Daniel Turek

Mongol Aggression Debate

Andrews 21 Nov 2012

 

According to Ways of the World author Robert Strayer, Mongols left an “indelible” mark on “the agricultural civilizations with which they so often interacted.” (Strayer p334) That is certainly true- one could say that the indelible mark was more of a deep wound of terror, violence, slavery, and suffering for those who were “interacted” with by the Mongols. Strayer begins the chapter with a little background on the Mongols, and no one can deny that they had a keen sense of the usefulness of technology in combat. Also, mobility – captured technology led to new innovations, these “innovations included complex horse harnesses, saddles with iron stirrups, a small compound bow that could be fired from horseback, various forms of armor, and new kinds of swords.” (p337-338) By the time Mongols started mounted warfare from the backs of horses and camels, they had figured something out that would reverberate through history – speed and distance win in military combat. By being faster, taller, and more in control than their opponents, the Mongols had all the key advantages. In this way, they exploited their power for gain in the lands surrounding their starting point. This exploitation of power alone dooms the Mongols to a place in history right there with the Nazis and Stalin’s Communist Russia. Any powerful empire that chooses to beat down their neighbors must be considered savage by history.

   However these savages changed the course of history, one must admit that they made history, and so should be recognized as such. But in a debate about whether or not the Mongols got a “bad rap” by historians, I cannot imagine how even the early scribes of those times would have made so much about the Mongols if it was not true. Why would anyone want to make up a story about how their homeland was conquered, their women and children enslaved, and their way of life destroyed? No, the Mongols were most likely exactly as described. Mongols left what Strayer describes as a “surprisingly modest cultural imprint on the world it had briefly governed.” (p342) This is not surprising really when one considers the fact that the Mongols had a very simple and, actually, meaningless culture in their empire. In fact, the main goal of the Mongols was to ride over the next dune and conquer and/or kill whoever might be living there. That is not a culture – it is simply a self-serving, cold-blooded way for a people to live. It is actually the antithesis of the adage, “live and let live.” Strayer points out the summarizing point of the whole driving ideal of the Mongols: “Each fresh victory brought new resources for making war and new threats or insecurities that seems to require further expansion.” (p345) That is all they had – like so many termites or locusts, which have only the need to exploit every natural resource so that they may spread everywhere to consume absolutely everything, the Mongols were the same. No, it is not an understatement to say that their bad rap was deserved.

Nov. 13, 2012

   How fascinating to finally read about Islam and what it means to be Muslim. Although some of the concepts and facts Strayer discussed were known to me previously, I did learn so much more about aspects of the faith that had been mysterious to me. The connection to Christianity was especially surprising - I wonder how many people of those claiming to be Christian or Muslim know just how connected the two belief systems are. Something else that caught my attention was the notion that Islam from the start was a belief system intent on crushing rivals and proving other belief systems to be wrong. Well, wrong as far as whether or not they could in some way coincide with Islam. It is fairly tragic that in the modern day, when I read the word jihad I can't help but connect so many negative connotations. Then again, jihad exists right there alongside Inquisition and witch trials, etc. So many belief systems of humankind involve an outlet for intolerance and persecution of non-believers. Of course, an individual can have just as fervent a belief in which football team is best, or the classic Coke vs. Pepsi debate...
    Personally, I'm down with either Coke or Pepsi. I suppose that says a lot about my nature - I can accept variety. To some degree, it seems like Islam can accept some variety as well. In Strayer's account of Islamic history, he is sure to point out the fact that on several occasions, when Islam was introduced to a new area with a pre-existing belief system, the conversion was gradual and maybe even formed a symbiotic relationship with the local beliefs. That is very progressive for an organized religion. But what it not so progressive is the fact that under the Quran, women are yet again subjugated and deemed fit for corporal punishment if found guilty of any "crime," even if it is a crime for which a man would receive no punishment whatsoever. It says so much about the nature of women that there hasn't been a revolt of all females against men who seek to treat women as property or second-class citizens.Unfortunetly, it is male humans who always seek to solve their problems with violence and bloodshed. Maybe someday everyone will realize that this is not the answer.
    I have often scoffed at organized religion, but my mother has always said that it is the people who corrupt the religion - if a religion gets a bad name, it is not the spirituality that did the damage, but the human beings who did the damage in the name of the religion. When looking at the five pillars of Islam, one can see how this is the case. Any individual who is kind, generous, and humble is alright by me. If one subscribes to the five pillars, the resulting person will be a good person. I do not think I need to go into detail about historical events that gave Islam and the Arab world a bad name, so I won't. Suffice it to say, that for all people who subscribe to an organized religion, let me say this - if your faith leads you to a place where you are respectful and courteous and generous to your fellow humans, you have the right idea. If whatever you are reading inspires you to have hatred in your heart and wish suffering and pain on others, then all I can say is put that foul book down and never pick it up again. In fact, how about chucking that book into a recycling machine so it can get made into something far more useful: greeting cards...

