Chapter 11: A Russian View of the Mongols

The writer of the Chronicle accounted for what he saw as the disaster of the Mongol invasion by describing the story of the invasion in great detail. While the passage is not necessarily a long one, the Russian writer surely knew which points to touch on in order to show how destructive and harmful the Mongols were towards their people. Basically, the Mongols didn't care about anyone! They raped their women and children and they would kill people by fire or by slaying them with swords. And this is how they conducted their business.
I think that the Mongols were successful for a number of reasons. First of all, they had a very large group of warriors to their advantage. The Russian writer describes them as coming "like locusts." I have never been in a swarm of locusts but I have seen them on TV and in movies and it is extremely frightening and hectic. I can imagine that if the Mongols approached the Russians as locusts do that it was a very overwhelming feeling, to say the least. Especially if the people of Ryazan were significantly outnumbered, which it appears that they were. They called upon Yuri of Volodimir for help but he did not assist them in their battles and so Ryazan went down quite easily. Another possible reason for the Mongol success is that they were "lawless," or so the Russian writer refers to them as. Throughout the document, the Chronicle writer talks about how horrible they were to the Russians. They seem to be fearless as they torch down churches and violated nuns and priests' wives. The fact that they were so demanding and really made it a point to take what they thought should be theirs is a very powerful tool.
I think a major thing that offended the Russians about the Mongols was there inconsideration for their religious beliefs. Time and time again the writer of the Chronicle refers to the Mongols as pagans. By the way that they treat their clergy and their nuns, they burn down their church, and the commit this huge massacre during Easter week. That seemed to be an important aspect of the Mongols that the Russians really did not like, apart from them clearly killing off all of their towns and stuff. But the fact that they disrespected God and their religion was a major offense by the Mongols.
In terms of a clash of cultures regarding the Mongols and the Russians, it could not be more prevalent. As I mentioned before, a major difference that existed was religion and religious beliefs. Influences on things such as language and government were also ways that the two cultures clashed at first and then, as most do in one way or another, sort of assimilated into one another. Russian culture absorbing more of that Mongolian culture, as there are still traces of that culture that are visible in Russia today.

Chapter 9: Reflections on The Voice of Allah

The Quran's understanding of Allah is, in many ways, quite similar to the Christian and Jewish God. First of all, they only refer to on god, not multiple gods. One of the things that I find interesting is all of the commotion over all of these different religions when essentially, they are all kind of saying the same things. Allah is infinitely compassionate and merciful, similar to the Christian and Jewish god. Allah is the one who was never born.. very similar to the Christian god. There are, of course, differences in the three Gods, however none so distinct that it makes them seem as if they are worlds apart. What I am trying to say is that more similarities exist between us and other cultures in regards to religion than our differences.

The Quran seems to have a very kind view of society. A good society is one that treats others with kindness. Even in terms of slaves, the Quran suggests that if they ask to be freed that they should be freed if the owner sees some kind of good in them so that they, too, can experience God's wealth! That's a really nice and open minded thing to say, I thought, especially for the time period. The Quran's view on a good society seems to be one that is quite inclusive and also just very nice. 

Attitudes toward non-Muslims are extremely accepting and open minded! I am not sure why I am so surprised by that, maybe because there is just so much war that has to do with religion. But the Quran states that all believers are brethren. And if someone feels differently than Muslims, then it is okay and there is nothing to freak out about. It stated that God could have created us all the same but he didn't, because he is testing our tolerance. And I kind of love that idea and I wish that everyone sort of followed that rule of thumb. That's fantastic. Perhaps once we all become tolerant then we can move on to the next step, which is to be accepting of other ways of life. 

Of course, there are always problems that can arise from different perceptions of God and stuff. That is just always going to be a problem and there will always be misunderstandings. For example, some people might even think, No! We can't be tolerant of others because my way is the right way! Stuff like that is difficult to combat and we can only hope that people can be as tolerant as their religions suggest that they should be. 

