Friday, May 18, 2012
AP Exam
Overall, the final exam was not terrible. Some of the multiple choice were really awkward, but for the most part they were not that bad. The cricket DBQ was rather strange and I had some trouble with that, but he other two essays were not very difficult. I felt prepared because I did not go over the top with studying, but did an efficient amount. The review was very useful because we went over the important specific facts. The only thing I would suggest for the upcoming exams is going over as a class the 5 major themes a little more in depth.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Communist Manifesto
Negatives:
1. When reading the homework on the blog, I decided to jump right to the 10 demands at the very end. The demands were "pretty generally acceptable" only to the workers, not the bourgeoisie class. If those 10 demands were set in stone as law, the upper class would no longer exist. People would not get land from rich relatives, the rich would be taxed, everybody must work, and not just the upper class would be educated. The bourgeoisie class would not favor any of these. They would never want to give up all the advantages they have as the rich folk of the area, such as having smarter children, having land bestowed upon them, and making money by not actually working. The 10 demands must be more accommodating to these richer people if Marx and Engels want them to pass. This would inspire the proletariat class to want a revolution, but they would have difficulty carrying it out with the lack of things they had and the ability of the bourgeoisie to hire people to defend them.
2. Marx and Engels are unwise when they bad-talk the bourgeoisie class. This part is when the two are explaining how the bourgeoisie class even came to be: with the development of modern industry came commerce, navigation, and railways, with which the bourgeoisie class grew at the same proportion and increased capital. Overall, they came about from a "series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange." When Marx and Engels write about their growth, he says that they pushed each of the classes back during the Middle Ages. This phrase is a poor choice of words because it basically says that the whole bourgeoisie class is a group of terrible people that are trying to better themselves and keep everybody away from their wealth. This is not entirely true, because the bourgeoisie class needed the proletariat people to bring in their wealth, because they did not work themselves. This helped the proletariat class, however, because it gave them the desire for communism, where they would not be considered subordinate to others.
3. One quote struck me as a terrible statement in the passage. It reads: "There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience." This quote seems to deter people from wanting a communist state. Marx and Engels show with this quote that there is no religion, morality, or "eternal truths "like justice and freedom. Religion has been one of the most important aspects of life from c. 2000 BCE to the present. People would be deeply offended and outraged by the abolition of religion. They also display the fact that freedom and justice would be gone. In the state with the bourgeoisie class ruling, people at least had the freedom to quit their terrible jobs or try and start new lives, whereas in communism they are sworn into that position for good. Also, without justice or morality, people would become mindless puppets and would become robots to support their country. This quote does not aid Marx and Engels in spreading communism.
4. Marx and Engels even admit in the Communism Manifesto that children will unable to do what they want with their lives. They try and sugarcoat it by coming up with what they feel are positive aspects of communism, but this one piece would not be forgotten. People as they grow from children into adults will already have what they are going to do for the rest of their lives planned out for them. Even if they do not want to do a certain thing, they would not have the choice but to accept this role in society. Again, this concept in communism would turn a country of working families that share a love for one another into a group of robots programmed to do whatever the state assigns them.
Positives:
1. Marx and Engels strongly appeal to the hard-working proletariat class. These people have difficult lives, but there is almost nothing they can do about it except for work and get money. However, their jobs can be difficult, dangerous, or just plain boring, and all for a very low wage, even for the time. They probably hated the bourgeoisie class for having it so easy and owning a ton of land which could be broken up amongst different people and the bourgeois would still have plenty of property. Communism, according to Marx and Engels, would give all the commoners equal amounts of land, with money not being an important factor for people, and everybody being equal to one another.
2. The two men explain that the bourgeoisie class came about because of the acquirement of capital, not just land. As people acquired capital, they became more wealthy and were only interested in helping themselves and nobody else. Of course, this was a process that occurred over a period of time, as families eventually became capable of acquiring more wealth from deceased elders. They explain that in communism, there is no obtaining of wealth, which appealed to the lower class citizens. They would no longer have to be the hard workers and get very little reward from it; they now would not have to worry about getting money to live, rather than just working on their land that is the same amount as everybody's land.
3. The lower class people of the bourgeoisie state would no longer have to work for the rich people that earn their money by doing very little in their day. The lower class people that all found jobs to support their family often had grueling occupations that they needed to keep their family relatively healthy. They hated the bourgeoisie because they never helped their workers and were only concerned about earning more capital. With communism in place, these proletariat workers would not have to grind on their difficult, very low-paying jobs anymore.
