Chapters 23 and 24

I never thought I would be so interested in learning about world history…there is so much more I want to know. In these two chapters I learned what it meant to be a third world country, a second world country, and a first world country. A first world country is an industrialized nation or a democracy. So the United States, for example, would be a first world country. I am thinking most of the European nations are probably considered first world countries. A second world country is one that belongs to the Communist world. While Strayer indicates that Communist rule no longer is as widespread as it was, I believe Communism continues to exist in China, Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba for example. Finally, a third world country would be considered to be a developing nation, such as any one of the nations in Africa or in Latin America.

It was interesting to note the difference between Africa’s political evolution and that of India’s following colonial rule and how these nations dealt with their newfound freedom. India eventually received its independence from British rule in 1947 with the help of late Mahatma Gandhi, perhaps the most recognized individual in the global struggle against colonialism (Strayer 697). India had a Western-style democracy, with multiples political parties, regular elections, and civil liberties. The transition from colonial rule to independence was gradual in that the British began to hand over power to the Indians prior to India gaining its independence, with Indians holding positions within the administrative government at the time of its independence. India remains a developing third world country. Gandhi, unfortunately, was assassinated in 1948.

While the independence transition for India had been a gradual process that was not the case with Africa. Even though the colonial British, French and Belgian governments tried to implement democratic principles and ideologies, i.e., elections, legislatures, political parties, and parliamentary procedures in various states during the 1950s, these fragile governments soon were replaced by military coups, dictatorships and authoritative one-party systems. Some believe that Africans were not ready for their independence. According to Strayer, some believed that Africa lacked “crucial ingredients for democratic politics—an educated electorate, a middle class, or perhaps a capitalist economy (707). Interestingly, others suggested that Africa’s traditional cultures were based upon a communal philosophy rather than an individual’s philosophy, where Africans preferred to arrive at a consensus rather than a majority rule. The other issue for Africa was that they had to deal with many tribes, rather than dealing with political entities.

Another important difference existed between India and Africa. When South Africa gained its independence from British rule in 1910, that independence had been granted to a government completely controlled by a white settler minority, which represented less than 20% of the total population (Strayer 701). The black African majority had no political rights whatsoever, and the separation between blacks and whites was seen in the policy of apartheid. Apartheid allowed for the segregation of blacks from whites in every way imaginable.

By the early 20th century, South Africa had developed a stronger economy seen initially in gold and diamond mining and later in other industries including rubber processing. By the 1960s, South Africa’s economy had benefited through extensive foreign investments. Almost all black Africans were involved with the success of this economy in that they provided all the labor for the white-owned farms and companies. Apartheid still was present, and it presented an odd situation. Black Africans were dependent on a white-controlled economy, which made them vulnerable to repressive actions. However, collectively they could threaten to withdraw the essential labor, which was a powerful weapon (Strayer 701). Like India, Africa had a peaceful leader in Nelson Mandela who helped to bring apartheid to the global forefront. Like Gandhi, Mandela spearheaded nonviolent civil disobedience—boycotts, strikes, and demonstrations. He was arrested in 1960 and spent 27 years in prison. Ultimately, apartheid ended in 1994 due to intense national and international pressures. Nelson Mandela was elected and served as president of South Africa! I was an employee working at Bank of America during the apartheid era. I remember Bank of America taking a very strong stance against apartheid by withdrawing its investments from South Africa. It notified each and every employee (93,000 employees at the time) in writing of its decision to do so. I can also remember that South Africa was not allowed to participate in the Olympics! Lastly, I can remember the day that Nelson Mandela was elected president of South Africa. I knew I was witnessing history.

A possible reason for Africa’s lack of success with its initial attempts at democracy may have been due to its economic situation. Strayer indicates that African economic performance since independence has been the poorest in the developing world (707). Since the 1980s, however, there has been a resurgence of Western-style democracy. This resurgence may have been due to the failure of authoritarian governments to remedy the extremely difficult economic situation. It also may be due to the end of apartheid and the collapse of the Soviet and Eastern European Communism. That being said, I know that there remains tremendous poverty and a need for humanitarian aid in many areas of Africa.

The other interesting section that caught my eye was the discussion of the globalization of liberation and comparing the feminist movements. I never would have thought of comparing the feminist movements. However, without a doubt, the issues that I faced as a Caucasian, middle-class working mother in the United States were probably very different than that of an African woman or a Middle Eastern woman, or perhaps an African American woman in the United States. I found Strayer’s comments regarding African feminists in the 1970s and beyond resenting Western feminists’ interest in female circumcision very surprising. He stated that these interests echoed the concerns of colonial-era missionaries and that Western feminism could easily be seen as a new form of cultural imperialism (737). I am having a difficult time embracing these thoughts.

My last comment for this blog pertains to the globalization of religion. Whatever religion one believes, I truly believe that to ensure a peaceful, global co-existence, we need to work together to gain tolerance and understanding of the various religious traditions. While I am not quite sure where religions actually began in our world history timeline (probably during the Ancient era), I always have wondered how it was that so many different religions came into existence. Much like I have learned that probably Homo sapiens evolved in Africa, perhaps religion had its evolution in just one tradition, whatever that may be.