Chapter 7: Reflections on A European Christian in China

In Marco Polo's written travels, we see that he loves China! He seems to describe everything as "fine." But not the kind of fine that's just like, whatever... the kind of fine that would describe fine china. Ironic, kind of. I was referring to fine china as in plates that are used for a nice dinner party but I guess it also literally applies to the country of China in this case. Anyways, Marco Polo begins by saying that China is "the finest and noblest in the world." Clearly, he thinks very highly of it. He notices that both the men and the women are very fine and delicate and that nearly everything is just so great. He loves the silk that they dress themselves in and the quality of food in their markets and the bathhouses that they bathe in every month! Needless to say, he is very impressed. 

Marco Polo describes the city as "the finest and noblest in the world" so that the great Kaan could be aware of how awesome the city was. He did not want the city to be taken over or conquered, he wanted them to know how lovely the city was so that it could be preserved, almost, and saved from destruction and ruin.

It is clear that Marco Polo is a foreigner as well as a Christian in his writings. In one simple sentence, he is talking about how the Chinese eat dogs and other unclean animals and how a Christian would never do such a thing. For reasons like these, it is evident to see that Marco Polo is an outsider, despite the fact that he may have lived there for over ten years. In the last paragraph, he mentions that  the Chinese are extremely friendly to foreigners who come for trade and other such purposes. He knows this because he has been treated as a foreigner himself. He also makes it a point to mention that they hate the sight of soldiers!!

The evidence of China's relationship with the outer world is much focused on trade, it looks like. Marco Polo talks about how the foods that are from the market are the most fresh and how they come from different places. He also talks about how the treat foreigners so well, implying that foreigners do frequent China, especially for their exports of silk! That was a huge thing. China's silk provided for much trade of other goods, which connected them to various parts of the world. 

Chapter 6: Reflections on The Making of an Axumite Empire

In this document, it is clear that Axum has not yet accepted Christianity because of the thanks that he gives to Zeus, Poseidon, and Ares, all of which are Greek gods. Upon conquering all of these different villages and nations, Axum immediately notes that he could not have done so without the help of the gods. 

The point of view in which the document is written is certainly in the first person view of Axum. "I" is used consistently throughout the document and the arrogance and pride that the author has while talking about himself is unmistakeable. Basically, the author (Axum) sounds somewhat conceited and it is easy to see that he is speaking about himself. 

The types of imperial control that the document reveals is that of a very strong handed government. Keywords such as "conquered" and "submission" are indicative of the kind of force that Axum and his empire imposed on others. Practically the entire document consists of telling stories that talk about Axum overcoming others. There really is no other kind of imperial control in this document other than brute force and power. 

In regards to the Greek influence on the document, it may be accounted for due to the fact that it was written in Greek on a slab of stone that was decorated with Greek gods. Also, Axum refers to Greek gods in his writings. The text states that Axumites had their own deities but that they often ams to be Greek deities. One reason why Greece may have had such a powerful impact not the Axumite document is how powerful the Greek empire was. And Axum really responded to power!

A the end of the document, Axum thanks three of the greek gods. The sort of religious take that this empire has is one of power as well. Axum believes that the gods allowed him to take over all these other empires and towns and villages. The three gods that he mentions at the end are all extremely powerful and have control over the sea, warfare, and gods overall! Because their empire was very focused on force. 

Chapter 5: Reflections on Lessons for Women

It is difficult to say why exactly Ban Zhou began her work in such a critical manner towards herself. As we know, women back then were very disregarded and viewed as unimportant so perhaps the beginning of Zhou's "Lessons for Women" was a way of introducing herself in the most humble way possible, as to not upset anyone. In the preface, it mentions that she was very educated and yet she calls herself an "unworthy writer" and "unintelligent by nature."She gives most of the credit to her wealthy family and, back then, women were not considered smart and so if they were even to be considered good at anything it must be due to some external cause.
The Confucian attitudes that I saw reflected in "Lessons for Women" were that of respect and leadership. Zhou emphasizes how women can be the best that they can be in Chinese society (which is pretty depressing to read) and Confucius also emphasized rules of how one can become the best version of themselves. As it says in the pretext, the premise for "Lessons for Women" was to apply Confucianism to the lives and behaviors of women since, in reality, Confucius hardly mentioned women at all.
A perfect marriage is described as one that is a balance between yin and yang. One is powerful and the other yields. Zhuo says that "The correct relationship between husband and wife is based upon harmony and intimacy, and conjugal love is grounded in proper union."She really does stress the importance of harmony in her writing, however for them, a proper relationship is seen as the husband controlling his wife and the wife serving her husband. Today, that is not what we would consider a harmonious relationship but things were very different back then. Statements such as these make it evident how low women were seen. A perfect woman should have womanly virtue, womanly words, womanly bearing, and womanly work. As for the man, they should be in control of their women, however treat them with respect, as she questions how love can remain intact if a man hits a woman.
In regards to education, Zhou questions why only the young boys are taught and the young girls are not. She says that she understands that the boys need to learn so that they can "manifest their authority" but she also says that what the men do not realize is that "husbands and masters must also be served." Zhou believes that they are ignoring the harmonious relationship that men and women are supposed to be sharing. She references "The Rites," a famous text that states that children should be learning at the age of eight. It does not just specify that young boys should be educated, so why are they not teaching the young girls as well? Zhou, being an educated young woman, knows how important and beneficial it has been for her to have had literary training.

