Western Civilization prides itself on the elimination of the spoils system. Family ties have only a shadow of their former power in the granting of jobs as idealist push for more qualifications and resume building. However, Western idealists were not the first to come up with these ideas and likely used their knowledge of history to point to the values of efficiency in doling out positions. The Islamic religion and the expansion of Alexander the Greats empires are two of the best examples in history where the job was given to the best man(men) and not solely the closest relation.
When Alexander the Great died at his young age, the empire was left headless. Alexander basically left it up to the most cut throat generals to find a place in his empire and establish themselves. Although the methods that were used to elect these generals would seem to be more a war than an actual election in the present day, the truth is that only the men most fit would receive the position. Muhammad employed a similar tactic with the religion of Islam although his intentionality may be questioned a bit further.
Muhammad left no clear heir to his role as the leader of Islam. Not only does this cement his role as a prophet(in the discussed religion) but it allows for the religion to grow according to the people. Had Muhammad left an heir or chosen his successor his opponents would have used that decision as leverage in an attempt to discredit his authenticity as a prophet. It is unknown if the religion could have survived such an attack. Some may claim that the splintering of the religion into several factions is due to Muhammad's failure to address this contingency. Despite these claims, it is often the ability of a religion to be fluid that allows for it to survive in an ever changing world. Bestowing upon the followers the ability to shape their culture may be one of the main reasons Islamic tradition continues.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Saturday, November 21, 2009
The Crusades, also set to Heavy Metal
The subject of The Crusades came up in class this past week as a major change in Islamic-Christian relations during the medieval period. The Crusades were a major blot on the name of Christianity, as thousands upon thousands of people were massacred on both sides in the name of religion. Countless atrocities were committed throughout the bloody history of the Crusades, which planted the seed of mistrust between Muslims and Christians.
This view was also shared by the Power Metal band called Demons & Wizards, which was a side project of Blind Guardian and Iced Earth, two European Metal bands. One of their songs is called "Poor Man's Crusade" and it paints the Crusaders as misled individuals under the control of a deceiver. Yet it also accuses the Christian soldiers of mindless slaughter under the guise of "religious purification".
A few song lyrics stand out as relating directly to the discussion in class. The Pope that began the Crusades, Pope Urban II, is referenced in the song as: "He convinced us all. He is a gifted man, though he will slaughter in the name of Christ. Holy and bright, he's a devil in disguise. Protector of the cross, beware of the snake." As a man of the cloth, Pope Urban II should have proclaimed a message of peace, but instead, he deceived many Christians into joining a series of brutal wars.
Demons & Wizards also highlight the fact that the conquering Christians viewed the Muslim rule over Jerusalem as an insult to the birth place of their religion that could only be rectified by pagan deaths. The chorus explains this viewpoint through the following lyrics: "The Holy Land, home of our blessed lord, enslaved and stained by godless hands, they shall be damned. Jerusalem is waiting for you to rise once again, so we will slaughter in the name of Christ."
The last part of the song details the needless sacrifice and the bloodthirsty nature of the Christian soldiers in a senseless war. This set of lyrics also explains one of the strong motivators of the Christian soldiers. By joining the Crusades, the soldiers were deemed pure and free of sin, as long as they fought well in combat against the Muslims. This is shown as:"You'll shed your blood, Your bodies fall. That is the price you'll pay to cleanse you of your sins. Vicious and cruel, let's kill them all, let's kill them all. So we will slaughter in the name of Christ."
With such a violent meeting between two major religions, it seems inevitable that these events would have a lasting impact between Islam and Christianity. Muslims began to view the Christians as barbarians, while the Christians saw all Muslims as vile pagans. The Crusades would go on to influence other aspects of Europe and the Middle East, such as the movement of ideas and the spread of trade.
It seems that Blind Guardian has a recurring Christian theme in some of their songs. The singer is from Blind Guardian, so the vocals may sound similar to "Precious Jerusalem", the song from my previous post. It is the same Power Metal type of music as last week, so it shares the slower tempo and the epic story element.
This view was also shared by the Power Metal band called Demons & Wizards, which was a side project of Blind Guardian and Iced Earth, two European Metal bands. One of their songs is called "Poor Man's Crusade" and it paints the Crusaders as misled individuals under the control of a deceiver. Yet it also accuses the Christian soldiers of mindless slaughter under the guise of "religious purification".
A few song lyrics stand out as relating directly to the discussion in class. The Pope that began the Crusades, Pope Urban II, is referenced in the song as: "He convinced us all. He is a gifted man, though he will slaughter in the name of Christ. Holy and bright, he's a devil in disguise. Protector of the cross, beware of the snake." As a man of the cloth, Pope Urban II should have proclaimed a message of peace, but instead, he deceived many Christians into joining a series of brutal wars.
Demons & Wizards also highlight the fact that the conquering Christians viewed the Muslim rule over Jerusalem as an insult to the birth place of their religion that could only be rectified by pagan deaths. The chorus explains this viewpoint through the following lyrics: "The Holy Land, home of our blessed lord, enslaved and stained by godless hands, they shall be damned. Jerusalem is waiting for you to rise once again, so we will slaughter in the name of Christ."
The last part of the song details the needless sacrifice and the bloodthirsty nature of the Christian soldiers in a senseless war. This set of lyrics also explains one of the strong motivators of the Christian soldiers. By joining the Crusades, the soldiers were deemed pure and free of sin, as long as they fought well in combat against the Muslims. This is shown as:"You'll shed your blood, Your bodies fall. That is the price you'll pay to cleanse you of your sins. Vicious and cruel, let's kill them all, let's kill them all. So we will slaughter in the name of Christ."
With such a violent meeting between two major religions, it seems inevitable that these events would have a lasting impact between Islam and Christianity. Muslims began to view the Christians as barbarians, while the Christians saw all Muslims as vile pagans. The Crusades would go on to influence other aspects of Europe and the Middle East, such as the movement of ideas and the spread of trade.
It seems that Blind Guardian has a recurring Christian theme in some of their songs. The singer is from Blind Guardian, so the vocals may sound similar to "Precious Jerusalem", the song from my previous post. It is the same Power Metal type of music as last week, so it shares the slower tempo and the epic story element.
University of Sankore
The founding of Islam and its spread had a large influence on world. Not only did the new power cause Persia and Byzantium to crumble, its spread touched worlds that were both distant and unique. One world Islam spread to was West Africa. Besides the introduction of faith, Islam brought to this world the thirst for knowledge. In the mythical city of Timbuktu a University was founded that rivaled any University to date, its name was Sankore.
Sankore University was founded in 989 CE, originally as a Mosque. However, during the reign of Mansa Musa (1312-1337) the University was founded. soon becoming a large center of learning with an student population of 25,000 from all over Africa. There were four levels of degrees available at Sankore, primary, secondary, superior, and the circle of knowledge. The Primary degree was learning Arabic and memorizing the Quran. The Secondary degree was in general studies. These studies included the sciences such as astrology, mathematics, and chemistry. The University also offered courses that a trade school would offer, such as carpentry, tailoring, farming, fishing, and construction. Finally, business and ethics were offered. The Superior degree offers students a chance to do research and be instructed by the best professors. The Circle of Knowledge is becoming an imam or a professor at the University.
Unfortunately, the University went into decline when Timbuktu was invaded by Morocco in 1593 and took the best professors back to Morocco. The University never recovered, however its legacy lives on. Some figures have the manuscripts discovered at over a million. This large and prosperous center of learning shows us Islams influence and thirst for learning. also it shows us the level of intelligence and learning in Africa. There is an old West African proverb that sums up the nature of West Africa during this time "Salt comes from the north, gold from the south, silver from the country of white men, but the word of God and the treasures of wisdom are only to be found in Timbuktu."
For more information:
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Culture, Geography, Economics, Politics, and Religion, these are the five categories I use to organize my information when writing a history paper. Based on whatever two or three areas contain the most quality information the topics of said paper practically chooses itself. A recurring trend is that religion rarely so chooses itself and any paper that has been written on religion by me is usually not done so by choice. However, the persecution of the early Christians and the effect this would have on Western Christendom is something worth delving into.
Rarely do new institutions hit the ground running after their initial start-up and Christianity was no exception.
As the religion grew, opponents, like the state of Rome, began to oppose the growing power. Christianity however, was almost buffered by these 'half-assed attempts' (Quote Dr. Andrew Devenney) at eradication. If Rome, perhaps one of the most successful empires this world has seen, had truly put all its resources to the fore Christianity would most likely have been stifled and fizzled out. However, the resistance instead would likely harden the new faith to its course.
As these executions were carried out, the most famous taking place in the Colosseum, Christianity was instead fueled to new heights. Some sects of the religion would seek to use martyrdom as a course by which Christianity could be expanded. As more innocents were slain, more became aware of their plight. A saying that still exists in business today, especially small or growing companies 'all publicity is good publicity'. It became harder and harder for the public to ignore the unjust killings of these 'religious fanatics'.Whats more is that by the time of Constantine, Christianity was being utilized as a fix-it-all glue for the once mighty empire. Constantine publicly announced his faith and suddenly the fledgling religion boomed as temples sprouted up everywhere and some scholars estimate that 30% of the Roman Empire were involved in worship. Christianity gave the religion a new face, a common denominator that a large portion of the people could identify with. What it meant to be a true Roman citizen would be changing.
Most of the above information was found from various internet sites but these are the best sites I have found on the topics presented.
http://www.unrv.com/culture/christian-persecution.php
http://www.unrv.com/roman-republic/fall-of-roman-republic.php
http://www.unrv.com/culture/christianity-history.php
http://www.unrv.com/culture/spread-christianity.php
Precious Jerusalem: The Trials of Jesus set to Heavy Metal
Christianity has been the focus of class this week, so it seemed important to take a closer look at the founder of Christianity from an alternate viewpoint other than the Bible. Most people know about the story of Jesus. The man that overcame many trials and doubt to spread the word of God. Some believe that Jesus was actually the Son of God, and that he died to save man from his sins. Many know about his trials, like wandering the wilderness and being crucified, as it is told in the bible and during Mass.