The Most Recent Century, Chapters 21 and 22

It was odd reading about world history and realizing that I am living and was living within the timeframe of some of the occurrences that are considered significant events in world history. I was a child during the Cuban missile crisis. I can remember the tremendous concern my parents had about the Soviets, as their warships were heading towards Cuba. I recall there was a lot of discussion regarding the blockade and how everyone in my family circle was very ready to defend this country. I did not understand at the time the devastation that would have resulted had a “nuclear-tipped missile” been launched against this nation. I am truly grateful that the late President John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev were able to reach a compromise that resulted in Cuba removing the nuclear missiles in return for America’s promise not to invade Cuba.

I wish that this class was a bit longer than 10 weeks. I find myself wanting to learn so much more about the various events in history, especially about World War II. I did not realize that the total death toll was estimated at 60 million people, approximately six times the deaths in World War I (Strayer p 648). While the extermination of six million Jews seemed horrible, a death toll of 60 million is horrendous. Strayer indicates that 50% of those deaths were civilian casualties (p 649). Strayer also conveys that the German military personnel fulfilled Hitler’s instructions knowing that “soldiers guilty of breaking international law…will be excused” (p 649). How is it that these rulers/leaders think so little of human life?

In my mind, World War II began with the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. However, the other fact that I learned in this reading is that World War II actually began in Asia rather than in Europe, specifically in China in 1939. In the late 1920s and the 1930s, Japan’s military became more powerful and its expansion ambitions more prominent. Japan had acquired Manchuria, a large area in northeast China, after the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. However, Japan felt threatened by China’s increase in its nationalism. So Japan’s military, acting independently, seized control of Manchuria in 1931 and renamed this state Manchukuo. This action military angered the Western powers, and Japan withdrew from the League of Nations. This action resulted in Japan distancing itself from its Western allies, and aligning itself, instead, with Germany and Italy. Japan attacked China in 1937 and this conflict, the beginning of World War II, lasted eight years.

Interestingly, as the war with China unfolded, the worldview of Japan had hardened (Strayer p 645). Because of a series of international agreements in the early 1920s that curtailed Japan’s naval force in comparison to Britain’s or the United States’ force, plus the anti-Japanese immigration policies in the United States, Japan became convinced that European racism prevented the West from acknowledging Japan as an equal power. This sentiment, coupled with Japan’s dependence on foreign goods (especially American goods such as iron, machine tools, oil and copper), the British, French and Dutch colonial presence in southeast Asia, and the Soviet Union’s presence in northern Asia, Japan felt that its national survival was at stake. In 1940 and 1941, Japan began its military operations in the French, British, Dutch, and American colonies of Indochina, Malaya, Burma, Indonesia, and the Philippines, and the building of the Japanese pacific empire began. While Japan insisted that it was “creating an Asia for Asians” and freeing the continent from European dominance, Japan clearly was interested in Asia for its resources.

I now have a better understanding as to why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 6, 1941. Strayer indicates that” Japanese authorities undertook the attack with reluctance and only after negotiations to end American hostility to Japan’s empire-building enterprise proved fruitless” (647). He also indicated that an American oil embargo was imposed on Japan in July 1941. With American opinion of Japan as an aggressive, oppressive, and a threat to US economic interests in Asia, Japanese leaders felt that they had two choices: accept America’s terms which would probably reduce them to a second or third ranked world power, or go to war. Japan chose war.

The other fact I learned was just how close Hitler and Nazi German came to bringing all of Europe and much of the Mediterranean basin under its rule. I learned that the United States joined the war against Germany in 1942, rather than my initial impression of 1941. Strayer indicates that war was central to the Nazi phenomenon. “Nazism was born out of World War I, the hated treaty that tended it [the Treaty of Versailles], and the disillusioned ex-soldiers who emerged from it [war]” (p 648). The Treaty of Versailles, which officially ended World War I, stated that Germany undergo the following: Lose its colonial empire and 15% of its European territories; was required to pay large reparations to the victors; had to accept sole responsibility for the outbreak of the war. This treaty resulted in immense resentment in Germany. It was one of the disillusioned soldiers who stated, “It cannot be that two million Germans should have fallen in vain…we demand vengeance“ (p 632). The soldier’s name was Adolf Hitler. At the same time that Japan was launching its attacks against China in 1939, Hitler and Germany launched its attacks on Poland. So began World War II in Europe.

I read with interest Chapter 22 and its discussion regarding communism. I remember always having concerns regarding communism and the threat our nation faced. I remember well in 1989 how delighted I was for the peoples of East and West Berlin as the wall that prevented the residents of communist East Berlin from escaping to the West was torn down. I remember reading in the newspapers how peoples of Berlin took pieces of the wall with them as souvenirs.

I was in high school during the Viet Nam era and remember several classmates enlisting or being drafted to fight the threat of communism. As I recall, Viet Nam never was declared a war by Congress. Rather, the United States provided military support in the form of a police presence. I recall being told by friends who did return home that soldiers could not initiate fire, only return it. I did not know that America was defeated at the hands of the Vietnamese…I would like to learn more about this undeclared war, as well.