Nov. 6, 2012

    Yeah! Obama was re-elected - the USA dodged a bullet with this close election...

   But anyway, in regards to the likelihood of sea-faring migration along the coast of North and South America, and the South Pacific, I believe it makes complete sense. As it is mentioned several times in the reading packet, it is just too bad that there is not more evidence to fully flesh out the theory. Of course no one should just blindly believe everything they read, but the way all these cultures are, including traditions, technology, appearance, etc., it just makes sense that there would be a common origin and migratory path. To think that people braved the open ocean without the modern technology we take for granted is amazing. Of course, even today, people travel across open ocean in very basic watercraft with minimal amounts of equipment. But think about it - no coast guard or navy to come to the rescue in an emergency!
   Perhaps it is because I grew up on the coast and really would never want to live away from the ocean, I see a certain nobility in the fact that the sea-faring travelers did not leave behind much in the way of physical evidence. They lived in relative harmony with their environment; they felt no need to erect enormous temples or destroy the landscape with mining or huge scale farming. It goes back to my preferred way of looking at the correct way for humans to interact with the natural environment: "Take only pictures, Leave only footprints." But unfortunetly, the early sea-farers could not take pictures, and did not provide future generations with written records. There were cave inscriptions and decorations, and pottery, but nothing can substitute a written account of how everything happened. It would be amazing to know exactly how the migrations happened and what was going on with the people who were a part of it.
   Maybe as time goes on, more marine archaelogy work will be done along the coastlines and some evidence will be found that will tie it all together. I can see why people would devote so much time and energy into the pursuit of this knowledge. I mean, do you realize that in this modern time, we know more about the surface of Mars than we do about how people migrated from Eurasia to the Americas? But, as we know, for so long there has been a lack of resources and energy devoted to anything not centered around Western Europe. But times are changing, and the human species will be richer as more connections with our past become clear.

Nov. 4, 2012

   It was incredibly fascinating to read about the origins of global trade. Today, we take such things completely for granted. From goods and products to breaking news, we here in the US can know exactly whats going on anywhere in the world. Reading about the Silk Road and sea-going trade in the Indian Ocean shows that although we do take these things for granted, the origins are far more complex than what is immediately apparent. Also, as previously discussed, it is foolish to consider China to be an "emerging" economic power. Anyone who possesses that view obviously does not know much about global history!
   Studying history is not as useful without relating it to the present. As a US citizen, I have fallen into the funk of looking at the news and seeing the country falling into economic hard times, while concurrently, China rises in economic, and therefore political, power. Well, at it turns out, all this stuff happened a thousand years ago! Everything moves in cycles, and everything "comes full circle." As soon as the "merchant trade" came into being, the truth became such things as "to the victor go the spoils" and "survival of the fittest" in the "cut-throat" business world. The moment power rested with those who controlled "trade," the door was opened for the shrewd and the resourceful to determine the fate of people and nations. Instead of power being measured by square miles of land, or the number of standing armies, real power came down to who controlled the money. And, in the case of the era of history we're looking at, the "money" could be silk, or spices, or knowledge. This is the world we live in today - wars are fought and peoples' lives are at stake, but so much of it comes down to corporate profit margins and the wealthy doing everything is their power to remain wealthy.
   But back to the world of the Silk Roads and the Byzantines, and Marco Polo, it would have been an exciting, and trecherous, time to be alive. The world was changing rapidly, and this was the first time in history where people saw substantial change within their own lifetimes. Instead of global change occuring on the scale of millenia, power and change could sway within a matter of years. Here was the beginning of a trend - fortunes could be made overnight, and lost just as swiftly. The picture of this time painted by Strayer evokes all the adventure and romance associated with this brave new era of long-distance trade, but reading about the suffering and chaos that went along with it does not spur envy. Reading about the effects of disease on malequipped native populations is especially disheartening. But somehow, humankind survived, and although there have been ups and downs, we as a global population know what it takes to live in peace and unity. The question is, will everyone someday be willing to set aside personal ambitions for wealth and power so that all may live in comfort and with opportunity?