4.Education for all kids in the communist state would be free of cost. Now, not only the rich, preppy kids of the bourgeois class get an education. Every child will become literate and learn what their superiors had been learning all along. Because of this, nobody will be able to rise up and grab control of power because they have a much more advanced intellectual capacity than others. People will be equal with one another not only in social power, but brain power as well.
1. When reading the homework on the blog, I decided to jump right to the 10 demands at the very end. The demands were "pretty generally acceptable" only to the workers, not the bourgeoisie class. If those 10 demands were set in stone as law, the upper class would no longer exist. People would not get land from rich relatives, the rich would be taxed, everybody must work, and not just the upper class would be educated. The bourgeoisie class would not favor any of these. They would never want to give up all the advantages they have as the rich folk of the area, such as having smarter children, having land bestowed upon them, and making money by not actually working. The 10 demands must be more accommodating to these richer people if Marx and Engels want them to pass. This would inspire the proletariat class to want a revolution, but they would have difficulty carrying it out with the lack of things they had and the ability of the bourgeoisie to hire people to defend them.
2. Marx and Engels are unwise when they bad-talk the bourgeoisie class. This part is when the two are explaining how the bourgeoisie class even came to be: with the development of modern industry came commerce, navigation, and railways, with which the bourgeoisie class grew at the same proportion and increased capital. Overall, they came about from a "series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange." When Marx and Engels write about their growth, he says that they pushed each of the classes back during the Middle Ages. This phrase is a poor choice of words because it basically says that the whole bourgeoisie class is a group of terrible people that are trying to better themselves and keep everybody away from their wealth. This is not entirely true, because the bourgeoisie class needed the proletariat people to bring in their wealth, because they did not work themselves. This helped the proletariat class, however, because it gave them the desire for communism, where they would not be considered subordinate to others.
3. One quote struck me as a terrible statement in the passage. It reads: "There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience." This quote seems to deter people from wanting a communist state. Marx and Engels show with this quote that there is no religion, morality, or "eternal truths "like justice and freedom. Religion has been one of the most important aspects of life from c. 2000 BCE to the present. People would be deeply offended and outraged by the abolition of religion. They also display the fact that freedom and justice would be gone. In the state with the bourgeoisie class ruling, people at least had the freedom to quit their terrible jobs or try and start new lives, whereas in communism they are sworn into that position for good. Also, without justice or morality, people would become mindless puppets and would become robots to support their country. This quote does not aid Marx and Engels in spreading communism.
4. Marx and Engels even admit in the Communism Manifesto that children will unable to do what they want with their lives. They try and sugarcoat it by coming up with what they feel are positive aspects of communism, but this one piece would not be forgotten. People as they grow from children into adults will already have what they are going to do for the rest of their lives planned out for them. Even if they do not want to do a certain thing, they would not have the choice but to accept this role in society. Again, this concept in communism would turn a country of working families that share a love for one another into a group of robots programmed to do whatever the state assigns them.
Positives:
1. Marx and Engels strongly appeal to the hard-working proletariat class. These people have difficult lives, but there is almost nothing they can do about it except for work and get money. However, their jobs can be difficult, dangerous, or just plain boring, and all for a very low wage, even for the time. They probably hated the bourgeoisie class for having it so easy and owning a ton of land which could be broken up amongst different people and the bourgeois would still have plenty of property. Communism, according to Marx and Engels, would give all the commoners equal amounts of land, with money not being an important factor for people, and everybody being equal to one another.
2. The two men explain that the bourgeoisie class came about because of the acquirement of capital, not just land. As people acquired capital, they became more wealthy and were only interested in helping themselves and nobody else. Of course, this was a process that occurred over a period of time, as families eventually became capable of acquiring more wealth from deceased elders. They explain that in communism, there is no obtaining of wealth, which appealed to the lower class citizens. They would no longer have to be the hard workers and get very little reward from it; they now would not have to worry about getting money to live, rather than just working on their land that is the same amount as everybody's land.
3. The lower class people of the bourgeoisie state would no longer have to work for the rich people that earn their money by doing very little in their day. The lower class people that all found jobs to support their family often had grueling occupations that they needed to keep their family relatively healthy. They hated the bourgeoisie because they never helped their workers and were only concerned about earning more capital. With communism in place, these proletariat workers would not have to grind on their difficult, very low-paying jobs anymore.