However, most people have not heard the song "Precious Jerusalem" by the German Power Metal band called Blind Guardian that also outlines the major trials in Jesus's life on earth. Just for the record, Blind Guardian is not a Christian band, but they do expand into mythological subject matter as part of their "Power Metal" status.
One of first obstacles that Jesus faces is doubt, which shows up in the song as: "I know it well, Every word I tell, Seems to make no sense at all". This is the lyricist's way of saying that the message of Christ was often doubted until he could provide a miracle or some sort of proof. His message of love and purity was also included as: "Words will heal it. Love will conquer the hearts of the hopeless, The Almighty is still alive". This explains Christ's overall idea to instill faith in God and to unite the people.
His trials like doubt in his hometown of Jerusalem and the hopeless situation of humanity, and his triumphs like the salvation of Humanity and Resurrection are also included in the song in lyrics like: "I turn to you oh my precious Jerusalem, deny your prophets their passion and treat them like fools", "Can't stand the pain, No more grief and misery. It goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on. Father stop it now, We must stop it now", and "Rise up and follow me, 'Cause I will bring the light. Rise up and follow me, Wake up and clear your mind."
Respectively, the first set of lyrics in the previous paragraph explain the grief that the Priests of Jerusalem gave Christ as they denied his message and how Jesus felt sorrow at the sinful nature of man, doomed to an eternity in Hell. The last lyrics detail Christ's return from death and his urge for people to act like him and to rise up above sin.
As the song shows, Christianity still has a large influence on the world outside of religious functions like church. It has the power to spread, inspire, and to bring the message to the people, just like it used to in Medieval Europe. The main difference is that Christianity is no longer confined to trade routes and the words of missionaries. Now, it can travel and reach more people than ever through alternative pathways like music.
Go ahead and listen to it. It is power metal, so it is slower, has easy to understand lyrics, and has a story to tell, unlike other genres of metal.
However, most people have not heard the song "Precious Jerusalem" by the German Power Metal band called Blind Guardian that also outlines the major trials in Jesus's life on earth. Just for the record, Blind Guardian is not a Christian band, but they do expand into mythological subject matter as part of their "Power Metal" status.
One of first obstacles that Jesus faces is doubt, which shows up in the song as: "I know it well, Every word I tell, Seems to make no sense at all". This is the lyricist's way of saying that the message of Christ was often doubted until he could provide a miracle or some sort of proof. His message of love and purity was also included as: "Words will heal it. Love will conquer the hearts of the hopeless, The Almighty is still alive". This explains Christ's overall idea to instill faith in God and to unite the people.
His trials like doubt in his hometown of Jerusalem and the hopeless situation of humanity, and his triumphs like the salvation of Humanity and Resurrection are also included in the song in lyrics like: "I turn to you oh my precious Jerusalem, deny your prophets their passion and treat them like fools", "Can't stand the pain, No more grief and misery. It goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on. Father stop it now, We must stop it now", and "Rise up and follow me, 'Cause I will bring the light. Rise up and follow me, Wake up and clear your mind."
Respectively, the first set of lyrics in the previous paragraph explain the grief that the Priests of Jerusalem gave Christ as they denied his message and how Jesus felt sorrow at the sinful nature of man, doomed to an eternity in Hell. The last lyrics detail Christ's return from death and his urge for people to act like him and to rise up above sin.
As the song shows, Christianity still has a large influence on the world outside of religious functions like church. It has the power to spread, inspire, and to bring the message to the people, just like it used to in Medieval Europe. The main difference is that Christianity is no longer confined to trade routes and the words of missionaries. Now, it can travel and reach more people than ever through alternative pathways like music.
Go ahead and listen to it. It is power metal, so it is slower, has easy to understand lyrics, and has a story to tell, unlike other genres of metal.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
First Council At Nicaea
Regarding the Byzantines and the rise and modernization of Christiandom, I've chosen to write about the First Council of Nicaea in 325AD. Emperor Constantine called together 1800 bishops from all over Christiandom (of which 318 attended - the number is disputed, but this one, in its specificity, as counted by the most sources) in response to a heretical cult in Nicaea. Essentially, Constantine disliked the cult in the area for reasons unexplained and wanted the Church to define its doctrine in order to exclude the heretics.
The attendees set their agenda and it is translated as this (the underlined sections are attempted hyperlinks to more information):
1. The Arian [a non-trinitarian sect, thought Jesus was 'unbegotten' and a divine 'creature' of God] question regarding the relationship between God the Father and Jesus; i.e. are the Father and Son one in purpose only or also one in being;
2. The date of celebration of the Paschal/Easter observation [moving this away from the Jewish tradition]
3. The Meletian [a dude that was concerned with how easy 'bad' Christians get back into the Church] schism;
4. The validity of baptism by heretics [if theyre not Catholic, should we care about them or slaughter them?];
5. The status of the lapsed in the persecution under Licinius [one of the emperors - he had lost a war in 324 to Constantine.]
The bishops largely accomplished all that they set out to accomplish on the political side of things (sorting out a 'church position' in the world - a rather foreign concept in the post-Reformation world of many denominations) yet did something much more profound in the course of human events.
Those with a history in Church (mine being very recent) will recognize the paragraph they produced in 325AD:
"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. [But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'—they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.]"
There are hundreds of translations of this paragraph, the Nicene Creed, but this is considered to be a direct translation from the original without input from different denominational traditions. The brackets are words inserted by bishops who wanted more political specificity. That specificity, however, came in precedent of unity that lasted with the Catholic church until the Reformation (ironically, the Reformation began in Britain, the only area of Christiandom from which Constantine didnt invite bishops). The 20 decrees that are, today, either second nature to Christians or not recognized, were issued with a democratic element of bishops. Here, it may be fitting to propose a comparison.
It is incredibly loose, but the Council at Nicaea with its 318 bishops from a geographically widespread area seems like an early representative democracy. Granted, there is an element of theocracy here, but the grouping together to come to make collectively binding decrees is the definition of a representative form of government. Also, the discrepancy between those invited and those who actually showed up is a precursor to the number of MEPs or US members of Congress that show up on any given day. To those more interested, it may be worthy to look into early examples of post-Athenian democracy within Christiandom and especially within Greece (I am sure somebody has already) to draw conclusions for the development of the Magna Carta and the Glorious Revolution.
In this development, there might be trends disregarded by the secular academics which could explain why both tradition and the attempted destruction of tradition have sprung up so strongly in our own age. Perhaps it could help explain why the EU has failed to acknowledge that the Lisbon treaty did, indeed, get killed. After all, the Nicaean Creed is still active, what else from that meeting could be?
[[[The pictures from the top: explanation of the trinity as it is set up in the Nicene Creed, a fresco of the Council, and the main bishops (with Emp. Constantine in the center) with the original Creed.
Sources:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum01.htm
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/nicea1.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also found this totally unrelated similarity interesting...
There is an odd semblance between this and Obama's creepy stimulus logo. The top one is a T/O Map of the world...maybe the stimulus logo tells us where to find that recovery he promised (I'm not partisan...really ;) ).]]]
The Inferno, A Field Trip Through Hell
The picture probably got your attention didn't it?
The Inferno, by Dante Alighieri, is the first book in a three part series called the Divine Comedy. The Divine Comedy is about a poet named Dante, who travels through the realms of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven. The Inferno describes his journey through Hell with his guide Virgil and all that he encounters within the fiery realm.
The class discussions this week have been about Christianity in Western Europe, so The Inferno is relevant, as it is a very descriptive view of how Medieval Christians imagined Hell. Hell was an important concept in early Catholicism as it kept people in line and enforced order throughout society. Many Christians during the Medieval times were afraid of the eternal punishments that awaited the wicked and strove to act like good Samaritans.
The Inferno describes Hell through the eyes of Dante, as a realm without hope and full of pain. The book goes into much detail, going so far as describing the geography of Hell, portraying it as an upside down mountain, divided into 9 circles, or levels. Each level housed a different kind of Sinner, with the first few reserved for either pagans or sins of excess, such as greed, lust, or gluttony. The next three housed the violent, the slothful, and the heretics. The last two were reserved for frauds and traitors that betrayed the trust of others.
Each level had specific punishments for the sins committed by those inside. An example would be that the greedy in the fourth level were forced to push giant bags of gold uphill for eternity, similar to Sisyphus's punishment in Greek Mythology. Initially, Dante felt sorrow and pity for the tortured souls, but he begins to see that no matter how harsh the punishment, the soul being punished had done something to deserve it. At the very bottom, in the depths of the ninth circle of Hell, Lucifer himself is trapped in a lake of ice and chewing on the three most prominent sinners of history. Cassius and Brutus both planned and carried out the assassination of Julius Caesar, who Dante the Author viewed as the man who was chosen by God to unify Italy. The third traitor is Judas Iscariot, the apostle who betrayed Jesus to the Romans, which is the most evil thing Dante could envision.
Ultimately, The Inferno is an allegorical story of what awaits sinners in the afterlife. This tale shows the true horror of Hell as it was imagined by Medieval Christians and the influence of Christianity on Western Europe. Also, it shows a darker aspect of Christianity's Salvation promise. Sure, Heaven awaits the souls of the dead, but only if they have lead a virtous life. Otherwise, those impure souls are sent to a place of eternal punishment and pain, with no hope of redemption.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Emperor Justinian the Great or the Foolish
The most powerful and well known Byzantine Emperor was Justinian. His many accomplishments include building the Hagia Sophia, organizing the law code, and reconquering some parts of the old Western Roman Empire. However, Justinian was not only the greatest Byzantine Emperor he was also the worst, causing the beginning of the decline of the Byzantine Empire. This was done through poor decisions and his campaign to reconquer the west.
When Justinian ruled Byzantium (527-565 CE) he ruled the most powerful Empire in the Mediterranean, with vast amounts of mineral wealth and treasure. Justinian, believing he was the heir to the Roman Empire, wanted to reconquer the west. His opportunity came when, to protect the faith, set out to take over the Arian Christians who were considered to be heretics. The Arian Christians included the Vandals and the Ostrogoths. The Vandals were persecuting members of the Roman Church, therefore, as protector of the faith Justinian had cause for war.