Chapters 17 through 20--The European Moment in World History (1750-1914)

Once again, I read with interest these four chapters. While I have heard about the French Revolution, until today, I did not know much about the circumstances surrounding it. The French Revolution took place between 1789-1815, a total of 26 years. It is amazing that, once again, another government, this time the French government, was facing bankruptcy. At the time, there were three classes in France: Two percent of the population was represented by the nobility and the clergy and represented the first two Estates General in the French organization; 98% represented the balance of the population, who represented the Third Estate and eventually declared themselves the National Assembly. King Louis XVI needed to increase taxes to offset the current financial situation. He sought to change the current tax system to make it more equitable; however, that idea was opposed by privileged class (sound familiar?). When the Estates General (all three estates) convened in 1789, the national Assembly separated themselves from the Estates General and launched the French Revolution. Ultimately, King Louis XVI and his queen, Marie Antoinette were executed.

The French Revolution was motivated by social conflicts that included unfair taxation, the distinct differences in the classes and the privileges enjoyed by the wealthy, the urban poor who suffered from unemployment, oppression and inflation. Strayer indicates that the French Revolution was much more violent than the American Revolution (p. 505). The Revolution spread through conquest under the military leadership of Napoleon Bonaparte who ruled from 1799-1814. Strayer says that he kept the revolution’s emphasis on social equality, but that equality did not necessarily include liberty (p. 507). He was credited with ending feudalism, proclaiming equal rights and religious toleration, codifying the laws, and justifying or rationalizing government administration. He also was credited with creating the continent’s largest empire since the Roman Empire (Strayer, p. 507).

The other revolution that I was completely unfamiliar with was the Haitian Revolution, which took place between the years of 1791-1804. Interestingly, the French Caribbean colony, originally called Saint Domingue and later renamed Haiti, was considered the richest colony in the world. The vast majority of its population was made up of slaves, who revolted in 1971. The Haitian Revolution was the only successful slave revolt in world history (Strayer, p. 509). It was interesting to note that Napoleon’s defeat in Haiti convinced him to sell the Louisiana Territory to the United States.

As I read through these two sections, I continue to see common threads in our world history’s revolutions: The oppression of peoples, the benefits of the privileged, the desire for wealth, social inequalities, unfair taxation, the need to govern and control, just to name a few. One would think that we would learn from our past experiences, but we just seem to continue to make the same mistakes. Additionally, I was not aware that the issue of racial and gender equality was so pervasive throughout our history.

I wonder why it was that we humans transitioned from an egalitarian society to one that was patriarchal instead. Clearly women have been an integral part of society and man’s partner since the beginning of time. I read with interest the African case study regarding women and colonial economy and the division of labor between men and women. Once again finding themselves subordinate to men, women during pre-colonial times had extremely difficult responsibilities. Included in their agricultural responsibilities, they had to plan, weed, harvest and may have been assigned to their own fields to work. They also were responsible for child rearing, food preparation, and many were involved in local trading activity. As the demands of the colonial economies grew, women had even more responsibilities, as cash-crop agriculture became more important and more profitable. I cannot imagine raising a family, being responsible for all the planting, weeding, and harvesting of my assigned field, in addition to being able to trade my harvested or produced goods, AND doing all of this without any male assistance and in the African heat!!! I much prefer an egalitarian society where gender differences are recognized and respected.

Having now a better understanding global colonial empires, it seems to me that colonization was a modern form of slavery. It included required unpaid labor in many instances, and in some places, such as French Africa, the natives were legally obligated to work ten to twelve days a year under “statute labor” (Strayer, p.599). Similar cruelties seen during the era of slavery were seen in colonization in many areas. It was extremely difficult for me to read about the cruelties of forced labor that occurred in the early 20th century in the Congo under Leopold II of Belgium. Rubber for tires and bicycles was in demand and villagers of the Congo were forced to collect rubber. If they failed in their collection or if their collection was inadequate, soldiers would kill them or maim them. This is just another example of man’s inhumanity to man. Again, one would think that we would have moved beyond this…

The Early Modern World, Chapters 14 through 16

Once again, these chapters provided so much interesting historical information.  I can remember learning about the Aztecs, Mayans, and the Inca civilizations in grade school.  I also remember learning about Christopher Columbus, his incredible discovery of America, the subsequent voyages of other explorers.  However, I do not remember being taught about the abuse, exploitation and the destruction of the cultures of the native peoples.  It is no wonder that many Native Americans objected to any celebration of the 500^th anniversary of Columbus’s arrival to the Americas (Strayer p 403). 

I have mixed feelings regarding Columbus.  As an Italian American, I am proud of Columbus’ accomplishments.  He had the courage to sail on unchartered waters and to explore unknown lands with tremendous risk to his own life and the life of his crew.  I learned for this first time through this reading that the purpose of Columbus’ voyage in 1492 was to sail west across the Atlantic Ocean in the hopes of arriving somewhere in the East.  Never realizing that he had made a mistake, I had always thought that he purposely had sailed to “discover America.”  Nonetheless, there is pride in knowing that it was an Italian explorer (albeit sailing for Spain) who “discovered the Americas.” 