Chapter 4: Reflections from the Hindu Scriptures

In contrast to Confucius and his writings, the Bhagavad Gita has some different ideas on what a good society should be comprised of. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna tells that the way to achieve nirvana while still remaining active in the world is to be free of all attachments. This person does not have any desires. This is a very difficult thing and that is why it is very difficult to achieve nirvana. Krishna is somewhat vague when it comes to telling Arjuna why he should perform his duty as a warrior. He tells him that those who fight such battles are given "an open door to Heaven." It is sort of like it is just Arjuna's duty to fight because it is what the higher powers want. He also tells him that if he does not fight, that he is "abandoning his duty and his fame."

Krishna describes the god society as basically being that of a caste system, which was in place in India. The caste system was quite discriminatory and if you were born into a certain caste, it was extremely difficult to leave it. The four divisions of the caste system mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita are the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras. While the Sudras are the lowest class of the caste system mentioned here, they are still higher than the Untouchables, who are not even mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna explains that a good society is one in where everyone stays in their own places and does their own duties. He would rather have someone performing their own duty incorrectly than have someone performing someone else's duty perfectly. That's an interesting statement. 

A major theme that I see present in this Hindu passage is conformity. It seems that they liked everyone to play by the rules and not really ask a lot of questions or question why they might be doing what they were doing. As long as you were doing job, regardless of how "defective" it might be, you were pretty much in the clear. Don't rock the boat! Another theme that I found a little bit more comforting was the theme of rebirth. They also talk about how once someone dies, it is certain that they will be reborn, and vice versa. 

Compared to the Analects by Confucius, the Bhagavad Gita does seem very different. Confucius' work appeared to be much more inclusive and focused on being a good person and a good leader. I felt like the Hindu text was less geared towards individuals and more geared towards groups getting their job done. And if they got their job done, everything was going to be okay. However, I do think that one thing that the two have in common is the way the Confucius talked about being the best person that you can be and how Krishna also mentions how you can become the best person you can be (he mentions it is like assimilating to Brahmins, the highest class). Nevertheless, each of the texts provided some sort of groundwork for achieving the best version of yourself. 

Confucius: The Superior Man

Many of Confucius' ideas regarding leadership are extremely profound. What he refers to as "The Superior Man" is, in fact, a sort of paradigm of leadership and greatness. While there are some statements that I did not completely agree with, "Without recognizing the ordinances of Heaven, it is impossible to be a superior man," there were others that I found to be quite inspirational. During the time of Confucius, religion was a much more universally accepted practice. Today, I think that more people would not necessarily agree 100% with the idea that in order to be a great person or leader that you have to believe in God. Maybe I am wrong but that's how it would seem to be. I think that one of his statements that he made should actually be more relevant than it is today: "Riches and honors are what men desire. If they cannot be obtained in the proper way, they should not be held." I like that one. Take blood diamonds, for example. They are certainly not obtained in a proper way and therefore, people should not have them. But we do. In a perfect world, there would be no blood diamonds. One of my favorite quotes that I read was, "When internal examination discovers nothing wrong, what is there to be anxious about, what is there to fear?" I liked this because it tells us that if we look inside ourselves and are content with what we see, then why should we have anything to worry about? Another great one is "The superior man is modest in his speech, but exceeds in his actions." Statements such as these are the ones that are completely applicable today. Leaders should be humble and they should have trust in what they are doing and who they are. Even on a smaller scale, I think that everyone has some kind of leadership within them. If we know in our hearts that something is right, and true, and pure, then it most often is.