Justinian first set out to retake North Africa from the Vandals. This was not difficult, due to the weakness of the Vandals in numbers and ability. The Conquest of the Vandals only took six months ending in 533 CE. Next Justinian set his eyes on Italy. Although he was able to wrestle Italy away from the Ostrogoths, the Byzantines were not able to hold it. Three years after his death in 565 CE a new group of barbarians, the Lombards, took over Italy. Why was Justinian not able to hold the reconquered territory? The most important reason was many of the Romans who lived in these areas did not support Byzantium, some even fought against them. Also in Italy the only reason why the Byzantium army survived was the strength of their navy. Their numbers were too few and many had to be recalled to protect the Empire against the Persians.
The most important reason why Justinian caused the beginning of the decline of the Byzantine Empire was before the reconquest Justinian paid the Persians for peace. With large sums of money going to the Persians and more money and manpower going to the reconquest, Byzantium declined in power. Due to the lack of money economy slowed down and the increased taxes caused the people of Empire to lose allegiance to Constantinople. All of these led to the slow decay and carving up of the once powerful Empire.
When Justinian ruled Byzantium (527-565 CE) he ruled the most powerful Empire in the Mediterranean, with vast amounts of mineral wealth and treasure. Justinian, believing he was the heir to the Roman Empire, wanted to reconquer the west. His opportunity came when, to protect the faith, set out to take over the Arian Christians who were considered to be heretics. The Arian Christians included the Vandals and the Ostrogoths. The Vandals were persecuting members of the Roman Church, therefore, as protector of the faith Justinian had cause for war.
Justinian first set out to retake North Africa from the Vandals. This was not difficult, due to the weakness of the Vandals in numbers and ability. The Conquest of the Vandals only took six months ending in 533 CE. Next Justinian set his eyes on Italy. Although he was able to wrestle Italy away from the Ostrogoths, the Byzantines were not able to hold it. Three years after his death in 565 CE a new group of barbarians, the Lombards, took over Italy. Why was Justinian not able to hold the reconquered territory? The most important reason was many of the Romans who lived in these areas did not support Byzantium, some even fought against them. Also in Italy the only reason why the Byzantium army survived was the strength of their navy. Their numbers were too few and many had to be recalled to protect the Empire against the Persians.
The most important reason why Justinian caused the beginning of the decline of the Byzantine Empire was before the reconquest Justinian paid the Persians for peace. With large sums of money going to the Persians and more money and manpower going to the reconquest, Byzantium declined in power. Due to the lack of money economy slowed down and the increased taxes caused the people of Empire to lose allegiance to Constantinople. All of these led to the slow decay and carving up of the once powerful Empire.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
The Coronation of Charlemagne
My book review was in relation to the Dark Ages, period shorty after the Fall of Rome. While the book, The Dark Ages Reconsidered, makes the case for a less dark time, there is little dispute that civilization received a substantial boost when Charlemagne was crowned emperor in 800 C.E. I found an article, "The Crowning of Charlemagne," that gives a brief overview of the event. The author, Patrick Henry Reardon, relates how Charlemagne accomplished a remarkable feat on Christmas Day of that year. Actually, there are three results of his coronation. First is the fact that Charlemagne united much of Europe. "Although the political unity Charlemagne imposed on the greater part of that continent did not outlive him, the cultural unity of Europe did." Second, his relationship with the Catholic church afforded the church great influence and power in European politics for centuries to come. Finally, Charlemagne fought against the Eastern Orthodox tradition of Christianity, furthering the schism between the East and West, and changing the dynamics of religious tradition.
Charlemagne's objection to the Eastern Orthodox form of the Nicene Creed was especially troublesome. Two and a half centuries after Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne, those doctrinal and canonical tensions between East and West finally became schismatic and tragic, when the legates of Pope Leo IX excommunicated the Patriarchof Constantinople in 1054.The article seems to portray Charlemagne in an almost too flattering light, but it seems that if ever there would be a time to overlook a man's faults, it would be the day of his coronation.
Halloween Origins
Everyone remembers the holiday that was just celebrated last week, unless there was heavy drinking involved. Halloween is a big deal in America and it invokes thoughts of candy, costumes, and a cold night spent begging at strangers' homes. Almost everyone participates in it as children and even as adults, treat it as a day of celebration.
However, the concept of Halloween that we know today shares many differences and similarities with its Celtic and Christian origins. The name itself, Halloween, developed from Christian roots. In the 800's CE, November first was declared by the pope as All Saint's Day, or All-Hallows. The word Halloween developed from the old English word for the evening before All-Hallows.
For example, many people wear costumes during Halloween for fun, trick or treating, and for tradition. In the old Celtic traditions, costumes take on a more serious meaning. During the Celtic celebration of Samhain, it was believed that the barrier between the physical and the spiritual worlds would be at its thinnest as the world transitions from warm to cold seasons. At this time, spirits, both malevolent and benevolent, are able to move between worlds. In order to ward off evil spirits, the Celtic people would wear masks and disguises that made them look like the evil spirits. The evil spirits, seeing only other spirits and no people, would wander off in search of other victims. The reason for wearing costumes has obviously changed over the years, taking on a more light-hearted meaning.
The modern symbol of caramel apples in connection with Halloween has roots in both Roman and Celtic cultures. One reason is that, before the Roman occupation, Halloween was the end of Summer, the beginning of Fall, and the beginning of the apple harvest. The other reason is that after Roman Occupation, the Celtic celebration of Samhain was merged with two Roman festivals, the day of the dead, and the festival for the goddess of trees and fruits, whose symbol was the apple.
Halloween is a holiday with many meanings. It started as a religious festival and has evolved into a secular holiday that anyone from any religious background can participate in. The holiday has grown and changed along with Humanity to where it is now, incorporating fun and candy to appeal to the young and the old. It has a fun celebration of the change between season for any person, of any age, of any religion. Halloween is truly an accessible holiday.
For more information:
http://www.history.com/content/halloween/real-story-of-halloween>http://www.history.com/content/halloween/real-story-of-halloween
However, the concept of Halloween that we know today shares many differences and similarities with its Celtic and Christian origins. The name itself, Halloween, developed from Christian roots. In the 800's CE, November first was declared by the pope as All Saint's Day, or All-Hallows. The word Halloween developed from the old English word for the evening before All-Hallows.
For example, many people wear costumes during Halloween for fun, trick or treating, and for tradition. In the old Celtic traditions, costumes take on a more serious meaning. During the Celtic celebration of Samhain, it was believed that the barrier between the physical and the spiritual worlds would be at its thinnest as the world transitions from warm to cold seasons. At this time, spirits, both malevolent and benevolent, are able to move between worlds. In order to ward off evil spirits, the Celtic people would wear masks and disguises that made them look like the evil spirits. The evil spirits, seeing only other spirits and no people, would wander off in search of other victims. The reason for wearing costumes has obviously changed over the years, taking on a more light-hearted meaning.
The modern symbol of caramel apples in connection with Halloween has roots in both Roman and Celtic cultures. One reason is that, before the Roman occupation, Halloween was the end of Summer, the beginning of Fall, and the beginning of the apple harvest. The other reason is that after Roman Occupation, the Celtic celebration of Samhain was merged with two Roman festivals, the day of the dead, and the festival for the goddess of trees and fruits, whose symbol was the apple.
Halloween is a holiday with many meanings. It started as a religious festival and has evolved into a secular holiday that anyone from any religious background can participate in. The holiday has grown and changed along with Humanity to where it is now, incorporating fun and candy to appeal to the young and the old. It has a fun celebration of the change between season for any person, of any age, of any religion. Halloween is truly an accessible holiday.
For more information:
http://www.history.com/content/halloween/real-story-of-halloween>http://www.history.com/content/halloween/real-story-of-halloween
Britain and Greece Argue Over Stolen Sculptures
A few weeks ago, it was mentioned in class that Britain did a little bit of looting from Greece's Parthenon. Specifically, Thomas Bruce, the British ambassador to the area during the early 1900's, managed to make off with a sizeable amount of sculptures and architecture from the Acropolis and the Parthenon. The marble pieces were sent back to Britain and the British Museum, where they have remained for almost two hundred years. In class, there was a brief mention that Britain may not have legal ownership of the pieces and that they should be returned to their homeland of Greece.
Ever since then, Greece has advocated the return of the "Elgin Marbles", while Britain has refused to do so for almost two centuries. The British Museum has adamantly claimed that the pieces do not belong to Greece, as they are a part of history, and as such, should be viewed as part of the entire world history. Also, the British propped up their arguments with claims that if Greece receives its monuments back, what's to stop other nations from withdrawing their pieces from foreign museums? Another crucial British argument was that Greece did not have any measures of protecting the pieces and that pollution and weathering would have damaged them anyways.
Greece has its own arguments to get the Elgin Marbles back. One point is that the actions of Thomas Bruce were pretty close to vandalism and looting, as he defaced a historical site and damaged many of the monuments and sculptures. The other Greek point is that they have newly constructed The New Acropolis Museum, a state of the art museum is dedicated to the Acropolis. The New Acropolis Museum has many protective measures in place and claims to be safer for the Marbles than the British Museum.
So far, the only real British offer was a temporary loan of the pieces to the new museum. However, this only angered the Greeks, as they believe that by acknowledging the loan offer, they would provide legitimacy to British ownership of the Elgin Marbles. As the Greeks see it, only an owner can loan things out, and the British have no right to do so, because they are not the legal owners of the pieces. Greece is not the only country demanding artifacts from Britain, as that list extends from India to Nigeria.
More information can be found at:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/artdesign/story/2009/06/12/parthenon-marbles-loan.html
Ever since then, Greece has advocated the return of the "Elgin Marbles", while Britain has refused to do so for almost two centuries. The British Museum has adamantly claimed that the pieces do not belong to Greece, as they are a part of history, and as such, should be viewed as part of the entire world history. Also, the British propped up their arguments with claims that if Greece receives its monuments back, what's to stop other nations from withdrawing their pieces from foreign museums? Another crucial British argument was that Greece did not have any measures of protecting the pieces and that pollution and weathering would have damaged them anyways.
