The Potato Eaters

Dutch artist Vincent Van Gogh began painting approximately 10 years prior to his suicide at age 37. His short life was marked by strong humanitarian impulses toward the poor, especially miners, weavers, and peasants. Despite his intentions, the poor often ridiculed his efforts. Failures in his personal life and sickness led to despair. Unable to support himself regularly, he lived off his younger brother Theo. Bouts of epilepsy worsened his depression. Although tragic, these experiences enabled Van Gogh to depict the social circumstances and psychological moods of the people who interested him as can been seen in the 1885 painting The Potato Eaters (you can see a larger version of the painting by clicking here), which depicts the social and psychological circumstances of people who became dependent on potatoes. After studying the painting, I would like you all to discuss the following: What features of the painting reveal the social circumstances of the people who became dependent on potatoes as their staple food? How do their circumstances compare with the views of thinkers who had earlier praised the potato? How does the painting suggest the inner mood of the individuals depicted? How might Van Gogh define the purpose of this kind of art in industrial Europe? Your thoughts…

The Columbian Exchange in the Early Modern Period

Disseminated most widely by Alfred Crosby in The Columbian Exchange: Biological and Cultural Consequences of 1492, the term Columbian exchange refers to the worldwide transfer of pathogens, plants, and animals resulting from the expanded and intensified contact among civilizations after 1492. To America, Europeans brought diseases (smallpox and measles), animals (cattle, horses, sheep, and pigs), and plants (grapes, sugar, wheat, barley, and oats). From America, traders carried away not only precious metals but also corn (maize), potatoes, and sweet potatoes. These transfers contributed significantly to the formation of new civilizations in the Americas and altered the civilizations of Europe, Asia, and Africa.

In the Americas, smallpox and measles reduced the indigenous population of the Caribbean Islands almost to the vanishing point by 1540. In Central Mexico, the native population declined from about 18 million at the time of contact to approximately 1 million in 1605. Peru’s native-American population declined from 11 million to about 700,000 by the early 18th century. Throughout the Americas, the indigenous population declined by about 90 percent.

In place of people, European animals claimed the land. This was especially true where open grasslands were available. To cite one example, in the Mesquital Valley north of Mexico City, sheep increased from 39,000 in 1539 to 4.4 million in 1589. As the number of sheep increased, the former corn-producing valley became scrub land. In other zones, now virtually empty of native farmers because of population loss, new crops of wheat, barley, and sugar became predominant.

In Europe and Asia, maize and potatoes became staple foods for the poor, and in both areas contributed to population increases. Between 1650 and 1750, the population of Europe, including Asiatic Russia, increased from 103 million to 144 million; the population of Asia, excluding Russia, increased from 327 million to 475 million. As one of many factors, new crops bore a direct relationship to the population rise. Maize and potatoes increased the total food supply because they allowed previously uncultivated land to be used, including fallow land.

One of the documents I would like you to read (you can read all the documents I’d like you to read by clicking here) describes a smallpox epidemic in the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlán, just months prior to the Spanish siege in August 1521 (you may have already read pieces of this in my post from yesterday). Written originally in Nahuatal, the Aztec language, in 1555 by native informants, the document was translated into Spanish in 1557 by Bernadino de Sahagún, a member of the Franciscan order. The documents on the spread of European plants and animals in Mexico and Chile were written in 1620 by a Carmelite friar, Antonio Vázquez de Espinoza. He not only identified the plants and animals but also described the native-Americans’ adjustments to their spread. Information on maize and potatoes in China came from local histories in the 18th and 19th centuries. European Enlightenment intellectuals wrote about maize and potatoes in Europe.

After reading the documents, I would like you all to consider and discuss the following: In the description of the smallpox epidemic in Tenochtitlán, what statements in the document indicate that community cohesiveness broke down as a result of the disease? What are the military implications of such a breakdown? In the document on the spread of animals and plants in Mexico and Chile, identify the plants and animals introduced from Europe, and review numbers of animals compared with people. Natives who survived the epidemics were forced to adjust to new conditions. How did they adjust? What jobs did they perform? How were the jobs related to the new plants and animals? Who controlled the conditions under which they worked? What are the implications for social relations? In the documents dealing with American crops in France, England, and Ireland, who were Locke, Boyle, and Smith? Why were they optimistic about cultivation of maize and potatoes? What were the advantages of cultivating these crops? In the document dealing with American crops in China, what types of sources were used to describe the cultivation of maize and potatoes in China? Who were the cultivators of maize and potatoes? In what kind of terrain did they cultivate these crops? What was the environmental result? Finally, based on the documents, what are the major ways in which the Columbian exchange altered world history? Your thoughts…

