government that had the ability or interest to do public works.

[Josquius]

I'm interested in this stuff too.
Apparently Afghanistan was once a rather nice forested land.

For the fertile crescent and all goats are largely to blame of course. As well as natural global warming.

[The Larch]

But "fertile growing region" is not what the modern has in mind when he thinks of Algeria, Tunisia, Palermo or, worst of all, Egypt post-Dam.  These are all virtual deserts, treeless and goat infested.

This is also a huge misconception. Sicily and the coastal areas of North Africa are in no way an arid wasteland. They may not be what they were in the past, but there's still lots of agriculture there. The Sahara doesn't reach to the coast, even if it has been "moving" northwards for centuries.

And "The Leopard" is not an epic about the unification of Italy, it's a drama about the decadence of old-fashioned aristocracy in the face of changing times.

[Maladict]

This is also a huge misconception. Sicily and the coastal areas of North Africa are in no way an arid wasteland.

There were grain fields as far as the eye could see when I drove across Sicily last year.

[saskganesh]

wheat grows well in semi arid climes. see saskatchewan, north dakota etc.

what you need is ongoing soil conservation.

[Caliga]

But "fertile growing region" is not what the modern has in mind when he thinks of Algeria, Tunisia, Palermo or, worst of all, Egypt post-Dam.  These are all virtual deserts, treeless and goat infested.

This is also a huge misconception. Sicily and the coastal areas of North Africa are in no way an arid wasteland. They may not be what they were in the past, but there's still lots of agriculture there. The Sahara doesn't reach to the coast, even if it has been "moving" northwards for centuries.

And "The Leopard" is not an epic about the unification of Italy, it's a drama about the decadence of old-fashioned aristocracy in the face of changing times.

I'm fairly certain northern Tunisia and Algeria are fairly green and fertile.  Same goes for at least the portion of Iraq between/around the Tigris and Euphrates.  Hell, southern Iraq is basically like a giant swamp.

[Malthus]

I rather suspect that the relative appearance of fertility has to do with land management practices at the time.

Take for example what is now Israel. Travellers of the 19th century universally describe "Palestine" as, basically, a goat-infested wilderness of desolation. It was considered the worst possible posting if you were a Turkish bureaucrat. The climate certainly hasn't changed in 100 years, but Isreal is now a major agricultural centre in the region.

[Malthus]

I rather suspect that the relative appearance of fertility has to do with land management practices at the time.

Take for example what is now Israel. Travellers of the 19th century universally describe "Palestine" as, basically, a goat-infested wilderness of desolation. It was considered the worst possible posting if you were a Turkish bureaucrat. The climate certainly hasn't changed in 100 years, but Isreal is now a major agricultural centre in the region.

That old chesnut. 

Is it incorrect?