Greece has its own arguments to get the Elgin Marbles back. One point is that the actions of Thomas Bruce were pretty close to vandalism and looting, as he defaced a historical site and damaged many of the monuments and sculptures. The other Greek point is that they have newly constructed The New Acropolis Museum, a state of the art museum is dedicated to the Acropolis. The New Acropolis Museum has many protective measures in place and claims to be safer for the Marbles than the British Museum.
So far, the only real British offer was a temporary loan of the pieces to the new museum. However, this only angered the Greeks, as they believe that by acknowledging the loan offer, they would provide legitimacy to British ownership of the Elgin Marbles. As the Greeks see it, only an owner can loan things out, and the British have no right to do so, because they are not the legal owners of the pieces. Greece is not the only country demanding artifacts from Britain, as that list extends from India to Nigeria.
More information can be found at:
http://www.cbc.ca/arts/artdesign/story/2009/06/12/parthenon-marbles-loan.html
Egyptian Lightbulb?
All history students are fascinated by strange things in history which are unknown or partially known to people today. As was posted in my last entry, I thoroughly enjoy such things.
This second 'mystery' points to a small ancient store room in Denderah, Egypt. On the wall, there is an inscription of what many historians and wishful thinkers see as a light bulb. Others believe it is a religious scene of a snake being born from a flower.
To evaluate the truth to the light bulb theory, one must look at the materials and skills needed to produce a lamp of this sort. The first is glass, the second is a vacuum, and the third is electricity.
While no one knows how far back glass was invented, we do know that the Egyptians made usable glass objects by dipping sand figurines in vats of molten glass. Could Egyptian scientists make a stable enough glass bulb to hold a vacuum?
Perhaps it wasnt necessary. According to some, this light bulb could have been filled with an inert gas heavier than oxygen. This is entirely possible yet it is equally unprovable that it was done. Assuming it was, they still need a sizable enough source of electricity.
For this, archeologists have found what is known as the 'Baghdad battery;' essentially, it's a jar that can be (and was) filled with a number of different substances. Throughout the ancient world, people were getting low-voltage results by combining acidic fruit juice with quiones (a chemical that can be harvested from common Egyptian scarab beetles - vinegar and other substances could also be used) while sticking a 1/4" thick, solid copper bar encircled by an approximately 1" in diameter iron tube vertically in the center. The currently accepted conjecture for the use of this battery deals with using this and a spatula to bind gold on the surface of silver objects. Naturally, this 'out there' suggestion of a light bulb demands a different interpretation.
The theory of this 'Denderah light bulb' has been stuck in my head for a while. The weakest point of the argument is the isolation of heavy gases or the creation of the vacuum. Perhaps this is just another mystery of the past that students can glaze over to make the memory of neoclassical and modern scientists seem more original. I leave you with these low quality videos (comment if you can find better) of a plasma lamp designed to prove the feasibility of the drawn design. In the latter video, it is a nonworking model where the location of the batteries can be seen.
Does this support the 'aliens help build the pyramids' theory?
Sources:
http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/Denderahlightbulb.html
http://www.kinsalecrystal.ie/history.htm
http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/bbattery.htm (among others for the battery...used about 15 of them)
Does this support the 'aliens help build the pyramids' theory?
Sources:
http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/Denderahlightbulb.html
http://www.kinsalecrystal.ie/history.htm
http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/bbattery.htm (among others for the battery...used about 15 of them)
Hadrian's Wall
Walls have been a permanent feature in world history. From ancient times up to modern day walls have been used. Originally used for defensive reasons, today walls are used mainly to keep people in. One of the best known walls in the world is Hadrian's Wall that stretches across the the border between England and Scotland. Hadrian's Wall was built by the Roman Emperor Hadrian (r. 117-138 CE) in 122. This project was part of Hadrian's goal to consolidate the Empires gains and create a stable border. Also the wall was built for protection from the barbarian tribes of Scotland.
Hadrian's wall stretches 73.5 miles across northern England, from the North to Irish Sea. The wall was built out of stone. It was fifteen feet high with a width of 8 feet. Every mile there was a small fort with two towers between each of them. Also there were 16 large forts that could house up to 1000 soldiers. On the north side of the wall there was a ditch that ran along the wall. On the south side of the large forts towns sprang up to provide for the Roman soldiers.
Emperor Hadrian died in 138 CE and his successor Antoninus Pius wanted to expand the empire. Therefore, the Antonine Wall was built across the narrow part of southern Scotland between the Firth of Forth and the Firth of Clyde, in 142 CE. At this time Hadrian's wall was abandoned, and the northern border of the Roman Empire was the Antonine Wall. However, when Antonius Pius died in 161 CE his wall was abandoned and Hadrian's wall was refortified.
Hadrian's Wall was abandoned when the Romans abandoned Britain in 410, however, many of the towns by the forts continued on. Unfortunately, the wall fell into disrepair, with many stones being taken for other buildings. Today the main foundations of the wall and the forts remain. I have been to Hadrian's wall, and what surprised me the most was how well it was built. The wall was in a perfect straight line and the forts in symmetric distribution. What is left of the wall varies, some of it is gone completely, while some is over six feet high.
A great site for pictures of Hadrian's Wall
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/hadrian_gallery.shtml
For other information
http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/rome/a/aa060600a.htm
http://www.hadrians-wall.org/page.aspx//About-the-World-Heritage-Site/Archaeology-
Hadrian's wall stretches 73.5 miles across northern England, from the North to Irish Sea. The wall was built out of stone. It was fifteen feet high with a width of 8 feet. Every mile there was a small fort with two towers between each of them. Also there were 16 large forts that could house up to 1000 soldiers. On the north side of the wall there was a ditch that ran along the wall. On the south side of the large forts towns sprang up to provide for the Roman soldiers.
Emperor Hadrian died in 138 CE and his successor Antoninus Pius wanted to expand the empire. Therefore, the Antonine Wall was built across the narrow part of southern Scotland between the Firth of Forth and the Firth of Clyde, in 142 CE. At this time Hadrian's wall was abandoned, and the northern border of the Roman Empire was the Antonine Wall. However, when Antonius Pius died in 161 CE his wall was abandoned and Hadrian's wall was refortified.
Hadrian's Wall was abandoned when the Romans abandoned Britain in 410, however, many of the towns by the forts continued on. Unfortunately, the wall fell into disrepair, with many stones being taken for other buildings. Today the main foundations of the wall and the forts remain. I have been to Hadrian's wall, and what surprised me the most was how well it was built. The wall was in a perfect straight line and the forts in symmetric distribution. What is left of the wall varies, some of it is gone completely, while some is over six feet high.
A great site for pictures of Hadrian's Wall
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/hadrian_gallery.shtml
For other information
http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/rome/a/aa060600a.htm
http://www.hadrians-wall.org/page.aspx//About-the-World-Heritage-Site/Archaeology-
The World in 1492
After spending some time discussing Early American History with high school students and touching on it in conversation with an elder generation it has become apparent that little is known about the true doings of one Christopher Columbus and his first voyage to the New World. Many cliches are today used to teach this man and his history to school children and it is important that they be addressed at some point other than in an AP History class or other college requirement.
Firstly, no educated person in the late 15th century believed that the world was flat and that a ship might fall off the edge and be devoured by dragons and whatnot. If the world was thought to be flat then Columbus' intentions to sail westward to find East China would more than explain the rejection he suffered at the hands of the monarchs. Furthermore, Columbus messed up his calculations and he messed them up badly. One of the reasons he was turned down for his voyages was the fact that the Council of Portugal whom he met before believed his calculations to be off. They knew that the world was not near as large as he painted it to be, the only problem here is that no one had charted that large expanse. Perhaps some of Columbus' crew believed that the world was flat and that could explain why he kept two log entries of their travels. If the crew didn't know how far they had traveled, worrying about the edge of the world seemed pointless.
Further, too often are the true exploits of Columbus forgotten amongst his findings. Yes, the discovery of the New World changed the world, but the treatment of its people changed an entire culture. The Colombian Exchange would reap all the gold Europe could possibly want, along with the labor to find it and work the lands. Never again would such a plague ravish the New World as the one that absolutely crippled the Native Americans whose home was rightly here.
To some scholars this information is likely easily recognized as what truly happened, however it's importance cannot be underestimated. What really happened in history is too often a far cry from what is remembered and an event such as Columbus' voyage has become so wrought with fairy tales that the truth is only known to those who actively study the subject. Columbus was not necessarily a bad person or a good person, historians have the responsibility of making others see the facts. Columbus was merely an explorer looking for wealth and fame, and he found it, his methods however need to be remembered by all.
For more info on Columbus:
http://www.millersville.edu/~columbus/columbus.htm
http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/christopher-columbus.htm
Firstly, no educated person in the late 15th century believed that the world was flat and that a ship might fall off the edge and be devoured by dragons and whatnot. If the world was thought to be flat then Columbus' intentions to sail westward to find East China would more than explain the rejection he suffered at the hands of the monarchs. Furthermore, Columbus messed up his calculations and he messed them up badly. One of the reasons he was turned down for his voyages was the fact that the Council of Portugal whom he met before believed his calculations to be off. They knew that the world was not near as large as he painted it to be, the only problem here is that no one had charted that large expanse. Perhaps some of Columbus' crew believed that the world was flat and that could explain why he kept two log entries of their travels. If the crew didn't know how far they had traveled, worrying about the edge of the world seemed pointless.
Further, too often are the true exploits of Columbus forgotten amongst his findings. Yes, the discovery of the New World changed the world, but the treatment of its people changed an entire culture. The Colombian Exchange would reap all the gold Europe could possibly want, along with the labor to find it and work the lands. Never again would such a plague ravish the New World as the one that absolutely crippled the Native Americans whose home was rightly here.
To some scholars this information is likely easily recognized as what truly happened, however it's importance cannot be underestimated. What really happened in history is too often a far cry from what is remembered and an event such as Columbus' voyage has become so wrought with fairy tales that the truth is only known to those who actively study the subject. Columbus was not necessarily a bad person or a good person, historians have the responsibility of making others see the facts. Columbus was merely an explorer looking for wealth and fame, and he found it, his methods however need to be remembered by all.