The Battle for Tenochtitlán

Bernardino de Sahagún, a member of the Franciscan religious order, was one of the earliest Spanish missionaries in Mexico, arriving in 1529. He soon developed a keen interest in the culture of the peoples of Mexico, for whom he had deep affection and respect. Having mastered the Nahuatl language, spoken by the Aztecs and other central Mexican peoples, around 1545 he began to collect oral and pictorial information about Native Mexican culture. The result was his General History of the Things of New Spain, a major source of information about Mexican culture at the time of the Spanish conquest. Many Spaniards considered Sahagún’s work dangerous because they feared his efforts to preserve the memory of native culture threatened their plans to exploit and Christianize the “Indians.” As a result, in 1578 his writings and notes were confiscated by royal decree and sent back to Spain, where they gathered dust in an archive until rediscovered and published in the nineteenth century.

The document that I would like you to read comes from the twelfth and last book of the General History. Based on interviews with Aztecs who had lived through the conquest some twenty-five years earlier, Book Twelve, which exists in both Nahuatl and Spanish versions, recounts the conquest of Mexico from the time Cortés arrived on the Mexican coast in April 1519 until the days following the Aztec’s capitulation in August 1521. Although the exact role of Sahagún and his Indian assistants in composing and organizing Book Twelve has been hotly debated by scholars, most agree that it accurately portrays Aztec views and perceptions of the events that unfolded between 1519 and 1521.

The excerpt from the document that I would like you to read (you can read it by clicking here) picks up the story in November 1519. By then the Spaniards had gained as allies the Tlaxcalans, the Aztec’s bitter enemies, and were leaving Cholula, an ancient city that the Spaniards and their allies had sacked and looted because of its leaders’ lack of cooperation. They were on their way to Tenochtitlán, the splendid Aztec capital on Lake Texcoco, for an anticipated meeting with Emperor Moctezuma.

After you have read the document, I would like for you all to consider and discuss the following: What does the source reveal about the motives of the Spaniards and their Indian allies for their attack on the Aztecs? What was Moctezuma’s strategy to deal with the Spaniards? What did it fail? Aside from their firearms, what other military advantages did the Spaniards have over their opponents? On several occasions the Aztecs routed the Spaniards. What explains these Aztec victories? How did the Aztec view of war differ from that of the Spaniards? What does the source reveal about Aztec religious beliefs and values? Your thoughts…

Why England Should Sponsor Colonies

Although King Henry VII and a group of Bristol merchants had dispatched the Italian mariner John Cabot to North America in 1497 to search for a route to Asia, no further English exploration or colonization took place until the reign of Elizabeth I, when the political and religious conflicts connected with the English reformation abated. England’s renewed efforts were not auspicious. Backed by a group of investors who formed the Company of Cathay (China), Martin Frobisher made three voyages to North America between 1576 and 1578 in search of gold and the Northwest Passage to Asia, but found neither. Five years later, an effort promoted by Sir Humphrey Gilbert to colonize North America ended in tragedy when the expedition was lost at sea while sailing south from Newfoundland. These setbacks did not discourage a small group of merchants, mariners, and courtiers who continued to formulate plans for colonization and promote them at Elizabeth’s court.

Included in this group was Richard Hakluyt, the son of a minor London merchant, who was orphaned at age five and raised by an older cousin, a lawyer. Through contacts with his cousin’s friends and business associates, the young Hakluyt developed an interest in trade and exploration. Although he studied Greek and Latin at Oxford, his intellectual passion was geography, which he learned from books, maps, and reports from mariners, merchants, and explorers. Ordained a priest in the Church of England, Hakluyt still had time to write books on exploration and lobby royal officials and Queen Elizabeth herself on behalf of various proposals to colonized North America.