4.Education for all kids in the communist state would be free of cost. Now, not only the rich, preppy kids of the bourgeois class get an education. Every child will become literate and learn what their superiors had been learning all along. Because of this, nobody will be able to rise up and grab control of power because they have a much more advanced intellectual capacity than others. People will be equal with one another not only in social power, but brain power as well.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Revolution Leaders
George Washington- He is drawn standing tall and proud looking. Washington has one arm extending, as if he is reaching out to everybody else like he is saying "follow me" or "I will guide the way". He has a sheathed sword in his left hand pointing towards the ground, which could symbolize that he will lead with peace and that his job as a war leader is over. The items on the table, such as the red table cloth, could stand for the blood that was shed to break off their country from Great Britain. He is wearing a long, black jacket with black pants and shoes.
Marat- This picture of Marat is of him dead. There is what appears to be a stab wound in his chest. There is blood on the letter in his hand and on the blanket under him. He looks as if he is smiling with his eyes closed. This could be like he had finished what he started successfully and it was his dying feat. The quill in his hand and letter suggest that he just finished the letter, which could be an announcement that France is free from the tyranny of the French crown. The picture of him dead is important because it shows that until his death he was fighting to free the people of France.
Toussaint Louverture- The picture of Louverture is of him standing with a proud, accomplished look on his face. It is as if he has finally overthrown the French government in Haiti. His sword is in its sheath, as Washington's was. This could symbolize that his job as a rebel has finished and that his time to lead has begun. He is holding a large sheet in his hand with writing, which could be the Haitian constitution. Louverture is wearing rather elegant military clothing, especially compared to the man behind him. The picture appears as though it were meant to make Louverture seem like a vibrant and powerful man.
Simon Bolivar- Simon Bolivar has an extremely elegant uniform like that of Toussaint Louverture. Out of all four paintings, he is the only one looking straight at the painter, which could signify that he was a haughty yet willing man. There appears to be some sort of glow emanating from his left shoulder and face that could try to make him seem more royal and elegant. Bolivar is holding something in his left hand, which once again seems to be a sheathed sword to signify the end of the war. His right hand is in his jacket and over his heart, which might mean that he is pledging himself to his people
In each depiction of the revolutionaries, they all have something in their hands. However, Marat is the only one without a sheathed sword; he has a quill. The sheathed swords all could represent the end of hard times, while the quill and bloody letter could indicate that the difficulty is just beginning for France. Marat also is the only one not wearing elegant looking clothes. The elegant clothes could try and give the men a powerful air to their appearance. Each picture has the person's name somewhere on it except for that of George Washington. The names on the pictures serve to remind everybody who led them through their individual revolutions, to try and make them seem more important. The lack of George Washington's name could be his way of making him more of a common man as opposed to someone who everybody should know and be loyal or subject to.
The revolutions all needed a heroic figure. Somebody was needed to unite the rebels into one force to fight against their ruling superiors. Also, the heroic figure was necessary to spark the uprising and try to bring other people to support them. Each depiction of revolution leaders express similar qualities. They all express the resilience that the leaders possessed. This is most prominent from the sheathed swords, showing that they would not quit, and the painting of Marat, who had just finished a letter, possibly declaring freedom, right before he was killed. The dominant quality shown, however, is loyalty to their land. It is evident in each painting that the leaders would stand by their fellow rebels no matter what, because they are all depicted with their weapons on them, except Marat who was painted dead to further extend the loyalty and dedication to the people of France.
Marat- This picture of Marat is of him dead. There is what appears to be a stab wound in his chest. There is blood on the letter in his hand and on the blanket under him. He looks as if he is smiling with his eyes closed. This could be like he had finished what he started successfully and it was his dying feat. The quill in his hand and letter suggest that he just finished the letter, which could be an announcement that France is free from the tyranny of the French crown. The picture of him dead is important because it shows that until his death he was fighting to free the people of France.
Toussaint Louverture- The picture of Louverture is of him standing with a proud, accomplished look on his face. It is as if he has finally overthrown the French government in Haiti. His sword is in its sheath, as Washington's was. This could symbolize that his job as a rebel has finished and that his time to lead has begun. He is holding a large sheet in his hand with writing, which could be the Haitian constitution. Louverture is wearing rather elegant military clothing, especially compared to the man behind him. The picture appears as though it were meant to make Louverture seem like a vibrant and powerful man.