For more info on Columbus:
http://www.millersville.edu/~columbus/columbus.htm
http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/christopher-columbus.htm
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Original Melting Pot
It seems that Americans are born taking pride in the idea of the melting pot. The American Melting Pot allows each and every citizen to feel that no matter their culture, their beliefs, or their heritage, they are valued as an important ingredient in a larger matter. However, something not quite publicized is that the Americas were not the first great melting pot society. Ancient cultures have long been experts at assimilating new religious and political regimes to create a much stronger union. The famous Silk Road can be viewed as one of these great melting pots that would change much of Europe and Asia at the height of many an empire.
The Silk road established a route that could, in theory reach all the way from the Chinese city of Luoyang near the Pacific Ocean to Tyre on the Mediterranean Sea. Although seldom traveled to their whole length by single merchants, these roads still allowed for the transportation of much besides wealth. Culture traveled with merchants, and most merchants coming from India traveled with Buddhism in their hearts and spread the religion across Asia. Soon western China would be home to Buddhist cities and temples.
However, Buddhism was not immune to the effects of the melting pots. Secular affairs in wealthy cities neighboring the Silk Road rose in number although original Buddhism had supposedly shunned material world. In some of the northwest regions of India, Buddhism met with the remnants of Alexander and Buddha's statues became slightly Greco-Roman in nature. A Greco-Roman son of Zeus (Herakles) was adopted by Buddhists of the area to represent one of the divine protectors of Buddha.
However, as culture is allowed to transit from place to place with greater speed, so is disease. In today's world we are always bombarded with this fear as more and more diseases spread with greater speed and the word epidemic is thrown out so often that it is rare to watch the news without hearing something of it. The Silk Road on the other hand gave rise to perhaps one of the most feared diseases ever found-the Black Death. After the Mongol control of the Eurasian landmass came to an abrupt end, interactions between Asia and Europe increased as under one empire the advantages of long distance trade became apparent. The Black Death was the result, a series of diseases that are believed today to be comprised mostly of bubonic plague, anthrax of other epidemics. It is believed, that within 4 years 1/3 of Europe was killed by the Black Death...4 years. The Melting Pot failed to assimilate that one.
Whether it be the American Melting Pot which is credited with creating a diverse and dominant culture in today's world or the Silk Road, cultural collision existed. Some cultures resisted and sought to remain true to their roots. Most of them aren't around anymore although a few likely exist to some degree. Cultures, disease, the good comes with the bad, but as the test of time as the example, those cultures that adopt new practices and assimilate new ideas are the ones that will become the greats.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I cannot find much information of Vajrapani that makes much sense to me, Robert Strayer's textbook Ways of the World: A Brief Global History is where my info comes from or you can feel free to check wikipedia at your leisure.
For a brief Chinese version on the effects of the Silk Road please follow this link
http://library.thinkquest.org/13406/sr/
The Silk road established a route that could, in theory reach all the way from the Chinese city of Luoyang near the Pacific Ocean to Tyre on the Mediterranean Sea. Although seldom traveled to their whole length by single merchants, these roads still allowed for the transportation of much besides wealth. Culture traveled with merchants, and most merchants coming from India traveled with Buddhism in their hearts and spread the religion across Asia. Soon western China would be home to Buddhist cities and temples.
However, Buddhism was not immune to the effects of the melting pots. Secular affairs in wealthy cities neighboring the Silk Road rose in number although original Buddhism had supposedly shunned material world. In some of the northwest regions of India, Buddhism met with the remnants of Alexander and Buddha's statues became slightly Greco-Roman in nature. A Greco-Roman son of Zeus (Herakles) was adopted by Buddhists of the area to represent one of the divine protectors of Buddha.
However, as culture is allowed to transit from place to place with greater speed, so is disease. In today's world we are always bombarded with this fear as more and more diseases spread with greater speed and the word epidemic is thrown out so often that it is rare to watch the news without hearing something of it. The Silk Road on the other hand gave rise to perhaps one of the most feared diseases ever found-the Black Death. After the Mongol control of the Eurasian landmass came to an abrupt end, interactions between Asia and Europe increased as under one empire the advantages of long distance trade became apparent. The Black Death was the result, a series of diseases that are believed today to be comprised mostly of bubonic plague, anthrax of other epidemics. It is believed, that within 4 years 1/3 of Europe was killed by the Black Death...4 years. The Melting Pot failed to assimilate that one.
Whether it be the American Melting Pot which is credited with creating a diverse and dominant culture in today's world or the Silk Road, cultural collision existed. Some cultures resisted and sought to remain true to their roots. Most of them aren't around anymore although a few likely exist to some degree. Cultures, disease, the good comes with the bad, but as the test of time as the example, those cultures that adopt new practices and assimilate new ideas are the ones that will become the greats.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I cannot find much information of Vajrapani that makes much sense to me, Robert Strayer's textbook Ways of the World: A Brief Global History is where my info comes from or you can feel free to check wikipedia at your leisure.
For a brief Chinese version on the effects of the Silk Road please follow this link
http://library.thinkquest.org/13406/sr/
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Impacts of the Silk Road
At any one moment, an individual is surrounded by multitudes of objects that were not made, raised, or grown in his or her town, state, or even the same country. The global economy that everyone lives and participates in depends on extensive trading between distant nations. This type of cross-cultural trade has always been a part of every human civilization, but it was not until the development of the Silk Road did an organized system of trade appear which could directly link places thousands of miles apart.
This massive trade network is the precursor to modern, worldwide trade that impacts everyone from farmers in Africa to engineers in Detroit to European CEO's. The Silk Road connected the entire Eurasian continent and allowed goods to travel from one end of the known world to the other, traveling over land and sea, much like the modern shipping lanes and truck routes of the present day.
Also, just like the world today, Chinese products flooded the markets. Precious items like silk and porcelain could be traded for Roman gold and Italian wine. This is comparable to the traffic of raw materials, toys, electronics, oil, and money that constantly circulate the world. The goods themselves traveled the length of the Silk Road, while the merchants rarely moved outside their circuits. The process of how goods moved from one end of the ancient trade network to the other is long and twisted. Goods exchanged hands from merchant to merchant along the road, slowly moving either east or west over land and sea until they reach their final destination. It was unheard of for a merchant to travel from Rome to China or vice versa in an effort to sell goods without the numerous middle men involved in the process.
While modern trade is even more extensive than the Silk Road, the reach of the Silk Road was enormous for its era. New Empires like the Romans and the Han Dynasty could provide upkeep and protection for the Silk Road, making it easier and safer for traders to move about. Again, this is reminiscent of trade networks in the modern era, as nations strive to provide safe, cheap, and fast access for traveling goods and in some cases, such as oversea transport, protection from bandits and pirates.
With all these similarities, it is easy to say that the Silk Road had a great impact in its time period. The Silk Road had all the things that are integral to modern trade today, from the ability to reach distant nations to allowing the movement of goods through thousands of miles, making it a model for trade networks in every era since then.
For more information, check out http://www.ess.uci.edu/~oliver/silk.html
This massive trade network is the precursor to modern, worldwide trade that impacts everyone from farmers in Africa to engineers in Detroit to European CEO's. The Silk Road connected the entire Eurasian continent and allowed goods to travel from one end of the known world to the other, traveling over land and sea, much like the modern shipping lanes and truck routes of the present day.
Also, just like the world today, Chinese products flooded the markets. Precious items like silk and porcelain could be traded for Roman gold and Italian wine. This is comparable to the traffic of raw materials, toys, electronics, oil, and money that constantly circulate the world. The goods themselves traveled the length of the Silk Road, while the merchants rarely moved outside their circuits. The process of how goods moved from one end of the ancient trade network to the other is long and twisted. Goods exchanged hands from merchant to merchant along the road, slowly moving either east or west over land and sea until they reach their final destination. It was unheard of for a merchant to travel from Rome to China or vice versa in an effort to sell goods without the numerous middle men involved in the process.
While modern trade is even more extensive than the Silk Road, the reach of the Silk Road was enormous for its era. New Empires like the Romans and the Han Dynasty could provide upkeep and protection for the Silk Road, making it easier and safer for traders to move about. Again, this is reminiscent of trade networks in the modern era, as nations strive to provide safe, cheap, and fast access for traveling goods and in some cases, such as oversea transport, protection from bandits and pirates.
With all these similarities, it is easy to say that the Silk Road had a great impact in its time period. The Silk Road had all the things that are integral to modern trade today, from the ability to reach distant nations to allowing the movement of goods through thousands of miles, making it a model for trade networks in every era since then.
For more information, check out http://www.ess.uci.edu/~oliver/silk.html
The Crusades: A Brief History
When we learn about the crusades we only focus on two, the first and the third. They are the most important, however, I was curious about the others. In this blog post I will briefly discuss all the crusades.
The First Crusade
The first Crusade (1095-1099), was called by Pope Urban II to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims. This Crusade was the most successful, and in the end Jerusalem was taken and the Kingdom of Jerusalem was established. Also, three other crusader states were established, Edessa, Antioch, and Tripoli.
The Second Crusade
The Second Crusade (1147-1149), was called to recover the city of Edessa, which had been lost in 1145. Two kings took up the call Louis VII of France and Conrad of the Holy Roman Empire. Unfortunately, the German army was decisively defeated by the Turks in Anatolia, and this defeat knocked them out of the crusade. When the French arrived in the Holy Land they decided to attack the city of Damascus. However, due to major losses they were unable to maintain an effective siege, and with a Muslim army marching to relieve the city, they left, ending the Crusade.
The Third Crusade
The Third Crusade (1188-1192), was called to take back the city of Jerusalem. Three kings answered the call, Frederick Barbarossa, Phillip II of France, and Richard the Lionheart. Frederick's army marched to the Holy Land over land. However, his army turned back in Anatolia when he drowned. Phillip and Richard traveled by sea. After taking back the port city of Acre, Phillip, due to his health, left for home. Richard then traveled down the coast being harassed and attacked by the Muslim leader Saladin. However, Richard's army was took weak to take back Jerusalem. therefore, Richard and Saladin signed a peace treaty. Although not able to take back Jerusalem the crusaders took back and defended the coastal cities.