Having said that, it is difficult for me to justify, understand, and condone the tremendous violent and aggressive behavior of our global past history when it comes to imperialism and expansionism for the sake of a deity, country, or individual.  It seems as this behavior has been pervasive throughout history.  I am inclined to believe that these are very strong human characteristics!!!  Are there circumstances that can defend the complete destruction and annihilation of another culture or another nation?  While the Spanish conquests were destructive enough to the peoples of the Americas, I can only imagine the obliteration that would have occurred if the Mongolian Empire, the Chinese Empire or the Turkish Empire would have arrived to the Americas first instead of Columbus.

It is equally difficult for me to understand the concept of slavery.  Strayer indicates that of all the commercial ties that linked the early modern global network of exchange, none had more profound or enduring human consequences than the Atlantic slave trade (453).  It was shocking to learn that over a 400-year period (mid-15^th to the mid-19^th century), the trading of humans involved the taking of 11 million people from Africa, shipping them across the Atlantic, and depositing them in Americas where their lifespans often were brief.  Additionally, approximately 1.8 million slaves died during the transatlantic crossing (453).  I was equally surprised to learn that the origin of the Atlantic slave trade began in the Mediterranean and with sugar production.  As an adult with grown children, my family is so very important to me.  I could not imagine having my husband or my children of any age captured, sold, beaten, branded and forced into labor in another country and culture thousands of miles away. 

In keeping with this discussion on slavery, my naiveté shows.  I did not realize how pervasive slavery was throughout our global history and throughout so many civilizations—not just the Greeks, Romans and Americans!!!  It had been a long-established tradition in all of the First Civilizations.  Likewise, virtually all subsequent civilizations—in the Americas (including South America), Africa, and Eurasia—practiced some form of slavery (Strayer 165).   It disturbs me that the United States constantly is criticized for its slave history.  Without a doubt, slavery should not have been allowed in this nation, and it was a terrible episode in our nation’s history.  Today, our nation continues to move forward in recognizing the rights of all peoples, regardless of race, creed, gender, religion, or place of origin, .  Notwithstanding the inhumanity of slavery, should I, as an American, be criticized for our nation’s participation in slavery, I certainly shall be better educated to respond.  However, no response, in my humble opinion, justifies the ownership of one individual over another, no matter where the nation!

Interesting to Note

Initially, Slavic-speaking peoples from the Black Sea region furnished the slaves for Mediterranean plantations, so much so that “Slav” became the basis for the word “slave” in many European languages (Strayer 453). 

Mulatto—Peoples of Portuguese and African descent

Mestizo—Peoples of Spanish and Indian descent

Creoles—Spanish people born in the Americas (as opposed to being born in Spain)

While I am not sure that I agree, Strayer indicates that Africans did not generally sell their own people into slavery.  He indicates that those individuals who were captured and sold normally either were considered outsiders or vulnerable people who lacked the protection from an established African community (455).  Really?  I find that difficult to believe—12.5 million Africans did not belong to any community?  Were they all prisoners of war, criminals, debtors, people who had been “pawned during times of difficulty?”

I never realized that sugar was such a tremendous commodity and found its history fascinating!  Arabs introduced large-scale sugar production into the Mediterranean.  The Europeans transferred sugar and its production to the Atlantic islands and the Americas.  Initially, the Portuguese on the Brazilian coast dominated the world sugar market, until the British, French, and Dutch in the Caribbean undid the monopoly.  Massive slave labor was used for sugar, and the Brazilians had hundreds of thousands of slaves!  It is not surprising that much of Brazilian and Caribbean society is of African descent!!

Silver trade was even more important than the spice trade in creating a global exchange network and eventually became central to world trade.  Most of world’s silver supply ended up in China (imagine that!). 

Chapter 16 was also interesting.  While I have taken two religion classes, I continue to appreciate all that I learn on religions.  I do believe that in order for us to successfully co-exist as a global society, we need to understand the religious traditions of our global cultures.  I read with interest the Protestant Reformation of the 16^th century.  I know understand that the Reformation pertains to any Christian religious tradition that rejects papal authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, such as the recognition of the saints or the veneration of the Virgin Mary.   As I look at the word Protestant, in my mind I see the word protest.  I wonder if Protestant comes from the protests of those who did not agree with the findings of the Roman Catholic Church. 

Jesuits—Society of Jesus religious order

The section of Science and Enlightenment was very interesting.  Enlightenment thinkers believed that knowledge could transform human society.  Much of Enlightenment thought attacked established religions; hence, many religions feel threatened by Enlightenment.  It is interesting to note that science became the most widely desired product of European culture, while Japan and the Ottoman Empire were not too interested in these ideas until later. 

Chapters 11, 12 and 13

Much like the last three chapters, it would be difficult to study world history without learning about the history of Islam, the Mongol movement, and where the world was during the 15^th century that precipitated essentially today’s global society.

I recently took a class entitled Religions of the World, where I learned about the prophet Muhammad and the Islamic religion. I recall the professor provided us with a statistic that I found surprising:  more people are becoming Muslim today than they are Christian.  It was equally surprising to learn that it was the largest and most influential of the third-wave civilizations.  The statistic that Strayer provided was that in the year 2000, there were approximately 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, representing 22% of the world population (p 301).  I think that what individuals found attractive about the Islamic religion is that it membership was a matter of belief, rather than a matter of birth, as it is in most other religions.  The other thing that may be attractive is that Islam is practiced as part of one’s total life, with no separation between religion and state as in Christianity for example.  Perhaps we could have a class discussion regarding the comments pertaining to Muslims that Pope Benedict made shortly after his appointment to the papacy.  It seems that whatever earlier tolerance existed between the Christian and Islamic communities has eroded since those comments were made. 