In 1584, Hakluyt wrote a lengthy memorandum to Queen Elizabeth in support of a proposal by Sir Humphrey Gilbert’s half brother, Sir Walter Raleigh, to colonize the east coast of North America, known at the time as Norumbega. Elizabeth declined, pleading lack of money, and thin funding was one of several reasons why the Roanoke Colony failed. Hakluyt and other supporters of English colonization continued to lobby on behalf of their ideas, however, and during the reign of James I the chartering of the Virginia Company and the Plymouth Company marked the true beginnings of the successful English colonization of North America.

The document that I would like you to read (you can read the document by clicking here) is the concluding summary to Hakluyt’s memorandum to Elizabeth. After reading the document, I would like you all to think about and discuss the following: According to Hakluyt, what are the economic advantages England might expect from colonizing Norumbega? According to Hakluyt, how will colonization strengthen England and weaken its rivals? According to Hakluyt, how will colonization help solve England’s domestic problems? How important is religion in Hakluyt’s thinking about colonization? How much concrete knowledge of the Americas does Hakluyt seem to have? Your thoughts…

1492: What Columbus and His Patrons Hoped to Gain

Among the many factors that contributed to Europe’s expansion in the early modern period, perhaps none was more important than simple human ambition. There is no better example of this truth than Christopher Columbus, the Genoese mariner credited with the “discovery” of the New World. The best available evidence suggests that Columbus (Cristoforo Colombo in Italian; Cristóbal Colón in Spanish) was born in 1451 to a weaver and went to sea as a teenager. As a young man he gained wide experience as a sailor, with voyages as far north as Ireland, as far south as Mina on the Gulf of Guinea, and as far west as the Canary Islands, Madeira, and the Azores, all islands off Africa’s coast. Having taught himself to read, he began to study geographical texts, maps, and even biblical passages that provided him with a set of assumptions concerning the circumference of the Earth (everyone that was educated knew the Earth was round, but the actual circumference was still up for debate), the size of Europe and the distance of Japan from the Asian mainland. Although false, these assumptions convinced him it would be possible to reach Asia by sailing west into the Atlantic. In 1484, Columbus sought support for an exploratory voyage from King John II of Portugal, but the king, who was convinced that sailing around Africa was the most promising route to Asia, refused.

Undeterred, in 1486 Columbus gained an audience with the Spanish monarchs Ferdinand and Isabella, who on hearing Columbus’ proposal gave him a small stipend and appointed a commission of “learned men and mariners” to examine this plan. For five years Columbus followed the Spanish court from city to city, waiting for a final decision. Negotiations broke down in early 1492 when the king and queen balked at what they considered Columbus’ excessive demands. With Columbus preparing to take his ideas to the king of France, however, a last-minute appeal to Isabella resulted in an agreement among the parties. In two “capitulations,” excerpts of which I would like you to read (you can read the first one by clicking here [read starting at "The Capitulation" on pg. 442 and all of pg. 443] and the second one by clicking here), Ferdinand and Isabella in April 1492 promised Columbus a large share of any economic benefits that might accrue from his voyage and extensive authority over any lands he might discover. Preparations could now begin for Columbus’ historic voyage that departed the Spanish port of Palos on August 3, 1492.

Columbus never realized his dreams of wealth and power. After his discoveries failed to produce either the gold or rich commercial opportunities he had promised, he lost favor at court, and from 1495 onward the monarchs ignored the agreements they had approved in 1492. Columbus made his forth and last voyage across the Atlantic in 1502, four years before he died in Valladolid, Spain, still pressing his claims with the Crown and still convinced he had reached Asia.

After you read the two documents I would like you all to consider and discuss the following: What assumptions underlie Columbus’ and the monarchs’ statements about the authority they expect to exercise in the land Columbus discovers? What kinds of authority will Columbus exercise over the lands he discovers? What role will be played by the monarchs? What kind of material benefits do Columbus and the monarchs expect to gain from Columbus’ promised discoveries? How will these gains be divided? How do the stated and implied goals of Columbus’ enterprise compare with the motives attributed by Gomes Eannes de Azurara to Prince Henry the Navigator? Your thoughts…

Mongols Win 5 Awards But the Byzantine Empire Upsets in the Season 2 Whapey Awards

Well folks, the vote was close in several categories, but the Byzantine Empire took home the top prize in the 3rd annual Season 2 Whapey Awards. The results follow:

Best Government: Byzantine Empire

Most Influential Society: Mongols

Most Influential Person: Chingis Khan

Best Leader: Chingis Khan

Worst Leader: Justinian

Best Conflict: Mongols vs. All

Best Social System: Abbasid Empire

Most Influential Belief System: Islam

Best Economic System: Byzantine Empire

Best Invention: Printing press

Worst Invention: Gunpowder

Most Influential Writer: Ibn-Khaldun

Best Cultural Contributions: Song China

Best Nomadic Society: Mongols

Best Film Set in Season 2: Aladdin

So there you have it! Thanks to all of you who voted, but about 40% of you all did not vote. Many of the categories were extremely close, so I can't emphasize enough the importance of every vote. Enjoy the weekend... the Season 3 Premiere continues with part 2 on Monday...