The Fourth Crusade
The Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) was called because of the failure of the third. The Crusader army gathered at Venice to purchase passage to the Holy Land. However, they were not able to pay for the passage. Therefore, the Venetians make a deal; the Crusaders would take Zama, a rebellious city on the Adriatic, and then they would take them to the Holy Land. Before, the fleet sailed Prince Alexius of the Byzantines showed up. He convinced the Crusaders to attack Constantinople, because Alexius's father was over thrown and replaced by his brother. The Crusaders, after defeating Zama, sailed to Constantinople. After a siege and assaults, the cities defences fell, leading to a sack of the city. The Fourth Crusade ended here, after the great wealth of Constantinople had been divided among the victors.
The Fifth Crusade
The Fifth Crusade (1213-1221) set out to take Egypt. Egypt was the main Muslim power in the area, therefore, to knock it out Jerusalem would be easier to take. The Crusader army landed on the Nile planning to march up it to take Cairo. The first city to take was Damietta, which was on the Nile blocking the route to Cairo. After a year of siege and unsuccessful attempts by the Muslims to defeat the Crusader army, the city was taken. Due to Crusader disunity and waiting for reinforcements the army did not move on Cairo immediately. This allowed the Muslims to build up strength. When the Crusader army finally moved marched on Cairo they were defeated. After this defeat a peace treaty was signed that restored all lands before the Crusade began and a eight year peace.
The Sixth Crusade
The Sixth Crusade (1228-1229) was Holy Roman Emperor's Frederick II crusade to make up for his failure to come to the aid of the crusaders in the Fifth Crusade. Frederick II due to his long history of backing down from the crusades, his conflicts with the Pope, and an outbreak of disease on his ships that delayed him, the Pope excommunicated him. Nevertheless Frederick sailed to the Holy Land. However, due to his excommunication many in the Holy Land did not help him and join his crusade. Therefore, Frederick could not launch an offensive. Fortunately, Muslim infighting created an opportunity for diplomacy. Frederick signed a peace treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, Al-Kamil. This treaty returned Jerusalem to the Christians and guaranteed a ten year peace. Frederick claimed the throne of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, but left the Holy Land because local Christian leaders did not recognized him as king.
The Seventh Crusade
The Seventh Crusade (1248-1254) was undertaken by King Louis XI of France. This last major Crusade resembled the fifth one. Louis planned to take Egypt, therefore, weakening the Muslim hold on Jerusalem. Like the Fifth Crusade, Louis marched down the Nile, taking Damietta, with relative ease. Louis continued the march to Cairo, attacking the Muslims at Mansourah. At first the battle went in favor of the Crusaders. However, a counterattack pushed the crusaders back to their camp. Due to a Muslim blockade and an outbreak of disease the Crusader army surrendered. King Louis was released when his ransom was paid.
The Eighth Crusade
The Eighth Crusade (1270) was another crusade taken by Louis XI of France. The plan was to take Tunisia and then march across north Africa to Egypt and the Holy Land. However, after beginning the siege of Tunis, Louis died. His brother succeeded him, and a peace treaty was signed.
The Ninth Crusade
The Ninth Crusade (1271-1272) was carried out by Prince Edward of England. Edward arriving too late to participate in the eighth crusade decided to sail for the Holy Land. After arriving he ended the siege of Acre. Unfortunately, word got to him that his father died and he had to return to England to be crowned king.
After the Ninth Crusade there were no more attempts to regain the Holy Land. The final Crusader city, Acre, fell in 1291 ending the Crusading era.
For more information about the Crusades
http://crusades.boisestate.edu/contents.shtml
The First Crusade
The first Crusade (1095-1099), was called by Pope Urban II to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims. This Crusade was the most successful, and in the end Jerusalem was taken and the Kingdom of Jerusalem was established. Also, three other crusader states were established, Edessa, Antioch, and Tripoli.
The Second Crusade
The Second Crusade (1147-1149), was called to recover the city of Edessa, which had been lost in 1145. Two kings took up the call Louis VII of France and Conrad of the Holy Roman Empire. Unfortunately, the German army was decisively defeated by the Turks in Anatolia, and this defeat knocked them out of the crusade. When the French arrived in the Holy Land they decided to attack the city of Damascus. However, due to major losses they were unable to maintain an effective siege, and with a Muslim army marching to relieve the city, they left, ending the Crusade.
The Third Crusade
The Third Crusade (1188-1192), was called to take back the city of Jerusalem. Three kings answered the call, Frederick Barbarossa, Phillip II of France, and Richard the Lionheart. Frederick's army marched to the Holy Land over land. However, his army turned back in Anatolia when he drowned. Phillip and Richard traveled by sea. After taking back the port city of Acre, Phillip, due to his health, left for home. Richard then traveled down the coast being harassed and attacked by the Muslim leader Saladin. However, Richard's army was took weak to take back Jerusalem. therefore, Richard and Saladin signed a peace treaty. Although not able to take back Jerusalem the crusaders took back and defended the coastal cities.
The Fourth Crusade
The Fourth Crusade (1202-1204) was called because of the failure of the third. The Crusader army gathered at Venice to purchase passage to the Holy Land. However, they were not able to pay for the passage. Therefore, the Venetians make a deal; the Crusaders would take Zama, a rebellious city on the Adriatic, and then they would take them to the Holy Land. Before, the fleet sailed Prince Alexius of the Byzantines showed up. He convinced the Crusaders to attack Constantinople, because Alexius's father was over thrown and replaced by his brother. The Crusaders, after defeating Zama, sailed to Constantinople. After a siege and assaults, the cities defences fell, leading to a sack of the city. The Fourth Crusade ended here, after the great wealth of Constantinople had been divided among the victors.
The Fifth Crusade
The Fifth Crusade (1213-1221) set out to take Egypt. Egypt was the main Muslim power in the area, therefore, to knock it out Jerusalem would be easier to take. The Crusader army landed on the Nile planning to march up it to take Cairo. The first city to take was Damietta, which was on the Nile blocking the route to Cairo. After a year of siege and unsuccessful attempts by the Muslims to defeat the Crusader army, the city was taken. Due to Crusader disunity and waiting for reinforcements the army did not move on Cairo immediately. This allowed the Muslims to build up strength. When the Crusader army finally moved marched on Cairo they were defeated. After this defeat a peace treaty was signed that restored all lands before the Crusade began and a eight year peace.
The Sixth Crusade
The Sixth Crusade (1228-1229) was Holy Roman Emperor's Frederick II crusade to make up for his failure to come to the aid of the crusaders in the Fifth Crusade. Frederick II due to his long history of backing down from the crusades, his conflicts with the Pope, and an outbreak of disease on his ships that delayed him, the Pope excommunicated him. Nevertheless Frederick sailed to the Holy Land. However, due to his excommunication many in the Holy Land did not help him and join his crusade. Therefore, Frederick could not launch an offensive. Fortunately, Muslim infighting created an opportunity for diplomacy. Frederick signed a peace treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, Al-Kamil. This treaty returned Jerusalem to the Christians and guaranteed a ten year peace. Frederick claimed the throne of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, but left the Holy Land because local Christian leaders did not recognized him as king.
The Seventh Crusade
The Seventh Crusade (1248-1254) was undertaken by King Louis XI of France. This last major Crusade resembled the fifth one. Louis planned to take Egypt, therefore, weakening the Muslim hold on Jerusalem. Like the Fifth Crusade, Louis marched down the Nile, taking Damietta, with relative ease. Louis continued the march to Cairo, attacking the Muslims at Mansourah. At first the battle went in favor of the Crusaders. However, a counterattack pushed the crusaders back to their camp. Due to a Muslim blockade and an outbreak of disease the Crusader army surrendered. King Louis was released when his ransom was paid.
The Eighth Crusade
The Eighth Crusade (1270) was another crusade taken by Louis XI of France. The plan was to take Tunisia and then march across north Africa to Egypt and the Holy Land. However, after beginning the siege of Tunis, Louis died. His brother succeeded him, and a peace treaty was signed.
The Ninth Crusade
The Ninth Crusade (1271-1272) was carried out by Prince Edward of England. Edward arriving too late to participate in the eighth crusade decided to sail for the Holy Land. After arriving he ended the siege of Acre. Unfortunately, word got to him that his father died and he had to return to England to be crowned king.
After the Ninth Crusade there were no more attempts to regain the Holy Land. The final Crusader city, Acre, fell in 1291 ending the Crusading era.
For more information about the Crusades
http://crusades.boisestate.edu/contents.shtml
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Precolumbian African-Carribean Interaction
Ever Since high school, I've been vaguely aware of scholarly concepts that Africans discovered the New World before Columbus. A geologist named Mark McMenamin interprets the pattern on gold coins minted in the North African city Carthage around 350 and 320 B.C. I have included several versions for your deciphering.
His argument is based around evidence that the Carthaginians were culturally linked to contemporary Phoenicians and that both peoples had been widely regarded for their sailing and maritime accomplishments in the Mediterranean and the British Isles.
The image was simply overlooked as confusingly written, Phoenician script. However, this theory was discounted in the 1960's and has baffled anyone since.
My take: Why would you make something that intricate if it was going to be sloppy and unrecognizable? There probably is some credibility to McMenamin hypothesis yet it need not be standard operating procedure until more evidence is uncovered. Perhaps this is unlikely because, going back to the coin example: why would you plot a little-known land mass on a coin to be seen by many without plotting it on other documents?
I remember an article in a magazine a few years back about African traders bringing metal shipments to the Carribean during the 14th and 15th centuries yet I couldnt find any articles on that...if you can, let me know :)
Mayan Civilization
About a hundred years after the collapse of the Great Zimbabwe civilizations I mentioned in the last post, another empire was snuffed out on the other side of the globe. The Mayan Empire, which had withstood the test of time for over three thousand years, was destroyed in 1550's by Spanish greed. However, the Mayan peoples still live on today, integrated into the societies of numerous South American countries.
The Mayans began as an agricultural people that shared a common language in 2000 BCE. These people would come to occupy the land from southern Mexico to Western Honduras. They began with basic agricultural techniques to grow corn, beans, and cacao and raised domesticated dogs, turkeys, and ducks. They soon advanced to crop rotation and terracing and worshipped agricultural gods in villages run by chieftains. Even in this relatively primitive living arrangement, they had developed rudimentary astronomy as part of their religion. It was not long before the chiefs and nobles began constructing larger towns and monuments like pyramids. These larger towns held thousands of people, making the Mayan civilizations one of the most populous empires of the ancient world. They began developing the areas around their cities, turning them into stone urban centers, complete with palaces, water reservoirs, causeways, and covered with a limestone stucco, providing a uniform look in all settlements.