I have a better understanding of the word jihad from reading this chapter, and, I think, a better understanding regarding the philosophy of Islam and its expansion.  With the war in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan against the Taliban and Al Queda, I found that journalists translated the word to mean “holy war.” However, Strayer’s definition of “struggle” makes more sense to me.   Strayer included a further explanation of the word by stating that in its lesser form, such as in the jihad of the sword, the Qur’an authorized an “armed struggle against the forces of unbelief and evil as a means of establishing Muslim rule…” (p 306).  While I am not convinced that Allah wanted Osama bin Laden and what I believe to be Muslim extremists to attack the United States on September 11, 2001, I do believe that Muslim extremists might view the United States as an evil empire replete with forces of unbelief.  Truth be told, I was not at all familiar with the Islamic religion and the Muslim philosophy.  I would venture to say that there are many people throughout the world that do not have a good understanding of the Islamic religion.  That being said, I still cannot condone the acts of September 11^th. 

Other Things that I Learned

Sunni Muslims—rightful political, military leaders chosen by the Islamic community.

Shia (Shite)—Religious Islamic group that believes that Muslim leaders should be the blood relatives/descendants of Muhammad.

Sufi—Islamic groups that seek to have a direct and personal or mystical experience with the religion by renouncing of the material world.

Sikhism—a combination of religious elements from both the Islamic and Hindu religions.

I always wanted to learn more regarding the Mongolian Empire.  I was unaware that the Mongols gave rise to the largest land-based empire in all human history.  It extended from the Pacifica coast (China) to Eastern Europe and undeniably brought what Strayer refers to as “networks of exchange and communication” between Europe, China, and the Islamic world in the 13^th century.  The Mongolian Empire was similar to other empires in its expansive militaristic philosophy; however, history indicates that they were a brutal people. Strayer explains that the devastation brought about by the Mongol conquest of Russian either matched or exceeded the devastation that inflicted during the Persian and Chinese conquests.   I found it very interesting that the Mongols, for the most part, seemed to retain their ethnicity.  They did not learn or become Chinese during their 70-year conquest of China, however, Mongols in Persia did convert to Islam. 

Taking into consideration the size of their empire and their frightening reputation, the Mongolian Empire ruled for such a short period of time (several centuries).  Strayer explained that their “cultural imprint was modest” (p 342).  They did not provide a new religion or a new civilization to the world.  Their largest contribution perhaps was in that they promoted international commerce as a source of tax revenue (imagine that!).  The empire collapsed, in Strayer’s opinion, due to a plague known as the Black Death, a deadly virus that was carried by rodents and transmitted by fleas.  This plague broke out in northeastern China in 1331, reached Europe by 1347 and devastated it, killing up to two-thirds of the European population.  With the tremendous decrease in population the volume of “global” trade was reduced and by 1350, the Mongol Empire was falling apart.  It was during the next 100 years that the Mongolian Empire lost its control of China, Persia and Russia, and the overland trade routes in Central Asia were closed for the most part. 

Chapter 13 introduced the world as it was known in the 15^th century.  During the 15^th century, both Columbus and Zheng He participated in oceanic voyages.  While I am very familiar with Christopher Columbus, I did not know anything about Zheng He and of China’s maritime abilities.  There was a tremendous difference between the Columbus’ and Zheng He’s ocean expeditions, especially in the size of the expedition.  Columbus made his world-changing expedition to the Americas in 1492 with three ships and a crew of approximately 90.  He’s expedition included hundreds of ships with a crew in the thousands, and his presence was seen in the Indian Ocean.  Europeans were seeking the wealth of Africa and Asia that included gold, spices, and silk, and were searching for peoples to convert to Christianity, while China found itself in a different position.  After Mongolian rule and healing under the Ming dynasty, China found itself in a position where it faced no equivalent power, needed no military allies in the Indian Ocean basin and essentially was self-sustained (p 375).  It had a powerful Chinese fleet, but did not seek to conquest or colonize, while Europeans did.  China stopped its voyages in1433 abruptly.  I can only wonder how our world would and could have been different had China chosen, instead, to continue with its oceanic voyages.

I truly enjoyed reading the Reflections section of this chapter and found that I agreed with Strayer’s thoughts. If China had chosen to go continue its oceanic voyages, would China have discovered the Americas first?  What if the Ottoman Empire, who lasted from the 14^th century to the early 20^th century and who was considered one of the greatest empires of the world, had continued its expansion of Islam at the expense of Christianity?  Would our world be 100% Islam?  (Unfortunately, I did not have time to discuss the Ottoman Empire, which is another empire that I found very interesting.  Perhaps we can have a discussion in class?  Another blog for another day?)

Another Interesting Thing that I Learned

There truly is a place called Timbuktu and it is located in Africa!!!