Why Portugal Began Exploring the African Coast

At the same time that Chinese fleets under Zheng He were sailing to India, the Arabian Peninsula, and east Africa, and Muslim sailors dominated the coastal trade of virtually every inhabited land washed by the Indian Ocean, Portuguese explorers began to inch their way down Africa's west coast. From 1419 onward, Prince Henry, the third son of King John I, almost annually sent out a ship or two in an attempt to push farther toward the sub-Saharan land the Portuguese called Guinea. After they rounded Cape Bojador, on the western Sahara coast in 1434, the pace of exploration quickened, especially now that the Portuguese were coming to believe that it might be possible to reach Asia by sailing around Africa. By 1460, the Portuguese reached the coast of modern Sierra Leone, and in 1488 Bartolomeu Dias sailed around Africa's southern tip. Finally, on May 20, 1498, Vasco da Gama, seeking "Christians and spices," dropped anchor off Calicut on India's west coast after rounding Africa. Although da Gama lost two of his four ships and many of his crew in these enterprise, Portugal was now in the Indian Ocean to stay.

Da Gama's success was still almost a half century in the future when in 1452 Gomes Eannes de Azurara, a Portuguese royal official, began to compose a history of of the life and work of Prince Henry, whose support for early Portuguese exploration has earned him the name "Prince Henry the Navigator." Azurara's history details Portuguese exploration down the African coast until 1448. Having completed The Chronicle of Guinea in 1453, Azurara turned to other duties in his service to the king, and he never completed an intended second volume. Nonetheless, his chronicle gives us a revealing picture of the spirit behind Portugal's first exploring ventures. Please read some excerpts from this document by clicking on the following link (The Chronicle of Guinea; just read chapter VII, pgs. 27-30). Once you have read this passage, I would like you all to consider and discuss the following: What event seems to have sparked Portuguese interest in exploring the oceans off Africa's west coast? What were the anticipated economic benefits from the Portuguese voyages? What religious goals did Henry hope to achieve? Does Azurara give the impression that Henry was motivated more by religion than economic gain? What does the document reveal about the extent of Portuguese knowledge of Africa in the mid-fifteenth century? Your thoughts...

Understanding the Italian Renaissance Through the Writings of Petrarch

The Renaissance was, above all, a significant new cultural movement that began in 14th century Italy, somewhat before the early modern period in a larger world history. Its innovations included new styles and a new attention to style; an increase in secular interests, as opposed to strictly religious goals; and a major revival of attention to classical Roman and Greek models in writing, art, and philosophy. The Italian Renaissance also included new political developments in competing city-states and a growing level of trade. Some scholars have identified growing delight in individualism and individual achievement as another unifying feature of the Renaissance.

As a cultural movement, the Renaissance lasted into the 16th century, by which time it was involving northern Europe as well. The Renaissance contrasted greatly, in religious, stylistic and philosophical terms, with the medieval culture that had preceded it in Western Europe.

The documents that I would like you to read come from letters written by Francesco Petrarch, one of the leading figures in the Italian Renaissance. From 1304 to 1374, Petrarch lived in Florence, a major Renaissance center. Petrarch was a poet, historian, and scholar, known both for his advancement of Latin classics and for his work in Italian. He wrote a number of letters to figures in the classical past, but also to contemporary authors like Boccacio, in order to discuss some of his intellectual and personal concerns. There are four letters of his that I would like you to read (you can read all four of them by clicking here): one simply generally entitled "To Posterity"; another to Boccacio; and two more to the long-dead Roman politician and philosopher Cicero, best known for his writing and for his his talents in the field of rhetoric. The letters were written in Latin and intended for publication.

