This blog will answer two questions:
1. In what ways did pastoral societies differ from their agricultural counterparts?
Pastoral societies as a whole were more often than not less productive economies. They didn't have the need to support large populations like agricultural societies which brings us to another difference, that the people lived in small encampments. These encampments were organized not by villages or towns but rather by kinship and in clans. Pastoral societies were also known to give women a higher status. Women were involved in the agricultural labor and had many domestic responsibilities, they were also given the right to remarry and file for a divorce without social out-casting. Finally the mobility of the pastoral societies was much greater than those of the agricultural societies. When the pastoral societies would be on the move they had a purpose and would bring their elaborate tent homes with them.
2. How did Chinggis Khan become so notorious so quickly?
His personal magnetism and courage allowed him to rise more quickly then most. Khan also relied on good friends and used traits such as loyalty rather than preference of kinship to gain friends and followers. He became chief shortly after winning a military battle and many people responded as followers. The more mobile he was the greater leader he became, eventually spreading his reign over The Great Mongol Nation which was now unified. Finally his expansion into China, Korea, Central Asia, Russia, Islamic Middle East and parts of Eastern Europe became a reality where people from all religions and backgrounds worshiped him.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Chapter 7
I wanted to answer the question, "How does the experience of the Niger Valley challenge conventional notions of "civilization""? (188).
Since we spent so much time talking about what made a civilization I figured this was a good question to answer, a bit of a distinction between what we have been studying. As far as the experience of the Niger Valley it differed in many ways from the civilizations we have looked at for the most part. The first striking difference was the lack of an imperial system. The Niger Valley, as far as historians have been able to tell were a series of "complex urban centers" which did not need the authority of some stately power. What I found most interesting however was the way the economy was organized (188). There was such a thing as a specialty where it ended up turning into a caste system where you could not marry outside of your specialization, such as rice cultivating or fishing. Another big difference for this civilization was the trade, how they traded and what they traded. Because there was scarcity among the land for certain resources it meant that the inhabitants had to travel further for what they needed, ultimately creating stronger relationships and a pattern of commerce.
Since we spent so much time talking about what made a civilization I figured this was a good question to answer, a bit of a distinction between what we have been studying. As far as the experience of the Niger Valley it differed in many ways from the civilizations we have looked at for the most part. The first striking difference was the lack of an imperial system. The Niger Valley, as far as historians have been able to tell were a series of "complex urban centers" which did not need the authority of some stately power. What I found most interesting however was the way the economy was organized (188). There was such a thing as a specialty where it ended up turning into a caste system where you could not marry outside of your specialization, such as rice cultivating or fishing. Another big difference for this civilization was the trade, how they traded and what they traded. Because there was scarcity among the land for certain resources it meant that the inhabitants had to travel further for what they needed, ultimately creating stronger relationships and a pattern of commerce.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Chapter 11 - The word Jihad
What caught my eye about this chapter was simple, a word. The word jihad seems to not be so foreign these days and I felt a certain familiarity reading the word. However upon reading the paragraph I realize that it is just another word I have heard and rather than have an understanding of it I simply link it to the first thing that came to mind. I am utterly embarrassed to say what I saw a connection with but I will try and explain. There is a show called NCIS and on this show a character named Zevva, of Hebrew descent works with many terrorism cases. While I know nothing about what it is I decided to do some research. The book says that jihad is sometimes called the sixth pillar and can refer to struggle. I while I continued reading I found "the understanding and use of the jihad concept varied widely within the history of Islam and remains a matter of controversy int he twenty-first century" (306).
I wanted to see what the first thing that popped up when I searched the word jihad on google and it was, without fail wikipedia, next was something called Jihad Watch. Jihadwatch.org states that:
"Jihad Watch is dedicated to bringing public attention to the role that jihad theology and ideology play in the modern world and to correcting popular misconceptions about the role of jihad and religion in modern-day conflicts. By shedding as much light as possible on these matters, we hope to alert people of good will to the true nature of the present global conflict."
What concerns me most however is that this website may not be spreading as fast as it should, for example if you switch your search to just images, I would say that easily 99% of the results are images of violence, in same cases grotesque pictures. I suppose I want to understand why this word jihad has not been dissected back to its true meaning? If so, there could be a greater chance that we would honor our neighbors for their beliefs instead of betraying their true character.
I wanted to see what the first thing that popped up when I searched the word jihad on google and it was, without fail wikipedia, next was something called Jihad Watch. Jihadwatch.org states that:
"Jihad Watch is dedicated to bringing public attention to the role that jihad theology and ideology play in the modern world and to correcting popular misconceptions about the role of jihad and religion in modern-day conflicts. By shedding as much light as possible on these matters, we hope to alert people of good will to the true nature of the present global conflict."
What concerns me most however is that this website may not be spreading as fast as it should, for example if you switch your search to just images, I would say that easily 99% of the results are images of violence, in same cases grotesque pictures. I suppose I want to understand why this word jihad has not been dissected back to its true meaning? If so, there could be a greater chance that we would honor our neighbors for their beliefs instead of betraying their true character.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)