   The current condition of the United States of America is not perfect. It is no utopia free from struggle, class inequality, poverty, crime, etc., etc. As US citizens, we wake up every morning and do what we can to survive; if we are lucky, we may even seek to better ourselves. For those among us who strive to better the lives of our fellows, I say Thank You. I'm sure that sentiment is not expressed nearly as often as it should.
   There is no shortage of people in the US who believe conspiracy runs rapant in politics - the authorities wield their power like tyrants who wish for nothing more than to stifle the masses and prevent any deviation from the status quo. The wealthy seek to hoard all resources and force the common rabble to fight over the scraps. They ensure that there is no opportunity for a neo-Spartacus...
   On that note, one cannot consider present-day America without drawing the obvious parallel to that notorious experiment known as The Roman Empire. Did citizens dwelling within Rome realize that a couple thousand years in the future, history students the world over would view their system as an example of what not to do? Wait a minute - I shouldn't say students. After all, I do not speak for everyone. I only speak on behalf of any person who believes slavery is heinous and deplorable. My view on that particular subject is in fact a product of my geographic location. In a wonderfully idealized way, the writers of the United States' governing documents pushed this notion that every person had an inalienable right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." What an incredible concept- it is incredible to think that people actually had to write that down as if it wasn't a natural way to think about the state of living as a human. I cannot think of anything more natural than to live and find joy in life, and to promote the well-being of others so that all may find the beauty that exists in simply living. Talk about idealism. Even as I write these words that seek to promote peace and good among all people, there is inevitably someone in the world who is plotting a way to destroy life and bring pain and suffering to others. What a place Earth is. Sociologists probably have endless theories of why this dichotomy exists, but I suppose it is not worth getting too worked up over it.
   Back to the topic at hand- how anyone could imagine slavery being a natural order is beyond me. Reading Strayer's account of slavery through the ages is depressing and tragic. To think the institution of slavery has become interwoven with the fabric of humanity is a shame on our species. I cannot help but wonder what the world would look like today if everyone naturally rejected the notion of enslaving other humans. Imagine over the course of millennia how many potential innovators or great thinkers were engulfed by the suffocating evil of slavery.
   America was partially built on the backs of slavery. I consider myself lucky to live in an era where I can look back to the early dark days of this country and realize that slavery is a horrific institution that was rightfully abolished. Slavery still exists in some unenlightened places in the world, and that is an ongoing tragedy. Humankind is much better off on the whole than the way things were only several hundred years ago. Where can we go from here? As always since the dawn of "civilization," the people have the power to live right and justly. However, the masses always have found themselves in need of guidance and government- the key to providing good life and opportunity for all lies within the chosen leadership. In those brutal, class-based societies in classical India, China or Rome, the leaders seemed to exercise control over the people that seems unreal. No government should ever be allowed to get that all-powerful. It's up to the people to ensure that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is not infringed upon.