China and the World, Chapter 9

I truly am appreciating what it is I am learning about in this world history class.  I know that as a younger student, I was just not ready, or perhaps not that interested, in the past events of other nations.  Today, however, I am in a different place where I want to learn about the past of other civilizations and other nations to put in perspective where we are as a nation and where we are as a global partner.  Perhaps it is because I am more mature than many of my fellow students, but I recognize that in order for us to peacefully co- exist with our fellow nations around the world, we need to fully understand what has gone on before at all levels.  Perhaps, then, we stand a chance of survival globally. 

Of the three chapters assigned this week, I found the reading on China quite enlightening.  While I realize that China today is one of the super powers, I did not realize that it had such a significant history.  Our reading this week educates us regarding China’s history from 500 CE to 1500 CE and refers to China as a major player among the then third-wave civilizations.  Strayer indicates that China had a centered “world order” that was felt throughout most of eastern Asia, and its wealth and cosmopolitan culture attracted many of its neighbors.  The Tang and Song dynasties lasted for 1,000 years.  I was also surprised by its technological advances that included:  the invention of gunpowder circa 1000 CE; its iron industry that produced suits of armor, arrowheads, metal for coins, and tools; papermaking; salt production through solar evaporation that was found to be extremely useful in preservation of food stuffs; and, printing (which I thought had been invented by a European later in history).  I was equally surprised to learn that it staffed its bureaucratic form of government via an examination system; public agency recruitment in the State of California typically includes an examination system of some sort as well. 

China’s self-perception that it was superior over other cultures equally was a surprise.  They considered themselves the “middle kingdom,” the center of the world, and they felt that they were superior to all “barbarian” peoples from beyond its borders.  Their Chinese lifestyle advocated culture and education, was self-sufficient, and greatly contrasted to the primitive nomadic lifestyles of northern China where people lived in tents and rode horses and who “sought access to China’s wealth and wisdom” (Strayer, 249).  Interestingly, China was willing to allow access within its borders for two reasons:  1) China believed that all barbarians could become Chinese through assimilation; and 2) China was “radiating civilization” (Strayer, 249) and, in doing so, was inviting others to visit. 

This access to China came at a price, known as the Tribute System.  This system was a set of practices that required the non-Chinese visitors/authorities to not only acknowledge Chinese superiority, but to acknowledge their own subordinate position by “kowtowing” to the Chinese in a series of ritual bowings and quasi worship behavior.  The visitors then would present their tribute, their gifts, to the Chinese emperor.  In return for the visitors’ submission, the emperor would grant them permission to enter China and trade in their rich markets, and would then bestow upon them gifts that often were of more value than those the emperor himself received.  This tribute system enabled the Chinese to regulate their relationships with the northern nomads, as well as the peoples of the neighboring states of Korea, Vietnam, Tibet, Japan, and the European barbarians that traveled over water.  While this practice was successful most of the time, there were times when it worked in an opposite way.  When China was faced, for example, with nomadic tribes, such as the Xiongnu, that were able to interact with its empire on equal terms militarily and otherwise, it was in China’s best interest to negotiate with these groups by providing them with essentially a “reverse tribute.” So, China would provide these tribes with large quantities of annual “gifts” of wine, silk and grain.  While these “gifts” complied with the tribute system, they were, in fact, a payment to the tribes for not invading China and for any necessary protection.  It was interesting to note that some of these nomadic tribes did not want to conquer China; rather, they preferred this extortion.

I was unaware of the impact China had on its neighboring nations, Vietnam, Korea and Japan.  While China did conquer the area of Korea, the Korean states did emerge between the 4^th and 7^th centuries and resisted Chinese political control.  Korea was successful in maintaining its political independence while participating with China’s tribute system.  While Korea did accept much of the Chinese culture in the form of luxury goods, scholarship and religious influence, it maintained its own culture and separate political existence.  Vietnam’s experience with China was somewhat similar to Korea’s experience.  However, the cultural heartland in Vietnam’s Red River Valley was part of the Chinese state until 939 CE.  Vietnamese rules adopted the Chinese approach to government, and the elite remained deeply committed to the Chinese culture.  However, much of the Vietnamese culture remained in place, including its language, cockfighting, and its belief in greater roles for women.  Japan’s relationship with China was interesting in that Japan was neither invaded nor conquered by China.  Rather, Japan voluntarily and selectively borrowed much of China’s culture especially between the 7^th and 9^th centuries.  Japan created a bureaucratic state modeled on China, sent large-scale missions to China to learn, and elements of Chinese culture were seen in art, architecture, education, medicine, and Chinese Buddhism to some extent.  I know better understand why it is that China sometimes weighs in with its opinions on the various affairs of state for each of these nations. 

I found the practice of foot binding of young girls during the Tang dynasty very disturbing.  This practice involved tightly wrapping the feet of young girls, which resulted in the breaking of their foot bones and caused them great pain.  This was yet another example of patriarchal behavior specific to China to restore some of the Han dynasty restrictions on women of female submission and passivity.  Foot binding was associated with new images of female beauty and eroticism that emphasized a smaller, restrained and more delicate female.  It certainly resulted in keeping women homebound and uninvolved!  Strayer indicates that this practice lasted into the 20^th century, when it was eliminated by Communist and reformist governments.  I have a difficult time comprehending the philosophy behind patriarchal societies and the practice of treating women as inferior or subordinate beings.  Certainly, Chinese females could perform other essential functions other than concubines, entertainers, courtesans and prostitutes!  Perhaps this is a discussion for another blog!

