What the article seems to notice is that some parts of a civilization succeed to institutionalize themselves (and gain momentum over others thanks to it) and so

What the article seems to notice is that some parts of a civilization succeed to institutionalize themselves (and gain momentum over others thanks to it) and some don't. In a very sketchy way: - you may have excellent scientists and prestige for science, but no institutional structure/ecosystem to support, promote and benefit from it; - you may have lousy clergy but a well-working institution/structure of religion that helps with its prominence over society. (and the other way around, and mid-ways as well)