Chapter 3: Reflection on Governing a Chinese Empire

Han Fei's Legalism is called that because it is "hardheaded" and "practical" and lies in rewards and punishments that come from following or breaking the rules. Han Fei believed that in order to have an effective government, there needed to be rules that came with some serious consequences. He wrote that "if rewards are high, then what the ruler wants will be quickly effected if punishments are heavy, then what he does not want will be swiftly prevented" (169). Simply put, Han Fei loved rules and he loved to enforce them.
Han Fei speaks of the "two handles" in his writings. The first handle is chastisement and the other handle is commendation. For those who break the rules, they will experience chastisement: death or torture. And for those who "men of merit," they will receive encouragements and rewards. By having these two handles, Han Fei felt confident that his country would be strong due to the strong law-abiding citizens.
By reading Han Fei's writings, I think that he believes that the rules should apply to everyone but the intelligent rulers. I don't think that these rules apply to the  nobles but perhaps I am reading it wrong. He seems to attempt to make things somewhat equal when he says that "if the punishment is severe, the nobles must not discriminate against the humble" (151). I am honestly kind of confused by who Han Fei is directing this to. I am having trouble discerning whether or not he is excluding the nobles from the rules and punishments or if they are, in fact, included.
Han Fei and other Legalists of the time had a very pessimistic view of human nature. He thought that nobles, such as himself, were the best kind of people and that most other people were "stupid and shortsighted" (169). The Legalists believed that the aristocrats and the thinkers had no purpose in their society. Instead, they believed that the only valuable ones were the farmers and the soldiers. While those are definitely important roles in society, Han Fei was being a little ignorant in not acknowledging everyone else as being useless. Because he believed that everyone was stupid, he was a firm supporter of Legalism and the strict rules that his people were forced to follow.

Comparing Mesopotamia and Egypt

While Mesopotamia and Egypt were among some of the first civilizations, they were not similar in all of their ways. 

One of the major differences that Strayer talks about, in regards to agriculture, is the rivers. The Egyptians thrived off of the Nile river whereas the Mesopotamians had to deal with the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The Nile river was predictable and reliable, allowing for the Egyptians to have a certain sense of security when it came to their water needs. The Tigris and the Euphrates, on the other hand, also rose every year but it was uncertain as to when they would be doing so. For this reason, many of the Mesopotamians crops would be flooded without any warning, making it more difficult for them to effectively take care of their crops. In addition to having difficulty with their natural sources of water, Mesopotamia was more susceptible to invasion due to their surrounding open plains, which provided no real geographical barriers. Egypt was surrounded by vast deserts and waterfalls, all of which made it more difficult for outsiders to make their way in. Egyptians seem to have had the upper hand when it came to geography and agriculture. This may have been a contributing factor as to how the cultures of the two civilizations were shaped. 

Aside from environmental differences, Mesopotamia and Egypt had more political differences as well. Mesopotamia had over twelve independently governed city-states. Because each of the city-states was so independent, there was lots of warfare caused by want of land. Due to the chaos and frequent un-organization of the city-states, the Akkadians, an outside force, took over what was once the Mesopotamian civilization. The Egyptians, once again, had it much easier than the Mesopotamians did. The Egyptians had a united territory that went on for 1,000 miles up and down the coast of the Nile river. The Egyptians were able to maintain their way of living for over 3,000 years! That is very impressive and a statistic that other ancient civilizations were unable to attain. Pharaohs were the men in charge of Egypt and everyone would look up to them, believing that they were a god in a man's body. The pharaohs remained powerful until the Nile river began to flood unpredictably and the Pharaoh was unable to predict the time of the flood. Only then was the image of the Pharaoh discredited and Egypt disbanded for some while. 

Although Egypt and Mesopotamia seemed as if they were two entirely different worlds, they actually did interact with one another as well as with some other of their neighbors. Egypt and Mesopotamia participated in trade with one another, though is was mostly fancy things for the elite of both societies. Both ancient civilizations were influenced by societies outside of their own and implemented ideas such as the chariot. 

