What book explain the reason and general signs and patterns of

>>9379686
Stop trying to generalise.

>>9379686
Glubb's The Fate of Empires

>>9379692
Why not?

>>9379686
Jared Diamond's Collapse was more about the fall. I think you would know that Diamond is somewhat controversial.
You should pick up Ian Morris (which I still need to read myself however) and especially Peter Turchin who developed an actual mathematical model instead of just theorizing.

For Peter Turchin see "War and peace and war" and "Secular cycles". Note that even Peter Turchin is controversial amongst some historians but he made a testable model. So his model can be put to the test whereas the theorizing of Diamond or Morris can't as easy.

>>9379698
Because the Persian and British empires had very little in common?

>>9379686
Book related was beloved when I was in college in 2002. It has since been surpassed by Why Nations Fail, and eclipsed by general consensus on Huntington's Clash of Civilizations and Fukuyama's most recent work. Academic consensus has turned on geographic determinism and has turned towards quality of institutions and the behavior of elites in those institutions.

>>9379692
Also this. Understanding history as a monolith simply means you do not understand history.

>>9379728
Diamond's subsequent book, Collapse, addresses some of the issues this anon brings up. I would recommend reading GG&S and Collapse together for a more complete understanding of Diamond's thought.

>>9379686
Diamond isn't a historian and uses some flawed examples to try and prove his broad-stroke theory. His theory might be valuable, but the basic evidence he provided often isn't accepted by critical historians.

Maybe worth reading to get you thinking about civilization, but do not take it as fact or historical consensus.