Simon Bolivar- Simon Bolivar has an extremely elegant uniform like that of Toussaint Louverture. Out of all four paintings, he is the only one looking straight at the painter, which could signify that he was a haughty yet willing man. There appears to be some sort of glow emanating from his left shoulder and face that could try to make him seem more royal and elegant. Bolivar is holding something in his left hand, which once again seems to be a sheathed sword to signify the end of the war. His right hand is in his jacket and over his heart, which might mean that he is pledging himself to his people
In each depiction of the revolutionaries, they all have something in their hands. However, Marat is the only one without a sheathed sword; he has a quill. The sheathed swords all could represent the end of hard times, while the quill and bloody letter could indicate that the difficulty is just beginning for France. Marat also is the only one not wearing elegant looking clothes. The elegant clothes could try and give the men a powerful air to their appearance. Each picture has the person's name somewhere on it except for that of George Washington. The names on the pictures serve to remind everybody who led them through their individual revolutions, to try and make them seem more important. The lack of George Washington's name could be his way of making him more of a common man as opposed to someone who everybody should know and be loyal or subject to.
The revolutions all needed a heroic figure. Somebody was needed to unite the rebels into one force to fight against their ruling superiors. Also, the heroic figure was necessary to spark the uprising and try to bring other people to support them. Each depiction of revolution leaders express similar qualities. They all express the resilience that the leaders possessed. This is most prominent from the sheathed swords, showing that they would not quit, and the painting of Marat, who had just finished a letter, possibly declaring freedom, right before he was killed. The dominant quality shown, however, is loyalty to their land. It is evident in each painting that the leaders would stand by their fellow rebels no matter what, because they are all depicted with their weapons on them, except Marat who was painted dead to further extend the loyalty and dedication to the people of France.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
TED Talk
I do not completely agree or disagree with Niall Ferguson. He feels that geography is not an advantage for societies to prosper. I believe it is because some areas have more resources than others, i.e. tobacco and sugar plantations in the Caribbean during the Early Modern Era. Ferguson argues that rules and laws allow for wealth increase, which I agree with because it unites the people under one government and allow them to function within their society. His "6 killer apps" are competition, the scientific revolution, property rights, modern medicine, the consumer society, and work ethic. He states that competition among individuals in a society thrives the economy, unlike uniformity. I am inclined to agree because this relates to the supply and demand effect as well. As people compete to sell their goods, they will likely lower the price, making people more likely to buy the products. The scientific revolution only was occurring in Europe, which had a booming economy due to this time, according to Ferguson. He does not really say why this helped the economy, and I can not find any way it does either. He explains that when more people owned land, the economy went up. I agree here because more people are able to make a living and produce for their region of living. I also feel that modern medicine aided the economy because more people survived and were born, so more people were alive to have jobs and manufacture. I do not feel that the consumer society enhances the economy as much as he claims, because people buying things like clothing will not propel the society forward. His last killer app, work ethic, is one with which I whole-heartedly agree. The effort and desire of the people to work is what even starts off any economy. People that find a new innovative way to make money do not just come across it and never need to work (aside from winning the lottery or scratch tickets). They put in their time and effort to stabilize their bank accounts. For the economy to function, people need to be willing to work, even if they do not want to necessarily. When people work, things are made, then sold, and the economy keeps flowing smoothly.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
Chapter 28
The authors of the textbook placed the Safavids, Ottomans, and Mughals all within the same chapter. They had their reasons for doing so. The Ottoman and Safavid Empires were very near each other geographically, with the Mughal Empire not being much farther away. All three empires coexisted during the same time period in history. Each empire also used Islam as the predominant religion. The overall idea to place all three empires in the same chapter was more of a positive than negative. However, it could have been done better. The way that the different subjects, such as trade or imperial growth, could have been more distinguished. Instead of giving each empire their own part of the chapter, the writers placed all three in the same part of the reading. This sometimes made it too jumbled together, but it also allowed an immediate comparison of each empire. The concept to designate only one chapter for each empire instead of one for each individually was not a bad idea, but it definitely could have been more organized.