There are many contrasting characteristics that do make both Egypt and Mesopotamia seem very different from one another, however each of the civilizations were simply doing the best that they could with the resources that they had. Clearly, Egypt had a much more welcoming environment to live in (and a much more unwelcoming environment that surrounded it and kept invaders out). On Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, physiological needs and safety needs are at the base of living a happy life. Looking at this, it makes sense that the Egyptians were able to have such a successful civilization for so long. Their basic needs were fulfilled, allowing them to worry about stuff other than when their river might flood. 

Chapter 2: Reflection on The Occupations of Old Egypt

The Egyptian text "Be a Scribe" was a school text that students would copy in hopes of improving their own writing. The text stresses the importance of becoming a scribe and highlights many of the disadvantages of following any other line of work.
By reading the Egyptian text, the occupational and social structure of Middle Kingdom Egypt did not seem very diverse. There seemed to be those who have noble positions and then... everyone else. "Be a Scribe" goes through over ten different occupations, each one very different and yet each one describing the toils and hardships that the men and women of those jobs face. The profession of a scribe was one of great importance and luxury seeing that it "it pleases more than bread and beer, more than clothing and ointment." In contrast to the more egalitarian societal structures of the Paleolithic civilization, the social and political hierarchy of the Egyptian society is very evident, as seen in the document. From "Be a Scribe," historians are able to grasp a real sense of the developing social structures that early civilizations were beginning to develop.
Learning how to write would open a boatload of opportunity for young Egyptians! After describing the many tedious and tiresome jobs of the peasant and the ships' crews and so on, the narrator of the document pauses to share some of the pleasantries of becoming a scribe. To succinctly sum up the many advantages of learning how to write: "Put the writings in your heart, and you will be protected from all kinds of toil. You will become a worthy official."Nice clothes, a mansion, and servants are just a few of the things that are mentioned.
While reading the Egyptian text it was kind of funny to truly see the absolutely timeless frustrations of a teacher. Not simply a teacher in a classroom, but the kind of person who has ever tried to give you any valuable advice in your life. The narrator of the document is practically begging the student to educate themselves as they say, "If you have any sense, be a scribe."And for as long as the instructor tries to press this information among the students, they do not seem to listen or to care: "But though I spend the day telling you 'Write,' it seems like a plague to you." The humor that I found in this is the uncanny familiarity of it all. Today, our educators and parents tell us to be educated and work hard and listen... But we are college students and we are invincible. History proves again that it does, indeed, repeat itself.

Chapter 2: First Civilizations

The hierarchies of gender and class are what interested me most about beginning of the earliest civilizations. As discussed before, the Paleolithic societies were some of the most egalitarian societies in the history of the world. It seemed that as civilization grew and things began to grow more complicated and complex, the equal roles of human beings began to dissipate. Inequality is now a very natural thing in our industrialized, technological societies and while it is something that is considered a concern, it is also something that humans have almost come to accept. Similar to today's hierarchy, the upper class was composed of people who did not have to do physical labor. On the other hand of the spectrum was the farmers, whose "surplus production supported the upper classes." Even further down on the hierarchical scale, however, were the slaves. Slaves emerged at the same time that civilization did, says Strayer in his book. Things were very simple back during the Paleolithic era and when new civilizations began to emerge, things became more and more intricate.
In terms of gender, historians believe that the inequalities became more apparent as civilizations grew, similar to the class hierarchy. They mentioned how things such as warfare caused women to slowly lose their equal status that they once shared with the men. Because men are more capable of things such as fighting, if only due to physical advantages, the women would stay home and take care of the kinds and the home. Sound familiar? While it does seem to make practical sense for the time and situation, the inequality of both class and gender was just something that skyrocketed way out of hand. Unfortunately, humans began to take advantage of others and decided that slaves were a good idea, as well as the unequal treatment of women over the years. Nevertheless, it was interesting to see where such disparities came from and what their foundation is rooted in.