The letters raise a number of Renaissance themes. The relationship to Roman culture is one that Petrarch deals with directly, in discussing Latin and vernacular Italian. The Renaissance ultimately encouraged the rise of vernacular languages--English and French as well as Italian--in cultural life, but it also promoted esteem for good Latin. The relationship to religion is another key theme: Petrarch writes as a Christian, but suggests a re-balancing of interests between religion and other concerns in intellectual and even ethical life. Petrarch also describes a new sense of himself as an individual, and this invites definition as well, as part of figuring out what the Renaissance was all about.

Petrarch's work can and should be compared with medieval intellectual life, in terms of the different cultural goals and values. It also raises deeper questions about the range of the Renaissance: how much was the Renaissance an elitist movement, and how much did it affect the wider society?

The Italian Renaissance must also be connected to world history. In one sense, it was a very self-contained cultural movement with specifically Italian features. But some scholars have found in the Renaissance a source of wider changes in culture and values that help explain new European initiatives in the world at large. After reading Petrarch's letters, what do you think? Was Petrarch highly individualistic in his presentation and assessment of himself? What were Petrarch's religious views? How do these compare with more traditional Christian values? How does he define the nature and purpose of ethics? What are Petrarch's attitudes toward the classical past? What does he urge his contemporaries to find in classical styles and examples? How does his love of the classics relate to his sense of his own achievements and individuality? Judging by Petrarch's interests, what kinds of changes were involved in the development of the Renaissance culture? How does it compare to medieval culture in Western Europe? What kinds of implications did it have for society at large? Again judging by Petrarch's interests alongside major developments in world history at the time: How would YOU define the significance of the Renaissance in world history? Did Renaissance values play a major role in causing new European global initiatives? How do they compare to other major causes? Your thoughts...

The Season 3 Preview

Ladies and gentlemen, the Season 3 Premiere is only HOURS away. Darkness lies on the horizon for many societies at this very moment. Therefore, without any further delay, here is your Season 3 Preview! Season 3 (or the Early Modern Period, as scholars generally refer to it as) will focus on developments between 1450 and 1750. A new range of global interconnections will be the most important change of the period. But new activity by Western Europe will be an important component as well, and some of this will be prepared by new innovations in the 14th and 15th centuries.

Western Europe's emergence as an increasingly important actor on the world stage between 1300 and 1500 will depend on several developments: new technologies, in part gained by previous contacts with Asia (such as explosive powders and the compass); acute international trade problems and fear of Muslim power, which prompted Europeans to seek new routes to Asia and also sources of gold that would give them greater bargaining power; and changes within European society itself, including greater rivalries among monarchs and within the Christian church. New international positions will continue the process of change within Europe, helping to promote new attitudes toward science. Western Europe's power at the same time will affect other societies, particularly in the Americas, which will soon be open to growing European control. Elsewhere, the impact of Western contacts, higher levels of international trade, and the foodstuffs available from the Americas will have diverse results, ranging from altered commercial patterns in Africa to deliberate imitation in Russia to controlled contact along with growing trade in East Asia. Other developments will shape the early modern centuries as well, including the formation of vigorous new empires (the Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal) in the Middle East and India, both of which will extend Muslim power. Renewed political strength in China will be another vital Asian development, as European influence and new global trading patterns will have only selective impact on the largest continent during the early modern centuries. Finally, Japan will face the dilemma of doing business with the west and risking takeover, or isolating itself from the west and risking falling behind the rest of the world. The big question, though, that remains is this: WITH THE ERA OF NOMADIC POWER OVER, WILL THE EARTH EXPERIENCE A GROWING PEACE WITH "CIVILIZED" SOCIETIES TAKING BACK FULL CONTROL, OR WILL THE CIVILIZED PEOPLES OF THE WORLD CREATE THE MOST VIOLENT WORLD WE'VE SEEN YET? Stay tuned for the Season 3 Premiere!

Season 2 Test Questions?

Any discussion that you all would like to have on the test, including any questions that you may have can be posted here...

For Your Consideration...

For Your Consideration

Mongol Empire- Best Government

For Your Consideration...

For Your Consideration

Ibn-Khaldun- Most Influential Writer

For Your Consideration...

For Your Consideration

The Seventh Seal- Best Picture Set in Season 2

For Your Consideration...

For Your Consideration

Mongol- Best Film Set in Season 2

The Season 2 Whapey Awards!