The majority of this period of global interactions was a positive experience for the world. Europe held much of the negative influence. They enhanced the slave trade immensely, and it also gave a power tilt towards the people of Europe. This time period did however incline the progress of men and women around the world. Maritime trade became much more prominent during this era. Textiles and goods were able to be spread globally, allowing for the advancement of many different societies who participated in this exchange of products. Ideas and beliefs spread with the trade. These thoughts commingled with one another to produce a new way of thinking or believing. Sea travel not only increased trade but also the ability and desire to travel. Because traveling became more available, people took the opportunity to explore and move to new lands, i.e. the colonization of the Americas and the Caribbean. This time period is not a completely positive time in world history because of the rough times that took place in Africa and the Native people of the Western Hemisphere. It certainly did launch human innovation in materials and ideas at the expense of Africans and the Native people of Oceania and the Americas.
The majority of this period of global interactions was a positive experience for the world. Europe held much of the negative influence. They enhanced the slave trade immensely, and it also gave a power tilt towards the people of Europe. This time period did however incline the progress of men and women around the world. Maritime trade became much more prominent during this era. Textiles and goods were able to be spread globally, allowing for the advancement of many different societies who participated in this exchange of products. Ideas and beliefs spread with the trade. These thoughts commingled with one another to produce a new way of thinking or believing. Sea travel not only increased trade but also the ability and desire to travel. Because traveling became more available, people took the opportunity to explore and move to new lands, i.e. the colonization of the Americas and the Caribbean. This time period is not a completely positive time in world history because of the rough times that took place in Africa and the Native people of the Western Hemisphere. It certainly did launch human innovation in materials and ideas at the expense of Africans and the Native people of Oceania and the Americas.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Page 748: Sources from the Past- Fabian Fucan Rejects Christianity
Fabian Fucan attacks multiple aspects that are altered by Christianity. His anger towards the Jesuits is caused by all of his troubles that he faces. Fucan felt that he was doing something good by studying and following the ways of the Jesuits; however, after about 15 years as a Jesuit, tensions with this group caused him to leave and return to "the Great Holy True Law [of Buddhism]." He also hated the Jesuits for their impact of the traditional Japanese culture. Fabian Fucan thought that the influence of God on Japan would ruin and do away with the Japanese way of life. According to Fucan, the Japanese rulers had been appointed by the gods that the country worshiped. The new god, Deus, would have destroyed the traditional method of choosing rulers. He believed that the introduction of Christianity and the god Deus would affect the lineage of emperors. Also, Deus's influence on Japan would change the Japanese political structure. The last effected area of Christianity in Japan would be social aspects. Fabian Fucan said that the Japanese religion was very supreme in Japan, and rightfully so. He claimed that, since it was so prominent, Christianity would neither spread nor survive because the current religion that was practiced would squash the competition.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Chapter 26 ShowMe Presentations
www.showme.com/sh/?h=kZpl6v2
Important People- Keval Kapadia (Period 1)
http://www.showme.com/sh/?h=U7JI1jM
Important Events- Me and Steven Hong (Period 2)
http://www.showme.com/sh/?h=enHa32e
Important Places- Christos Saledas (Period 4)
Important People- Keval Kapadia (Period 1)
http://www.showme.com/sh/?h=U7JI1jM
Important Events- Me and Steven Hong (Period 2)
http://www.showme.com/sh/?h=enHa32e
Important Places- Christos Saledas (Period 4)
Sunday, March 4, 2012
What I Now Think of Capitalism
I now know more about capitalism than it just being a small group of wealthy individuals controlling the free market. People were able to make themselves into this small, wealthy percentile. They held multiple advantages over other people, such as owning more land, machinery, workshops, and so forth. They gained their prestige off of the old concept of accumulating wealth. Businessmen competed with each other to sell their goods, which caused the effect of supply and demand on the economy. These businessmen also learned how to take advantage of the conditions of the free market to maximize their wealth. Capitalism was not a type of economy that was set up by the government for the well-being of the country. It was caused by the competition of businessmen and is supported by this competition. Capitalism is also what caused many social changes, such as distinctions in social class based on wealth.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Christianity and Capitalism
Christianity diverged into ideas through different influential people. This was because many people changed it to fit their personal needs, or even for the needs of their kingdom. The divergences branched off slowly until they stuck to certain societies. The only thing I know about capitalism is that a very small group of wealthy people are in control of the free market.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Road Smackdown: Romans, Incans, and Persians
The Romans' roads were the best in both composition and purpose. The Romans put the most detail and effort into constructing luxurious roads. They also used their roads more practically, trading food and other expensive goods to acquire various different items into their empire.