China definitely is an up and coming world power, if it is not so already one!

Chapter 4: Eurasian Empires

I enjoyed learning about the Eurasian empires during the Classical era, which spanned 1,000 years from 500 BCE to 500 CE and included:  The Persian Empire, the largest and most impressive of the empires; the Greek Empire, unified under Philip II and his son Alexander the Great and the originators of the Olympic Games; the Roman Empire, whose political systems still are emulated today, especially in the United States; the Chinese Empire, who was equal in size and population to the Roman Empire with a developed bureaucracy to hold the empire together; and the Indian Empire, which gave India its identity—a unique social organization called the caste system and the religion Hinduism.

A brief comparison between the Persian and Greek Empires, the Roman and Chinese empires, plus an explanation as to why the empires collapsed.

PERSIAN EMPIRE—IndoEuropean people, emerged in 500 BCE

·         35 million in state

o   Dozens of cultures

o   Dozens of states

o   Many languages

o   Cultural differences

·         Centered on Kingship cult.  King could be approached only through elaborate ritual and was
 VERY AUTHORITATIVE

·         Had administrative system in place

o   Governors in each of the 23 provinces

o   Had imperial spies—they were the eyes and ears of the King

·         General policy of respect for non-Persian cultures

o   Allowed exiled Jews in Babylon to return to their homeland and rebuild temple in Jerusalem

o   In Egypt and Babylon, Persian kings upheld religious beliefs/cults to foster Persian support

·         Survived 1,000 years prior to collapse

o   Imperial bureaucracy/court life (administrators, tax collectors, record keepers, translators became model for subsequent regimes, including Islamic world)

·         Infrastructure included

o   Coinage

o   Taxes

o   Canal linking Nile with Red Sea that allowed commerce/trade with Egypt

o   Roads, 1700 miles—facilitated communication/commerce

·         Immense wealth & power

GREEK EMPIRE—IndoEuropean people

·         Different from Persian in that there were hundreds of small, very competitive city-states or settlements that were fiercely independent and in frequent conflict with each other.

·         Allowed people various degrees of participation in political life

·         Emerged in 750 BCE; empire lasted 400 years.  Then, absorbed by other foreign empires.

·         Referred to themselves as Hellenes

·         Population 2-3 million people

·         Like Persians, there were an expansive people, but expansion took form of settlements in   distant places, rather than in conquests that became part of the empire.

·         Olympic Games—every four years, began in 776 BCE.

·         Spoke same Greek language, worshipped same Gods.

The greatest distinction between the Greek and Persian civilizations was in the participation in political life that occurred in Greece within the city-states.  It was unique in that the Greek men enjoyed “citizenship.”  While this citizenship varied both over time and from city to city (citizenship granted to the wealthy and gradually over time extended to middle and lower classes), the Greeks (men) were essentially a free people overseeing the affairs of the state and believed in equality for all citizens under the law.  Women, slaves and foreigners were excluded from political participation, however. 

Greco-Persian Wars—the East-West Divide

Land expansion essentially was the reason behind the Greco-Persian Wars.  It was a case of the small and divided city-states fighting the world’s largest empire.  While the Greek empire eventually did collapse 400 years later, there was a revolt by the Ionia Greek settlements against the Persians in 499 BCE where the Greeks regained control of their settlements.  Over the next ten years, the Persians attempted twice to regain control of the Greek settlements but were not successful militarily either by land or by sea.  These victories had a profound impact on the Greeks, whose very motivation for victory was the freedoms that their Greek way of life afforded them.  As a result of these victories, the worldviews associated with these wars were such that Persia represented Asia and despotism (tyranny and dictatorship), while Greece represented Europe and freedom.  So, the notion of the East-West Divide was born which continued to shape European thinking about the world into the 20^th century and beyond. 

Ultimately, the Persians were defeated years later after the collapse of the Greek empire.  Alexander the Great led a 10-year assault against the Persians that represented one of the greatest military feats of the classical period.  Alexander’s greatest accomplishments were in the widespread dissemination of Greek culture during world historians refer to as the Hellenistic era (323-30 BCE).  Elements of that culture now were found in Egypt, Mesopotamia and India!

COMPARING THE ROMAN AND CHINESE EMPIRES

At the same time that the Greeks and the Persians were fighting, two other classical empires were evolving: The Roman Empire on the far western region of Eurasia and China’s imperial state on the far eastern end of Eurasia.  Both empires flourished at the same time, occu

pied 1.5 million square miles each, and had 50 to 60 million people each.  They had almost no direct contact with one another and were slightly aware of each other. 

Similarities between these two empires were:

1.      They both felt that they were universal or governed most of the world.

2.      Both invested in public works—roads, bridges, aqueducts, canals, protective walls, designed militarily and commercially.

3.      Both adopted supernatural beliefs to support their rule.

a.       Romans belied that deceased emperors became gods and established religious cults to support the authority of the living emperors.

b.      The Romans persecuted the Christians for not participating in their cult.

c.       The Chinese emperor was referred to as the “Son of Heaven.”

d.      Chinese emperor governed with a “Mandate from Heaven,” as long as he ruled morally and with benevolence.  If tragedy occurred, it was believed that the Chinese emperor governed poorly and tragedy was punishment.