As time went on, society became more complex. The system of chiefs had developed into an entire social class of kings and nobles, who also doubled as priests during religious ceremonies. Each city was run by a king and his nobles and each city competed with each other and developed economically. Warfare was a part of Mayan life, but it was relegated into a ceremonial affair, waged on a much smaller scale than many of the empires around that time. The battles were mostly just raids by groups of nobles that did no real damage, other than some destruction to temples and the attempted kidnapping and sacrifice of rival rulers.
The people were divided into classes which included: Kings, Nobles, Merchants, Priests, Craftsmen, Farmers, and Slaves. These people believed in a polytheistic religion that required sacrifices. They also developed complex mathematics, astronomy, calendars, the concept of the number zero, and recorded their history on stone, pottery, and paper.
This society eventually began to deteriorate, as with all societies, and it began to breathe it's last when the Mayans abandoned the lowlands due to unknown reasons around late 800 CE. As of now, science has narrowed the cause to extended drought, disease, or warfare. Pretty much the standard we-don't-know-for-sure answer. This led to a weakening of Mayan society, economically, scientifically, and religiously. During this time, the Mayan civilization retreated into the Yucatan peninsula and focused their efforts their.
They rebuilt their civilization and began to flourish again until the Spanish arrived in 1511 CE. The Spanish Conquistadors and the colonists that followed soon began eradicating the Mayans through war, slavery, and disease, leading to total conquest of the area in 1697 CE. The Mayan civilization was no more, but remnants of it still survive in the hearts of many of its people, some of which have descendants still living in their homelands.
Oh, and by the way, nothing is going to happen in 2012.
Find out more at:
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761576077_3/Maya_Civilization.html
The Mayans began as an agricultural people that shared a common language in 2000 BCE. These people would come to occupy the land from southern Mexico to Western Honduras. They began with basic agricultural techniques to grow corn, beans, and cacao and raised domesticated dogs, turkeys, and ducks. They soon advanced to crop rotation and terracing and worshipped agricultural gods in villages run by chieftains. Even in this relatively primitive living arrangement, they had developed rudimentary astronomy as part of their religion. It was not long before the chiefs and nobles began constructing larger towns and monuments like pyramids. These larger towns held thousands of people, making the Mayan civilizations one of the most populous empires of the ancient world. They began developing the areas around their cities, turning them into stone urban centers, complete with palaces, water reservoirs, causeways, and covered with a limestone stucco, providing a uniform look in all settlements.
As time went on, society became more complex. The system of chiefs had developed into an entire social class of kings and nobles, who also doubled as priests during religious ceremonies. Each city was run by a king and his nobles and each city competed with each other and developed economically. Warfare was a part of Mayan life, but it was relegated into a ceremonial affair, waged on a much smaller scale than many of the empires around that time. The battles were mostly just raids by groups of nobles that did no real damage, other than some destruction to temples and the attempted kidnapping and sacrifice of rival rulers.
The people were divided into classes which included: Kings, Nobles, Merchants, Priests, Craftsmen, Farmers, and Slaves. These people believed in a polytheistic religion that required sacrifices. They also developed complex mathematics, astronomy, calendars, the concept of the number zero, and recorded their history on stone, pottery, and paper.
This society eventually began to deteriorate, as with all societies, and it began to breathe it's last when the Mayans abandoned the lowlands due to unknown reasons around late 800 CE. As of now, science has narrowed the cause to extended drought, disease, or warfare. Pretty much the standard we-don't-know-for-sure answer. This led to a weakening of Mayan society, economically, scientifically, and religiously. During this time, the Mayan civilization retreated into the Yucatan peninsula and focused their efforts their.
They rebuilt their civilization and began to flourish again until the Spanish arrived in 1511 CE. The Spanish Conquistadors and the colonists that followed soon began eradicating the Mayans through war, slavery, and disease, leading to total conquest of the area in 1697 CE. The Mayan civilization was no more, but remnants of it still survive in the hearts of many of its people, some of which have descendants still living in their homelands.
Oh, and by the way, nothing is going to happen in 2012.
Find out more at:
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761576077_3/Maya_Civilization.html
The Other Civilizations
Mostly, when the history curriculum turns to the great empires and civilizations of the world, the most often fought of are Rome, China, and possibly the South East Indian civilizations. Perhaps Persia or Egypt gets a mention from someone. Since the aforementioned societies shaped modern politics, economics, and social thought to such a degree that they did, the other societies are often forgotten. What of the kingdoms and tribal influences of Africa? Surely the land that scientifically spawned humanity deserves a mention in the minds of the college student. Furthermore, what mention is there of the Native American populations? Why is it that the other empires are so remembered and these are so forgotten?
Firstly, according to Robert Strayers textbook Ways of the World, A Brief Global History the lack of domesticated animals plays a large role in the power of societies. Unless water buffalo, zebra, and elephants count, Africa has slim pickings on animals it could domesticate. Now the great kingdoms ans cities of Africa did have access to the Roman markets as they continued to expand, however even at the height of the markets' involvements it was not enough to overcome this inherent disadvantage. Mesoamerica was likewise void of pack animals that could raise its empires to new heights. Without these creatures, transportation could not reach the same level as it did in Rome, nor could animals be used in an agricultural sense.
However, Mesoamerica and Africa managed to develop agriculture despite the domestication set back. According to Strayer, Mesoamerica was a "'totally engineered landscape'" in which the natives terraced mountains, constructed irrigation systems, and drained swamps. They were masters of their environment. The African societies cropped up after a large drought formed several large cities in the Southern Saharan region and consequently smaller villages formed up to supply the population with crops.
The cities of both continents also differed from the classic 'big' empires by their forms of governance. Quite a few of the African cities were noted to be 'cities without citadels' in that they had few distinct governments ruling the areas. Mesoamerica often relied on the elite families to rule over its people. Although many different ruling ideologies existed these helped differentiate between the great empires of the East. The differences between these empires helped form distinctive cultures that would never be seen in the same light. Due to the political and economic differences of these cultures, some would be forever remembered and others left as footnotes.
Firstly, according to Robert Strayers textbook Ways of the World, A Brief Global History the lack of domesticated animals plays a large role in the power of societies. Unless water buffalo, zebra, and elephants count, Africa has slim pickings on animals it could domesticate. Now the great kingdoms ans cities of Africa did have access to the Roman markets as they continued to expand, however even at the height of the markets' involvements it was not enough to overcome this inherent disadvantage. Mesoamerica was likewise void of pack animals that could raise its empires to new heights. Without these creatures, transportation could not reach the same level as it did in Rome, nor could animals be used in an agricultural sense.
However, Mesoamerica and Africa managed to develop agriculture despite the domestication set back. According to Strayer, Mesoamerica was a "'totally engineered landscape'" in which the natives terraced mountains, constructed irrigation systems, and drained swamps. They were masters of their environment. The African societies cropped up after a large drought formed several large cities in the Southern Saharan region and consequently smaller villages formed up to supply the population with crops.
The cities of both continents also differed from the classic 'big' empires by their forms of governance. Quite a few of the African cities were noted to be 'cities without citadels' in that they had few distinct governments ruling the areas. Mesoamerica often relied on the elite families to rule over its people. Although many different ruling ideologies existed these helped differentiate between the great empires of the East. The differences between these empires helped form distinctive cultures that would never be seen in the same light. Due to the political and economic differences of these cultures, some would be forever remembered and others left as footnotes.
The Great Zimbabwe Ruins, Historic and Political Impacts
It's already that day of the week, the last day to post a few blogs. Six days of procrastination and here I am again, at the edge of another deadline. Well, time to get to work I guess.
The Ruins of Great Zimbabwe have been an area of controversy ever since the empire that built it collapsed. Tribes from all over the area claim to be the descendants of the people that built the ruins. Europeans argue amongst themselves about the identity and race of the people that constructed Great Zimbabwe. It has been used in the political agendas of the people in charge and has been the rallying point of both racists and minorities. It is often in the center of conflicting ideas, so it would be best to know the facts about this ancient ruin.
The empire that first raised the walls of Great Zimbabwe reached its height between 1100 to 1450 CE and encompassed an area slightly larger than its modern descendant, Zimbabwe. It was a trading center that had ties quite far from its location in inland Africa, including Chinese artifacts. Near the end of the 1400's, the empire collapsed. The reason is unclear, but the common theories of drought, disease, famine, and poverty have been thrown around. For a time, the Shona people lived inside the ruins and continued its legacy as a trade hub until the Portuguese conquered them in the early 1600's and Great Zimbabwe sank into obscurity.
In 1867, a European hunter rediscovered the ruins and in 1871, a German geologist named Carl Mauch surveyed the ruins and proclaimed them to be connected to a biblical city of riches led by a Queen Sheba or the site of King Solomon's gold mines. Subsequent archaeologists deemed the site to have been a colony by white settlers, because they believed that the African population were too primitive to construct such a permanent structure. Some of these first archaeologists also caused damage to the site in their quest to prove that white settlers constructed the ruins. The white settler belief was not discredited until David Randall-Maciver came in 1905 and suggested that locals had built Great Zimbabwe and Gertrude Caton-Thompson's expedition supported that idea.
Up until that point, Great Zimbabwe was being used by the white colonists to cement their dominance over the African populace, by saying that Whites were there before the Africans, and that the Whites were superior to them. These discoveries were covered up until 1980, when these discoveries weakened the racist stranglehold of power, and would cause Africans rally behind this new symbol of African legitimacy over their own lands.
The Great Zimbabwe ruins have shown that the African populace was far more advanced than they were given credit for and have given the Africans their freedom back. The African citizens of Rhodesia changed their country's name to Zimbabwe in honor of the ruins that granted them their lands and freedom. Today, the Great Zimbabwe ruins are still part of a political agenda, but now, it is a symbol that unites people, instead of proving one's superiority over another.