Incan Roads vs. Persian and Roman Roads
The Incan roads served different purposes than the Persian and Roman roads. They used their roads to move food and small necessities from village to village, for a short distance. The Persian and Roman roads were used extensively in trade. They moved various goods, not just necessities, throughout the Eurasian continent.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
The Griots and Spreading Knowledge
I believe that the spreading of knowledge and information through the use of Griots is insufficient compared to the textbook. They spread information orally throughout the generations. As it passes down from father to son and so forth, the original story is altered and is not the same as it was when it was started. Without written history, the stories are not as credible because the original story was not recorded on a hard copy and will not have the same meaning. The textbook is much more accurate with spreading information. All that is written in the book is supported by historical evidence. The information is derived from multiple sources and combined into one in the textbook. The information used in the textbook is also the most recently updated and proven accurate information to date.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
The Mongols: Guilty of Terrorism and Kidnapping
The Mongol Trial was a success; not only did my prosecuting group win two of the three acts of violence that the Mongols were charged with, but we as students were able to get information about the Mongols and have a more factually-based opinion. For the most part, it was a fun, interactive project. The research part was easy, but what was not as easy was playing the role of Pope Innocent IV very sufficiently. I feel that I was more successful in fulfilling this role, however. I just wish that I had more of an impact of accusing the Mongols guilty of terrorism and kidnapping, but I do believe I did what could be done.
I completely agree with the outcome of the trial. I never believed that the Mongols committed genocide, since that is the goal of most, if not all, armies: to kill the enemy and win the war. I do believe that the Mongols were in fact guilty of kidnapping and terrorism. The people of conquered lands were taken from their homes and families unwillingly and forced to go to the Mongol capital at Karakorum. Also, terrorism was greatly used by the Mongols. They ravaged entire cities if they showed signs of opposition. This cause widespread fear throughout Eurasia because of the utter destruction that took place all over the landmass. This led to my personal conclusion that the Mongols committed acts of terrorism and kidnapping, but not genocide.
I completely agree with the outcome of the trial. I never believed that the Mongols committed genocide, since that is the goal of most, if not all, armies: to kill the enemy and win the war. I do believe that the Mongols were in fact guilty of kidnapping and terrorism. The people of conquered lands were taken from their homes and families unwillingly and forced to go to the Mongol capital at Karakorum. Also, terrorism was greatly used by the Mongols. They ravaged entire cities if they showed signs of opposition. This cause widespread fear throughout Eurasia because of the utter destruction that took place all over the landmass. This led to my personal conclusion that the Mongols committed acts of terrorism and kidnapping, but not genocide.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Genghis Khan: Madman or Genius?
Was Genghis Khan really a cold-blooded, ruthless murderer? Or was he simply a brilliant and self-composed leader? I have the notion that Genghis Khan was a genius and extremely talented military leader. I get the sense of his killings being reasonable, not just done for the sake of doing so. He was always able to justify a reason for attacking and killing other peoples, and if he was unable to, then he simply did not attack that specific tribe. Genghis Khan was the ruler of the largest land empire ever to exist on the face of the earth. He would be incapable of conquering so many different groups of people if he did it solely for the sake of killing them because more tribes would try to fight if they knew he would just murder them anyway. People submitted to his whim if they knew his soldiers would be attacking. If Genghis Khan really was just killing to shed blood, then he would have massacred all and any group of people, whether or not they resisted his power. Khan was sensible to women and children. He would not just slaughter the women and children of conquered peoples because he could; he let them go on with their business and even protect them from his own soldiers.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Project- Unanswered Questions
The reason why we chose Rage Comics to represent the different Crusades is simple. Rage Comics are short, sweet, and to the point. Also, they have the capability of being humorous and make the abbreviated form of the battles funny. The only problem that we encountered was that we could not get as much information onto the Rage Comic as we would like to and had to explain it in the blog post. The project worked how we figured it would. All the Rage Comics were simple and clever like we hoped, but as I said we just could not get all the information on each comic that we wanted.
Bibliography for Crusades Project
Works Cited
"The 8 Crusades Explained." Top 10 Lists - Listverse. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://listverse.com/2007/08/07/the-8-crusades-explained/>.
"CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Crusades." NEW ADVENT: Home. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm>.
"The Eighth Crusade - History for Kids!" Kidipede - History for Kids - Homework Help for Middle School Social Studies. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/medieval/history/latemiddle/eighthcrusade.htm>.
"The Eighth Crusade." Medieval Times & Castles. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.medievality.com/eighth-crusade.html>.
"The Fifth Crusade." Medieval Times & Castles. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.medievality.com/fifth-crusade.html>.
"Internet History Sourcebooks." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1k.asp>.
"Internet History Sourcebooks Project." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1192peace.asp>.
Lcsw, An. "Fifth Crusade (1217 to 1221)." Unexplainable.Net- UFOS, Ghosts, Paranormal, 2012 And More- Latest News. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.unexplainable.net/Religion/Fifth-Crusade-1217-to-1221.shtml>.
"Muslim Perspective on the Crusades | Perspectives and Religion in the Crusades." Agnosticism / Atheism - Skepticism & Atheism for Atheists & Agnostics. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://atheism.about.com/od/crusades/a/crusadesviews_2.htm>.
"Third Crusade, 1189-1192." Military History Encyclopedia on the Web. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_crusade3rd.html>.
"Third Crusade." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 12 Jan. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Crusade>.
Project Progess- THE FINAL DAY HAS COME
Now that we are finally done with our projects, I will share my contributions to the group's progress before posting the finals products. For the production of the Rage Comics, I helped provide some of the information pertaining to each of our Crusades. This basic knowledge I helped to provide came from the Google Doc that Mr. Whitten sent to everybody. Like the rest of my group members, I proofread each Rage Comic to make sure they all could display the Muslim perspective on these wars of religion. Lastly, I worked extensively with Keval on finding links to assist us in our research.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Project Progress- #4 1/11/12
Researching information about the Muslim perspective on the Crusades is becoming more challenging. It is easy enough to find summaries of each Crusade, but it would be much easier to derive the Muslim perspective based on the information from the source. We had finished Rage Comics for each Crusade, but we now need to maybe edit them to represent the Muslim perspective more efficiently, or just explain below the Rage Comic what the Muslim view is.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Project Progress #3- 1/10/12
Today, my group found one link to the Fifth Crusade:
http://www.medievality.com/fifth-crusade.html Bing.com
The crusaders made the terrible mistake of attacking Muslims in Egypt while still wearing their knight armor. They were too overheated to fight efficiently and were obliterated by the Muslims, with only a few crusaders surviving and heading back to Europe. The Muslims obviously were content in demolishing their invaders and felt a pride in their military.
http://www.medievality.com/fifth-crusade.html Bing.com
The crusaders made the terrible mistake of attacking Muslims in Egypt while still wearing their knight armor. They were too overheated to fight efficiently and were obliterated by the Muslims, with only a few crusaders surviving and heading back to Europe. The Muslims obviously were content in demolishing their invaders and felt a pride in their military.
Monday, January 9, 2012
Project Progress #2- 1/9/12
Today, my group was able to find a few websites with significant information about the Third Crusade and the Muslim feelings towards it.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_crusade3rd.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Crusade
http://atheism.about.com/od/crusades/a/crusadesviews_2.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm
The Third Crusade involved Richard the Lionhearted of the Franks and Saladin reaching a treaty without bloodshed between the two religious groups. The Muslims would permit Christians to visit Jerusalem but not rule. Originally, the Muslims did not care about the Christians coming to a city in their control until they started causing trouble and commotion in the Muslim world. The crusades left no real lasting effects on the Muslims.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_crusade3rd.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Crusade
http://atheism.about.com/od/crusades/a/crusadesviews_2.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm
The Third Crusade involved Richard the Lionhearted of the Franks and Saladin reaching a treaty without bloodshed between the two religious groups. The Muslims would permit Christians to visit Jerusalem but not rule. Originally, the Muslims did not care about the Christians coming to a city in their control until they started causing trouble and commotion in the Muslim world. The crusades left no real lasting effects on the Muslims.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Project Progress- #1 1/8/12
Today I chose my group for the project and which crusades we would be doing. My group consists of me, Steven Hong, Josh Rosenberg, Joe Greeley, Adam Bonfilio, and Keval Kapadia. We are going to make Rage Comics for the Third Crusade, Fifth Crusade, and Eight Crusade.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Holi
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)