Comments on classmates' Blogs:

On Courtney A.'s Blog:  I see a good overview of what is going on in the chapters, and how those events relate to one another. I believe there could be some more analysis and personal reflection, however- I understand that one of the aspects of blogging for the class is supposed to be personal thoughts/reflections, and maybe expanding on the textbook material into more creative subjects. This kind of personal touch might not be very comfortable for everyone as not everybody wants to put personal stuff on the internet. But the personal thoughts don't have to be extremely controversial or slanderous- just something to allow the reader to ponder what the blogger might be thinking/feeling as she or he reads the material. That's the stuff which makes for entertaining reading...


On Bianca L.'s Blog:  The post I read from Jordanlee's blog gave a good look at the train of thought going from our modern way of living back to the paleolithic way of gathering/hunting. Although the seed was planted for an in-depth comparison of the two methods of survival, the post stopped short of giving more of the author's thoughts and opinions on the subject. The most interesting and fascinating reading arises from the author who is willing to give themselves up to the reader- I do not mean to say that every last detail and opinion must be expressed (after all, some might be too controversial or inappropriate to share!) but something should be given up to give the reader a sense of feeling or emotion. Comparing prehistoric life and modern life is a great way to express one's feelings on the current state of the human experience.


On Jordanlee C.'s Blog:  Very interesting to compare modern US with some of the ancient civilizations we have been studying- So many times people in the US believe that the system of government in use is a stand-alone and nothing can be added or removed, but there is room for reconsideration. This is the kind of thought process that can be expanded upon greatly; books are written on subjects such as this. When blogging about such a topic, the author may feel uncomfortable when expressing opinions about such controversy, but the thoughts and opinions are the real meat of the discussion. By giving this extra dimension to the discussion, any educated person will read it and reflect on their own opinions and thoughts- only the uneducated would use someone's thoughts and opinions as a threat to some long-standing tradition or institution.


On Rachel O.'s Blog:  This is the kind of blog that grabs a reader's attention and presents creative thoughts and material. By adding that personal touch, I as the reader feel a better connection to the blog because it stirs my imagination- I was glad to read that Rachel had pondered the existence of other culture and artifacts on the Greek peninsula. That is the kind of thinking that leads one to wonder about the material; upon doing that, the material becomes more than just words on paper. It becomes real; an actual world that is lost to winds of change. But the remains are still out there, waiting to be discovered.


On Ben G.'s Blog:  The philosophical questions raised in this blog really work over the mind- Was it all simply destiny? Was Man's pursuit of ultimate power a conscious decision? Did the rise of human civilization spell the end Man's connection with the natural world? As one can immediately realize, when a blog goes on this kind of philosophical journey, there tends to be no end to the questions one can ask. What is in far fewer supply is real, undeniable answers. But that is the wondrous thing about philosophy- the answers are not right or wrong; the only answers that matter are the ones that bring the individual and sense or peace and comfort. When no answer brings peace nor comfort, the individual is in a bad place- although one does not need to answer all of life's mysteries wrapped up in a neat bow, there must be a feeling of ease. When a person or peoples is/are uneasy, the outcome tends to be tragic... 

Herodotus - Hail to the Home Team!

   On one hand, the bias towards the cause of the Greeks as they battled the vast Persian army is obvious in the piece. But after reading Herodotus' passage about the valient stand made by the Greeks at Thermopylae, something occured to me - this is a story of defense of a homeland. In all of human history, defense of the homeland is always a stirring tale of heroics and noble sacrifice. In turn, I realised something else - there is no honor to be gained from bloody expansionism. Conquerors are greedy, blood-thirsty, and without human decency. So many times in history, the odds are against the defenders of the homeland. When the defenders are victorious, good has truly conquered evil.
   When has a conquering power actually done something good for the people that have been crushed? I challenge the reader to name an instance of a conquered people being better off afterwards. When a people is beaten down, enslaved, and robbed of their home, it is more than just a loss of physical property or health - the very spirit of the people is destroyed. Here we are, several thousand years after the events of Thermopylae, and the story still inspires feelings of pride for the Greeks. If the early European colonists of the Americas had been soundly beaten back by the native people, we would probably not be here, but songs of praise would be sung in the present day about the bravery of the native defenders. Instead, the spirit of Native Americans has been virtually destroyed, with the current situation consisting of run-down reservations and gaming casinos that fail to give much back to their communities.
   In the end, that kind of sentiment does not really get us anywhere. The strong defeat the weak and that is all there is to it. Amazingly, one would think that the huge army of Persia would have easily crushed the small company of Greeks. But as it was written by Herodotus, "[Xerxes] had plenty of combatants ... but very few warriors." That statement proves how a huge onslaught of untrained, unorganized army cannot count on the strength of shear numbers. In the same fashion, tactics play a huge role. The Greeks utilized tactics and the knowledge of the terrain to give themselves the advantage. It reminded me of how the American revolutionists used "guerilla warfare" and sniping British officers from hiddden positions in trees to give themselves the upper hand. Although the lasting legacy of the experiment known as the United States will be argued for all of human history, there is no doubt that the actions of the revolutionists are a source of pride for millions of people.