Ok folks, now that season 2 is officially over, it's time for awards season. Once again, this is our opportunity to award the "best" in world history at the end of a season. This is also a great opportunity to reflect critically on content learned. This year, for the first time, all voting will be done online. The categories for voting will be listed below, and all you have to do, is nominate your selection in a comment post. Voting closes at 11:59pm ON THURSDAY. We'll tally the votes, and the winner will be announced this Friday. If any of you are in need of volunteer hours and would like to come in after school or during 6th lunch on Friday to tally votes, I'll be happy to have you. That would be a great help. Happy voting. Here are the categories for season 2...

Best Government:

Most Influential Society:

Most Influential Person:

Best Leader:

Worst Leader:

Best Conflict:

Best Social System:

Most Influential Belief System:

Best Economic System:

Best Invention:

Worst Invention:

Most Influential Writer:

Best Cultural Contribution:

Best Nomadic Group:

Best Film Set During Season 2 Nominees:

--Aladdin

--Apocolypto

--The Lion in Winter

--Mongol

--The Seventh Seal

Chinese and Portuguese Voyages at the Dawn of a New Era

Ladies and gentlemen, Season 2 is now complete, and we are now moving into a very uncertain world. With the era of the nomads now over, and the world up for grabs, it's anybody's guess where Season 3 will take us. One thing seems certain, voyages on the high seas seem to be the direction those vying for power are going. Contacts between widely separated regions in the world greatly intensified during the 15th century. Columbus' first voyage (which we'll soon be discussing) across the Atlantic at the end of the century brought the earth's two great islands--Afro-Eurasia and the Americas--into direct and permanent contact with one another. The changes that resulted from the new trans-Atlantic connections were massive in both the "New World" of the Americas and the "Old World" of Afro-Eurasia.

There was also a great leap forward in contacts between the major regions within Afro-Eurasia, a continuation of the trend that had begun with the establishment of the overland Silk Roads and the Indian Ocean voyages of the classical period. Between 1405 and 1433, the Ming emperors in China dispatched seven huge naval expeditions into the Indian Ocean under the admiralship of Zheng He. The Chinese ships were the largest and most technologically advanced vessels in the early 15th-century world. They made many successful landing at ports in Southeast Asia, India, Arabia, and the East African coast. Then, for reasons that are somewhat unclear, but likely due to continuing Mongol threats on the frontier, the Ming government called a halt to the maritime expeditions and cut off funds for shipbuilding, sending the greatest navy in the world into sharp decline.

While the Ming voyages were in full swing, the Portuguese government (which knew nothing about the maritime activities of the Chinese) began to sponsor its own, much smaller, overseas expeditions. During the course of the 15th century, Portuguese mariners were sent, very tentatively, down the west coast of Africa with the aim of discovering a sea route to Asia. (Muslim states now blocked the traditional routes from Christian Europe to Asia via the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf). Finally, in 1497 and 1498, Vasco da Dama led a fleet of three Portuguese ships and a crew of about 170 sailors around the Cape of Good Hope and up the East African coast. Assisted by an experienced Indian Ocean pilot, the Portuguese ships then sailed across the Arabian Sea to Calicut, a major port on the southwest coast of India (which the Chinese fleet had visited several times earlier in the century). Europeans were now able to sail directly to Asian ports. A new era of world history had begun.

The two documents that I would like you to read focus on the visits of the Chinese and Portuguese fleets to Calicut at different times in the 15th century. In the first document (that you can read by clicking here, starting at the heading "The Country of Ku-li [Calicut]," pgs. 120-126). Ma Huan, who traveled with Zheng He on several of the great maritime expeditions, records his impressions of the Indian port in the early 15th century. The second document (that you can read by clicking here) is taken from the record of the Portuguese voyage made by an anonymous member of Vasco da Gama's crew in 1497 and 1498. How do these selections illustrate the growth of maritime commerce in the Indian Ocean in the 15th century? In what ways were the Chinese and Portuguese voyages similar? How did they differ?