Gilgamesh Excerpt

Endiku is a beastly kind of man who lives among the animals. He feeds with them and he drinks from the same watering hole as they do. Endiku does not know anything else for "he knew neither people nor settled living." One day, a hunter comes across Endiku and is fearful of the way that this man is living as such a beast. He sends for a prostitute to tame and civilize Endiku. Apparently, women were seen as forces that could convert such wild things. The hunter's and his father's plan is for the prostitute to basically strip for Endiku and then seduce him and have sex with him. Once that all happens, the hunter's father hypothesizes that Endiku will no longer belong to the wild because " his animals who grew up in his wilderness will be alien to him." The hunter and the prostitute go through with the plan and it works! They have sex for an impressive six days and seven nights and then Endiku is so tired from all of the hard work that he has no energy to run with the animals as before. He comes to this sort of revelation that he is not supposed to be some wild person anyway, and he listens to the prostitute tell him how wonderful and godlike he has the potential to be. If only he were civilized... For the Mesopotamians, to be civilized was to give into hedonistic pleasures. Endiku was only civilized once he had sex, ate food, and drank beer. "Eat the food, Endiku, it is the way one lives," they said, "Drink the beer, as is the custom of the land." Only one Endiku did as the others did and left behind his more primal past did he "turn into a human." That line caught my eye, as it implies that prior to becoming civilized, Endiku was nothing but a wild beast. 

Chapter 1: Reflection on Nisa Interviews

By reading the interviews that Nisa partook in, I think that it shows that she has a very good idea of the life of earlier Paleolithic people. She starts off by talking about "life in the bush" and this allows readers to see that she is not much different from the earlier Paleolithic people. Much like the hunter/gatherer societies of the past, Nisa and her community operate in a very similar manner. Nisa tells us that one of the things that makes her most happy is when her father comes home bearing meat or honey. That is something that they treasure and we can see that is one of the most important things in her life. 

Nisa's accounts regarding sex and marriage show us that it is something that, in their culture, has to be done. There are several contrasts between marriage and sex in the San culture and in our culture. Today, we have more of a choice when it comes to marriage (and sex!). Women are becoming increasingly more independent and it is no longer believed that women need a man to take care of them, make money, bring home food, etc. The San culture is much more basic and, actually, it is much more realistic that the San women do need a man in order to help them hunt while they take care of the kids, for example. Nisa was very scared when she was to be married. As I would be also. The marriage is arranged and the girls are very young. She talks about how, at the end, she came to love and miss her husband, just like any other wife. 

Nisa looks at God and the divine in kind of a critical manner. Throughout her interview, I did not see her thank God for anything but I did see her blame God for things such as death: "God is the one who destroys. It isn't people who do it. It is God himself." I found this to be interesting. I wonder if Nisa feels this way because of personal experiences that have occurred to her or if this is kind of more of a general way of San thinking? In regards to the healing rituals, Nisa does believe in the power of those. Again, she questions if the strange sensation that you feel while experiencing N/um is God's doing. However, she does view the healing powers and very good and very strong. 

Overall, I think that Nisa's assessment of San life is perfectly realistic. That's kind of an interesting question to answer because of course, this being an interview of Nisa, everything will be described the way that she perceives things. And, ultimately, your perception is your reality. Therefore, her assessment is as realistic as it can get. To say that she made San life seem romantic or cynical would simply be our interpretation of something that we do not truly know or understand. For this reason, I cannot say that her description of a Paleolithic woman in the 20th century is anything but realistic. 

Chapter 1: Out of Africa & The Ways We Were

Regardless of how many times that I hear or learn about it, the beginning of human civilization will always remain incredible to me. Homo sapiens, stemming from Africa, were able to overcome difficult challenges that the huge and undiscovered world held. They survived the Ice Age and traveled from continent to continent via land bridges that the melting glaciers had created.We worry about what we will do after we graduate college and these nomads had to worry about day to day survival.
Early human societies were very small and nearly everyone had the same set of skills. Obviously, men were more typically hunters and women were more typically gatherers, however, there were no "specialists" of any kind of particular trade. One could say that things were more free, equal, fair. In fact, a study showed that plants gathered by women made up 70% of the diet while meat hunted by the men made up about 30%. Imagine that-a society where the female is the one who is looked to bring home the bacon. While today, we have made huge strides in beaming a more equal society, there are still many stereotypes that apply. Overall, the male is the one still looked upon to bring home the food and the money. Seeing that they do continue to make more money annually than women.
It's interesting because the earlier human societies lived such simple lives. There are so many distractions and materialistic values and intentions today. Reading about how things once were causes reflection of how much we have changed. And it brings about curiosity about the future. How much will change?