Sept. 23, 2012

   Can a large scale civilization exist and thrive without the "guidance" of a centralized government that administers law and order? According to chapter 3 of "Ways of the Word," civilization and central rule go hand-in-hand. I tend to agree with that view. In considering the nature of the situation - that is, thousands of people trying to live together and share resources - basic human nature more often than not will lead to every kind of scenario from simple misunderstanding to all-out declaration of war. Like it or not, when thousands of people are existing in close proximity to each other, concepts like "kindness" and "sharing" can easily go out the window. As a real-world example, think about how many times drivers on freeways intentionally speed up to block someone from merging, or go through intersections when it was clearly someone ele's turn.
   Without law and order, people revert back to primal instincts. In turn, all the lessons learned from thousands of years of being "civilized" go out the window. At best, an individual or couple will fight for the survival of their family; at worst, the "every man for himself" motto is called upon and in those cases, man becomes a simple animal, fighting for his own survival. The modern concept of civilization seeks to eliminate the need for animalistic survival situations. Many times, the concept is proven true. In my personal experience lately, I have noticed how the biggest concern for many people around me is how they are going to get their anitbacterially-washed hands on an iphone 5 when it's released! If that isn't a glowing positive review for the benefits of civilization, I don't know what is.
   Without going too crazy, I can't help but imagine what the world as I know it would be like without a centralized government. On one hand, I would like to think that everything would be just fine and we would all share and get along no problem. But the reality is that it would be a world of chaos. Additionally, we would not be here at all really. After all, modern society is only here because a central power base decided to organize labor to produce food and other goods which would then be dispersed among the population and/or traded to foreign buyers. So, without that precendent being set eons ago, there would not be 7 billion people on Earth - the "old ways" would never produce such a "bumper crop" of humankind!

The Beginning of "Empires"

Sept. 16, 2012

   After writing the essay comparing Xinchen and Claudius, and how they differed as rulers, I started to ponder something that began to arise in this period of history: the emergence of "rulers" and "emperors." In a small-scale society, a leader arises because of hunting prowess or some other skill, but when larger scale civilizations began to form, simple tribal style leadership became obsolete. It makes sense because in a population of thousands of people, there is going to be several who have the requisite skills and intelligence to lead. So how does a ruler/emperor come into power?
   That very question will be at the forefront of my mind as we continue studying early large- scale civilizations. At this point, I can take a guess and imagine rulers becoming powerful by showing prowess at making war, or bringing prosperity to the people, but I do not know the whole story. Think about our system today: people from the "general population" are voted into power by popular elections, or are appointed by people who were previously voted into their positions in government. How often did that happen in ancient times? There must have been records, and I am interested to learn more. Without more details, I imagine at this point that many of these early civilizations did not practice general elections as we know them today.
   In addition to wondering how early leaders were granted their power, I also started to wonder what the rest of the story was with the Han dynasty of Xinchen- from the descriptions in "Ways of the World," the overall situation for many people in that era was not very great. From "Ways" pp. 159: "During the Han dynasty, growing numbers of impoverished and desperate peasants had to sell out to large landlords and work as tenants or sharecroppers on their estates, where rents could run as high as one-half to two-thirds of the crop." This reminded me of the sharecropper situation in the early American South, which was also the cause of hardship and misery for people in the "peasant class." "Ways of the World" goes on to discuss political movements of the population seeking for a more fair and equal distribution of wealth- Sound familiar?? Human civilization runs in cycles- sometimes we can work together and make progress, and other times the greedy scoundrels lording over all the resources subject the rest of the population to hardship and poverty. Either way, everything will cycle around to its opposite condition. History teaches us so much, but so many times the lessons go unheeded.

