Ward-Perkins is specifically in conversation with that 'no collapse' reappraisal, because slowly declining, deurbanizing, and losing economic complexity had material consequences for even average people. and a lot of this comes down to what one means about 'collapse' and 'decline' i'm on board with the thesis that severe economic contraction and loss of complexity constitutes a significant event, and when it happens in a few decades a word like "collapse" seems appropriate. but some people assume that to have apocalyptic connotations, and for the survival of people and things, in however a declined state, to disprove a "collapse". semantics, really

i really get the impression from that trade stuff that the "palace economy" states were responsible for the import of copper and tin. unless we're looking at archaeological sites that lose their palace social structure and immediately pick up the slack some other way, i think there has to be a discussion of what the breakdown of 'elite economy' would mean for everyone else. bronze wasn't just for clouting your king---plows, nails, wheels---things normal people used and needed.