More information can be found at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A21025513
The Ruins of Great Zimbabwe have been an area of controversy ever since the empire that built it collapsed. Tribes from all over the area claim to be the descendants of the people that built the ruins. Europeans argue amongst themselves about the identity and race of the people that constructed Great Zimbabwe. It has been used in the political agendas of the people in charge and has been the rallying point of both racists and minorities. It is often in the center of conflicting ideas, so it would be best to know the facts about this ancient ruin.
The empire that first raised the walls of Great Zimbabwe reached its height between 1100 to 1450 CE and encompassed an area slightly larger than its modern descendant, Zimbabwe. It was a trading center that had ties quite far from its location in inland Africa, including Chinese artifacts. Near the end of the 1400's, the empire collapsed. The reason is unclear, but the common theories of drought, disease, famine, and poverty have been thrown around. For a time, the Shona people lived inside the ruins and continued its legacy as a trade hub until the Portuguese conquered them in the early 1600's and Great Zimbabwe sank into obscurity.
In 1867, a European hunter rediscovered the ruins and in 1871, a German geologist named Carl Mauch surveyed the ruins and proclaimed them to be connected to a biblical city of riches led by a Queen Sheba or the site of King Solomon's gold mines. Subsequent archaeologists deemed the site to have been a colony by white settlers, because they believed that the African population were too primitive to construct such a permanent structure. Some of these first archaeologists also caused damage to the site in their quest to prove that white settlers constructed the ruins. The white settler belief was not discredited until David Randall-Maciver came in 1905 and suggested that locals had built Great Zimbabwe and Gertrude Caton-Thompson's expedition supported that idea.
Up until that point, Great Zimbabwe was being used by the white colonists to cement their dominance over the African populace, by saying that Whites were there before the Africans, and that the Whites were superior to them. These discoveries were covered up until 1980, when these discoveries weakened the racist stranglehold of power, and would cause Africans rally behind this new symbol of African legitimacy over their own lands.
The Great Zimbabwe ruins have shown that the African populace was far more advanced than they were given credit for and have given the Africans their freedom back. The African citizens of Rhodesia changed their country's name to Zimbabwe in honor of the ruins that granted them their lands and freedom. Today, the Great Zimbabwe ruins are still part of a political agenda, but now, it is a symbol that unites people, instead of proving one's superiority over another.
More information can be found at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A21025513
Thursday, October 22, 2009
All Roads Lead to Cuzco
When we think of roads of ancient empires we think of the Persians or especially Rome. However, the impressive roads of the Inca Empire normally do not come to mind. The Inca Empire was based in the Andes Mountains and covered a distance of 2500 Miles, from modern day Ecuador into Chile. The Incas used their roads to connect their large empire. In all the Inca Empire had 40,000 kilometers of roads.
What makes the Inca roads impressive is the engineering feat to create them. The roads had to be built in all terrains, such as deserts, jungles, and the mountains. Many of the roads had drainage systems that protected them from erosion. In the mountains the Incas used bridges to span great canyons. Some of these suspension bridges were 150 feet long, made out of strong fibers. The Inca roads do not resemble the roads of today or of Rome. They were designed for walking, because the Incas had not wheeled transportation or horses. Many roads, especially in the mountains, were more like stair cases. Local workers built and maintained the roads as service to the emperor.
The road network not only served for transport and travel but also for communication. This communication was carried out by messengers called chasqui, who were stationed every three kilometers. This system resembles the Pony Express created in the United States to connect the east and west. Also, on the roads were settlements each at a days walk apart, to serve as a resting spot for the night.
The Inca roads were a huge engineering feat. They connected the Inca Empire from one end to the other, and were built in challenging terrains and climates. In the mountains the engineers used suspension bridges that were more impressive than any other bridges in the world to date. Many roads still survive today and are even used.
For more information
http://archaeology.about.com/od/iterms/qt/inca_road.htm
http://transportationhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_inca_and_their_roads
http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N24/bridges.html
What makes the Inca roads impressive is the engineering feat to create them. The roads had to be built in all terrains, such as deserts, jungles, and the mountains. Many of the roads had drainage systems that protected them from erosion. In the mountains the Incas used bridges to span great canyons. Some of these suspension bridges were 150 feet long, made out of strong fibers. The Inca roads do not resemble the roads of today or of Rome. They were designed for walking, because the Incas had not wheeled transportation or horses. Many roads, especially in the mountains, were more like stair cases. Local workers built and maintained the roads as service to the emperor.
The road network not only served for transport and travel but also for communication. This communication was carried out by messengers called chasqui, who were stationed every three kilometers. This system resembles the Pony Express created in the United States to connect the east and west. Also, on the roads were settlements each at a days walk apart, to serve as a resting spot for the night.
The Inca roads were a huge engineering feat. They connected the Inca Empire from one end to the other, and were built in challenging terrains and climates. In the mountains the engineers used suspension bridges that were more impressive than any other bridges in the world to date. Many roads still survive today and are even used.
For more information
http://archaeology.about.com/od/iterms/qt/inca_road.htm
http://transportationhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_inca_and_their_roads
http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N24/bridges.html
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Profiles in History: Confucius
Hey, let's get another one of these things going.
Confucius or K'ung-fu-tzu, was a Chinese Philospher whose views on politics and wise proverbs still affect many countries and billions of people. He preached a family based government and how to act correctly, and his views, labeled Confucianism, eventually overtook Legalism and Taoism as the primary political view.
Confucius was born in 551 BCE into a lower-middle class family, called Shi, who are a group of commoners that rose up through the ranks because of skills and talents, and are ranked just below nobles. However, Confucius's family was in the lower strata of that social level, and that situation definitely did not improve when he lost his father at the age of three. His mother raised the family during this time of poverty and died when Confucius was 23.
Confucius worked many odd jobs such as herding and accounting until he attained a position in the Lu government as a Justice Minister at the age of 53. He stayed at this position until he felt that Lu was not the place to be and traveled all over China, preaching his philosophical views and trying to get a job as a government official. It's kind of funny how jobs were hard to come by back then too. Anyways, back to Confucius.
What Confucius preached was basically the same unified government format as the old days, but with a few key changes. One of the main changes was that the rulers would be chosen by morals, ability, and merit instead of who their parents were. By choosing people such as this to rule, the people could learn from their proper morals, instead of having proper behavior forced onto them with laws. Other things that Confucius proposed was to develop the self through self-reflection, learning about the World, and proper morals. He was also a big supporter of the Golden Rule, Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you.
As he traveled, Confucius explained his ideas to the royalty, but none of his ideas were placed into effect in his lifetime. Disappointed by the lack of work, Confucius moved back to Lu at sixty-eight and began to teach his philosophy to disciples and students. There are no texts anywhere that are proven to be written by Confucius himself, but his students and followers recorded much of his teachings and collected them in The Analects. At the age of seventy-three, Confucius died and left behind a legacy that still affects us today.
If you want to find out more about Confucius, feel free to click on this link.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/
Thanks for reading this all the way, and if you skip/skim it, that's cool too.
Confucius or K'ung-fu-tzu, was a Chinese Philospher whose views on politics and wise proverbs still affect many countries and billions of people. He preached a family based government and how to act correctly, and his views, labeled Confucianism, eventually overtook Legalism and Taoism as the primary political view.
Confucius was born in 551 BCE into a lower-middle class family, called Shi, who are a group of commoners that rose up through the ranks because of skills and talents, and are ranked just below nobles. However, Confucius's family was in the lower strata of that social level, and that situation definitely did not improve when he lost his father at the age of three. His mother raised the family during this time of poverty and died when Confucius was 23.
Confucius worked many odd jobs such as herding and accounting until he attained a position in the Lu government as a Justice Minister at the age of 53. He stayed at this position until he felt that Lu was not the place to be and traveled all over China, preaching his philosophical views and trying to get a job as a government official. It's kind of funny how jobs were hard to come by back then too. Anyways, back to Confucius.
What Confucius preached was basically the same unified government format as the old days, but with a few key changes. One of the main changes was that the rulers would be chosen by morals, ability, and merit instead of who their parents were. By choosing people such as this to rule, the people could learn from their proper morals, instead of having proper behavior forced onto them with laws. Other things that Confucius proposed was to develop the self through self-reflection, learning about the World, and proper morals. He was also a big supporter of the Golden Rule, Don't do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you.
As he traveled, Confucius explained his ideas to the royalty, but none of his ideas were placed into effect in his lifetime. Disappointed by the lack of work, Confucius moved back to Lu at sixty-eight and began to teach his philosophy to disciples and students. There are no texts anywhere that are proven to be written by Confucius himself, but his students and followers recorded much of his teachings and collected them in The Analects. At the age of seventy-three, Confucius died and left behind a legacy that still affects us today.
If you want to find out more about Confucius, feel free to click on this link.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/confucius/
Thanks for reading this all the way, and if you skip/skim it, that's cool too.
The Death of Alexander
After class on Friday, I was curious what exactly was the cause of death of Alexander the Great. Our professor mentioned he essentially partied himself to death. I thought that there must be extenuating circumstances or some conspiracy of assassination. I found an article by Cameron Battersby titled "What Killed Alexander the Great?" To my surprise, Battersby said that Alexander essentially partied himself to death.
Without raking over any more academic coals, it seems reasonable to conclude that modern medical knowledge seems to suggest that Alexander died from the effects of a surgical catastrophe resulting from excessive alcoholic consumption and Antipater and Cassander had no input into that. There can be little doubt that Alexander came to replicate so many of the attitudes and actions of his father, Philip. ‘In the warrior society, epic toping was a source of admiration’.This surprised me. Battersby mentioned the prevalence of the culture of alcohol in the time of Philip II. I never expected The Great Alexander was one to succumb to alcohol. I would have thought that such a famous instance of death by alcohol would be a common argument for the evils of drinking in excess. In any case, I found it interesting that surgical historians can issue diagnoses based on the description of events thousands of years ago.
For this reason, Boerhaave’s Syndrome may be the likely diagnosis. It would fit in with the onset of pain described by Diodorus in the middle of an alcoholic binge with repressed vomiting. Philip’s son could hardly be seen to vomit his liquor!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)