History of Water

Sept. 6, 2012

   It is truly eye-opening to consider the origins of “civilization,” and hence, the birth of the “city” with which we are familiar. Even looking at a map of the modern world and all its major cities, it is plainly obvious to see the importance of a city’s proximity to either a major river or the sea. New York City is by the sea, as is London, while Paris straddles the Seine just as an ancient city would. As for the early cities of Mesopotamia, Egypt, and ancient Rome, locations were chosen based on the suitability of the land and water resources to provide for the people. The people who congregated into civil groupings are the reason for the city, and gave rise to all human culture. As said in “Discovering the Global Past,” the city itself is not the important thing; the culture of the people is the real interesting part of the city.

   Of course, it is debatable whether or not humans have a natural instinct to band together, but when one considers the living world scientifically, the more fragile members of the animal kingdom do in fact band together. Schools of fish, flocks of birds, and dens of meerkats all find that there is in fact, “safety in numbers.” For those that might think that humans are not fragile, think of the following: Humans are, usually, no match for bears, lions, tigers, and other land-based predators. However, in a group, with weapons of various levels of sophistication, any animal on earth can be either trapped and/or killed. You have to imagine that one of the very first lessons learned by early hominids was that they had a much better chance at survival in a harsh, unforgiving world when everyone worked together for the good of the society.

   Most everyone knows that drinking water is vital for survival, but how often does one think about how important irrigation of crops is to the survival of the population? Especially today, when a consumer can go to the local grocery store and select any kind of fresh produce imaginable – even items that normally would not be locally available – how many people would give a second thought to how and where the food was produced? Only recently have more people made the conscious decision to know how and where their food is produced, but even so, if you really, really want a peach and the only peaches available are shipped in from thousands of miles away, how many people would say no?  The first time a large group of people was able to live comfortably and securely in a city, and have access to produce grown by way of irrigation, the precedent was set, and the state of human existence changed forever. The debate is whether the change was for the good or the bad. I know what I believe, but who’s to say?

   Then again, I never have attempted to “live off the land” for any long period of time, so maybe I would enjoy it. Doubtful though – I have become used to modern conveniences and technology the way an arctic penguin is used to snow!   

Notes on Ways of the World



   From the preface, it is hard to imagine a world in which people in academia did not recognize the importance of studying the history of the world from a cultural standpoint- Before the '60s, it seems as though many people viewed those not from Western European origin as not worth the effort to study and relate to the "western" world.

    Understanding this makes me glad to be in the modern era where the whole is viewed as a whole of humankind. There are different cultures, traditions, and beliefs, but in the big picture, we are all the same fundamentally.
   Again, good to see the author consciously attempting to steer away from the simple "Eurocentric perspective." Although bias is natural and arguably inevitable, a textbook can go along ways by trying to minimize its bias. In the prologue of "Ways," the bias on the concept of "the beginning" clearly is biased towards the Scientific Method. As a way to present the information rationally and without the attachment of belief, the methods of science are the most practical to the widest ranging audience.
   Imagine the "Cosmic Calendar:" everything that we know and accept to be our collective history happened in a matter of minutes compared to the big picture! I like the concept of the "Three Cs" of world history: comparison. connections, and change. Nowadays, many people, including myself, take something like world history for granted. For example, if I were to suddenly decide I wanted to know everything there was to know about the history and culture of Cambodia, there would be a wealth of information ready for me to look up on the internet (of course, the source would be identified and verified!), or in books in libraries. To think this was not always so is quite eye-opening. I think I will like Strayer's approach to the subject. 
   

1st post

Here we go, I am ready to start blogging about history!    -Daniel