4.      Both empires absorbed a foreign religious tradition. 

a.       Christianity developed in the Roman Empire and became the dominant religion of Europe.

b.      Buddhism came from India and developed in China.  It was introduced by Asian traders but received little support from the Han dynasty.  Emperor Wendi of the Sui dynasty reunited China and Buddhism became popular.

Differences between the two empires were:

1.      Rome’s beginnings were as a small city-state, which meant that the Romans/Italians were in the minority within the empire. 

2.      Chinese empire grew out of a much larger populous of which most of them were Chinese.

3.      As the Chinese expanded, they assimilated the non-Chinese or “barbarian peoples” culturally, linguistically, through intermarriage, and in physical appearance.

4.      Romans had a different type of assimilation—via the granting of citizenship to individuals for service to the empire or for the adoption of Roman culture.  Eventually, citizenship bestowed to almost all free people.  This form of assimilation conveyed a legal status rather than a cultural assimilation.  Benefits of citizenship were:  right to hold office, to serve in the Roman military units, to wear a toga.

Language served both empires in contrasting ways.  Latin, an alphabetic language depicting sounds, gave rise to Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian, and Romanian, whereas, Chinese did not.  Chinese characters that represent words or ideas were not easily transferred to other languages.  Chinese could be understood by all literate people so cultural identities could NOT be maintained, whereas the people of the Roman Empire were able to maintain their cultural identities. 

The Han emperor Wudi established an imperial academy with the writings of Confucius to train officials for the elaborate bureaucracy that helped to hold the empire together.  This was the beginning of the civil service system with examinations and selection by merit.  Romans developed an elaborate body of law which was applied equally to deal with matters of justice, property, commerce and family life. 

What made for good government?  For those who inherited the roman tradition, it was good laws.  For those who inherited the Chinese tradition, it was good men.

After collapse of Roman and Chinese empires, China experienced 350 years of disorder, frequent warfare, and political chaos.  Then, a Chinese imperial state similar to Han dynasty reassembled under Sui, Tang, and Song—ruling persisted into 20^th century.  China’s bureaucracy provided stability even as dynasties came and went, and its agriculture was much more productive than Europe’s agriculture.  Re the fall of the Roman Empire, only the western half of the empire collapsed, while the eastern half, known as the Byzantine Empire, maintained the tradition of imperial Rome for another thousand years.  Nevertheless, no large-scale centralized imperial authority encompassing all of Western Europe has ever been re-established.  Most of Western Europe dissolved into various city-states and small territories ruled by princes, bishops or the pope.  Europe would become a civilization without an empire state.  Roman Catholic Church frequently at odd with state authorities. 

INDIAN EMPIRE—emerged in 600 BCE in South Asia

·         Fragmented collection of towns/cities, small republics governed by public assembles and some regional states ruled by kings.

·         Diverse—ethnically, culturally, linguistically

·         Hinduism—religious tradition, it is what has given India its identity.

·         Caste system—unique social system with “classes” of people--also responsible for India’s identity.

·         Once ruled by Persian emperors and then Alexander the Great.

·         Mauryan Empire (326 BCE to 184 BCE) large scale political system which was found in most of India.  Equivalent to Persian, Chinese and Roman empires, although not as long lasting. 

o   Population of 50 million

o   Large military force

o   Civilian bureaucracy, with ministries and large contingent of spies

o   Many industries: spinning, weaving, mining, shipbuilding, armaments

o   Financed using taxes

·         Gupta—short-lived empire (320 CE to 550 CE).

India’s history after empire collapsed resembled Western Europe rather than China or Persia. 

REASONS FOR THE COLLAPSE OF THE EMPIRES

·         Empires got too big, too over-extended and too expensive to sustain utilizing available resources.

·         Growth of large landowning families with huge estates were able to avoid paying taxes.  The free peasants became impoverished tenant farmers.  Central government authority diminished. 

·         Rivalries among elite factions created instability and eroded imperial authority.

·         Epidemic diseases

·         Growing threats from other regions

As I process the information learned from chapter 4, my interest turns to the reasons behind the collapse of the empires.  Chapter 4 opened with a brief discussion on the fall of the Roman Empire and suggested that perhaps a similar fate awaits the United States.  Needless to say, the US is over-extended (our national debt in the trillions of dollars), and it is very expensive to sustain our nation.  Certainly, we have over-utilized many of our natural resources.  Many would agree that our government has become corrupt, and it does seem as though the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  The more money one has, the greater the ability to avoid paying taxes.  Certainly, today’s terrorists’ threats are disconcerting, as nations become more experienced in weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, biological, etc.).  Perhaps the way of the Roman Empire is our destiny…I would LOVE to have this class discussion!

Here are my discussion questions.

1:  What is an empire?  Include some of the characteristics seen in an empire.

2.  From the Greco/Persian Wars came the terms the East/West Divide.  Explain how that term came to be.

3.  Compare and contrast the Roman and Chinese empires (a minimum of five facts).

4.  Discuss the reasons behind the collapse of the empires.