Extra Credit: Mongols Respected yes or no....

Hahaha wow was this a great and entertaining question to bring up with my family during Thanksgiving dinner. At first my parents just kind of looked at me in a strange way, like really you wanna discuss school on vacation but okay. We had an interesting conversation about it because at first my parents and I were on the fence about whether or not the Mongols really deserve to be more respected than what they were and still are. My obvious argument was that if we didn't appreciate them for something we wouldn't have named a country after them. They were unique in the sense that their force was unbeatable and yet they were able to persuade different groups of people in the different regions they conquered to change their normal day activities by improving on their technical skills. The Mongols obtained many skills, tricks and knowledge from the lands they conquered and went around spreading the ideas and perspectives of those people. So yes they do deserve to have more respect and acknowledgment for the fact that they didn't take credit for the ideas they spread. It was a strange thought before our discussion in class and with my family because before that I, like most people, would say that they didn't deserve respect for the horror they caused when taking over other lands and communities. But to be very honest people like the Conquistadors were also very vicious with how they conquered people but because history is written from the European point of view it will always be biased. The Europeans chose not to discuss the bad the Conquistadors did just the good but felt the need to point out all the flaws of the Mongols, which wasn't fair to a group of people who did terrorize but at the same time advanced many communities.

Geez Such Harsh Insinuations on Islam

Why do we view Islam as such a terrifying country? They have expressed that they are willing to die for their country. They fight for what they believe in and for their families. Oh that's right, they fight. Their violence is what they're very well known for. No one said they were bad people and trust me I'm not saying that at all, but they have been horrifically been stereotyped to be destructive people because of their dedication towards their religion. The people of Islam base their beliefs and dedication on the Quaran. This is their religious scripture that tells them that they will be doing their country a favor by dedicating themselves to Mohammad and the values he held. There is nothing wrong in putting your life at risk for others if it is being done for the right reasons but when it comes to taking revenge there is no value. People choose to be completely absorbed within their religion and not accept other religions for the reason that they have already been taught that it is taboo to accept another religion as your own. In the past to present day Islam, the values are still the same and the dedication is even more because of all the terrorist stereotypes created by surrounding countries and onlookers. Overall the individual is not fully to blame when it comes down to it because when people are easily manipulated through religion you can do anything for it, no matter what the consequences may be even death.

China vs Europe Who Made It Big

So in class we had a nice long debate about whether China or Europe experienced a more significant Renaissance. Okay well let's start with the fact that the Chinese may have created the first form of paper, but when the Europeans discovered their manufacturing methods of the paper they were able to spread the idea world wide. I felt like the Europeans made a significant "expansion" is the terminology I will use to defend myself. However, I do have to side with the fact that China had a more significant Renaissance due to the fact that they created a whole new China with the innovations they manufactured. The creations of paper, cotton and other innovations allowed for China to prosper as a country and they probably had good reasoning not to share it with the whole world. It could have been for the reason that they wanted to be the more prosperous and valuable country that had things other countries didn't have. So when the Europeans discovered China's secrets they chose to make it somewhat more advanced in order to disperse the idea to the world. The Europeans made themselves look like they were the most advanced and took all credit for manipulating the Chinese's original innovations. This is why I felt that the Europeans succeeded in having an expansion rather than a Renaissance because it wasn't based on their own original creations, but the manipulated versions of the original. Which in some sense wasn't very fair to China and this is why I felt that China deserved their accreditation for being the ones to manufacture the original. 

Oh Dear the Silk

Hmmm... it's not the milk but it sure does feel good. Who would have thought that this road would stretch as far from China to the Roman Empire? I would have thought maybe within Asia yes but not all the way to the Roman empire. Walking through the deserts and spreading wonderful material all over is the best trade that could help prosper. The trade included silk (of course), dates, clothing, religions and cultures. There were multiple religious concepts that were being spread through this route because the travelers would go to Greece, India, and other stops along the route and envelope and retain the culture. This was a large step to influencing the different regions with diversity and options of multiple beliefs. This also caused a lot of conflict among the regions because by creating forms of diversity within one region that had already become stable with one main religion was not going to end well for the non-believers. I find it so interesting because if you compare how nowadays diversity is valued whereas during that time period Christianity was the widely known religion and when other religions such as Islam and Hinduism started arising and spreading through this route it was very visible that not everyone wanted to follow the Christian religion but it was part of a status quo. 

Debate on Subjugation

"Subjugation is inevitable in human societies"
Wow what a great debate this was! I must say subjugation being defined as bringing under one's control it is a difficult topic to argue. I feel like it could be argued both ways but I will lean more to the no side of this. I feel like we definitely argued our points very well that subjugation can be avoided very well if people try hard enough to work together as one entity rather than attempting to overpower one another. The opposing side made the point that there is always one power hungry person within the community that attempts to manipulate the people into becoming their followers. But I'd like to point out that the nomadic people had no official leader because they had no specific place that they would settle down in. Also, they lived a hunter gatherer kind of lifestyle and they worked together in order to equally divide the food and materials amongst the fellow nomads. Seminal thinkers such as Confucious even encouraged being good to one another and working as a unit in order to have a functional community. Most people would think that oh that's totally impossible to not be oppressed by a single person or a group of people. If the paleolithic people and neolithic people were able to withstand being oppressed it is more than possible for people living in empires to be able to not subjugate the people by instilling fear within them, but instead they can work together and come to agreements that benefit all parties involved. I will acknowledge that the other side did make a somewhat valid point that a community has more structure and stability when there is someone in charge and having control over the people as a whole. However, in regards to mesopotamians and other indigenous peoples there was no main ruler but the Gods for them and they were able to maintain a stable and structured community. The people didn't have to fear oppression from any person but they feared the consequences when crossing spirits. This just shows that it is very possible for there to be no subjugation in a community if the people are willing to collaborate and work together. 

The Book of the Dead was something very interesting to read about. Who would have thought that so much is required of a person to enter the afterlife. Egyptians had very strict rules to enter the afterlife because they believed that the afterlife was sacred, just like their gods. The Egyptians developed their family units, hierarchy, and community on how the gods were known to lead life which is why it was important to be as pure as the gods in order to be prosperous in the afterlife. Not only was purity an aspect of the Book of Death, but the concept of being a good person to yourself and those in your community and always respecting the gods was also of great importance. All of the guidelines for the Book of the Dead are listed in a manor that applies to each individual about their actions that they have done throughout their lives and each one is based on god or community showing the importance of the community as a whole. 

Even though they had a hierarchy, the value of each person was similar because the Book of Dead didn't judge the rank of the person within the community but rather the type of person they were to their community. This expressed that Egypt had a very tight knit community that functioned well with the different ranks and this was a possible reason for their success as a community. Also the fact that the Book of the Dead was written on papyrus, it showed a growth of technologies such as language, art, and other developments. They were able to document their traditions and rituals on the papyrus to be later translated into what we now read as their Book of the Dead. Overall, the Book of the Dead was an interesting primary source that exposed a lot of valuable information to evaluate the Egyptian culture and community. 

Mesopotamians with Their Language and Attempts to Civilize

It’s amazing how advanced the Mesopotamian people were. They were advancing their own forms of technologies without even realizing it. The fact that technologies used for communication started with pictures and cave paintings into a written language. A language was a development that makes a community whole because by having a universal language it allows the people of that community to relay messages and conduct conversations amongst one another. As we can see through the story of Gilgamesh, the Mesopotamian people created stories about their own advancements as human beings. The Mesopotamians created their own form of a language that allowed historians of today to unravel some secrets about the lifestyle a Mesopotamian. Language is a large advancement for human beings and it coincides with the concept of civilizing people. The Mesopotamians were a group of people who made it possible to see that there was an understanding in the ways to civilize a “creature” into a human being. However, that didn’t mean that they were viewing the gender roles in an egalitarian point of view anymore. Women could be known as civilized but they were also in a sense weaker than the male. The egalitarian points of view in communities didn’t exist because they adapted to the ideas of having a hierarchy. In doing so, they segregated the ones who had power and wealth from those who didn’t have power and wealth. This also included the gender segregation within the family units created throughout the community because males had specific roles that gave them the provider title while the women held a caretaker title. As we can see, this concept still exists at times in this day and age, but now we try our hardest to create an equal role in society amongst the males and females.