Also, when you are finished reading through both documents, I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What does Ma Huan report about the people of Calicut? What aspects of life in Calicut interested him the most? What do we learn about the local economy from his report? How do you explain his confusion about religion in Calicut? What seems to have been the purpose of the Chinese visit to Calicut? How does the Portuguese report compare with that of Ma Huan? What similarities and differences do you see? What explains the discord between the Portuguese and their hosts? How important were Muslim merchants in Calicut? Where did they come from? What evidence do you see of an Islamic trade network in these documents? How did the level of Indian Ocean commerce in the 15th century compare with that during the classical period? Was the long experience the Chinese had in dealing with pastoral nomads such as the Xiongnu and the Mongols an asset or a liability for Ma Huan and his shipmates when they docked in Calicut? How does Ma Huan's account of Calicut compare with Sima Qian's report on the Xiongnu you read some weeks ago? What do the Chinese decisions to sponsor and then terminate the Zheng He voyages suggest about the political leadership of China during the Ming dynasty? Why was the decision to end the voyages significant? Suppose the Portuguese naval program had been ended after Vasco da Gama returned home. In your opinion, would such a decision have altered the course of world history in important ways? Does the Portuguese document suggest a shift in the European attitude toward trade and merchants? Your thoughts...

An In Depth Look at the Eclipse of the Nomadic War Machine

Ladies and gentlemen, as we near the final part of our Season 2 finale tomorrow, a sobering truth is quickly emerging. The end of an era nears very quickly-- the end of the nomadic era. Season 2 began with nomads (Arabs) and ends with nomads (Mongols), but at the end of the nomadic period, they will actually never again return to power. It was certainly an interesting ride, but it is in fact over folks. Why is this the end? Historian Robert Guisepi explains this quite nicely in a fascinating little article that he wrote back in 1992. You can see this article by clicking here. You do not have to read the whole thing, but please do scroll down to read the end under the heading "Analysis: The Eclipse of the Nomadic War Machine." When you are finished reading, I would like you all to discuss the following: What are some of the major ways in which nomadic people and their periodic expansions have affected global history? Which of their movements and conquests do you think were the most important? Why were the Mongols able to build a much greater empire than any previous nomadic contender? Why did the Mongol Empire collapse so rapidly, and what does its fall tell us about the underlying weaknesses of the nomadic war machine? Your thoughts... (goodbye nomads... forever... [tear]).

Court Case Monday: The People of the 21st Century v. The Mongol's Historical Reputation

I know that in 3rd period the bell rang earlier than I thought, so it was a bit chaotic getting this assignment out. If you guys have any questions, feel free to post them here. All classes can also use this area to discuss anything regarding the case. If you lost the directions sheet (which means you've lost 1/3 of your evidence), you can at least download the directions by clicking here. All the best on this one...

Mongol Rule in Russia

Mongol armies conquered most of Russia, including Kievan Rus', early in the 13th century. Their rule lasted until the middle of the 15th century. It had considerable impact in limiting Russian contacts with other societies, reducing trade and educational levels, and shifting political emphasis more toward central Russia. Many Russians copied Mongol habits in matters such as dress, and Russian leaders may have learned more about an authoritarian political model. Russia's Asian elements, certainly, gained ground in this period. But Russia was not completely changed, and among other things orthodox religious emphasis remained intact.

The documents that I would like you to read describe Mongol conquest and rule (Russians, as I mentioned today, called the Mongols Tartars). They are a bit fragmentary, coming from snippets in Russian chronicles and travelers' accounts. They are also not entirely harmonious, in talking both about atrocities and about considerable political and religious latitude. How do the documents, in combination, help explain why Mongol rule lasted so long? How do they also help explain why ultimately Russian leaders sought to drive the Mongols out?

Document I comes from the First Novgorian Chronicle, dealing with the year 1238. The passage provides another account of the attacks on Riazan and the city Vladimir, already discussed in document III in my earlier post. Chronicles were written by orthodox priests, and this authorship explains some of the terms used in the chronicle and might raise questions about factual accuracy.

Document II is from another religious source, a Catholic (Franciscan) monk, Giovanni de Plano, describing a visit to Kiev in 1244.

Document III is from a message sent to his people by the Prince of Novgorad, between 1266 and 1272.

Document IV deals with a Mongol decree, issued by Khan Mengu-Emir around 1308, sent to the Metropolitan (archbishop) of the Russian Church.

Document V comes from fragments of chronicles in the 13th century, on dealings between Russian princes and their Tartar overlords.

Document VI, finally, comes from another chronicle, the Voskresnesk, in 1262, discussing Muslim agents that Mongols used to collect taxes in Russia.

Collectively, the documents (which you can read by clicking here) deal with a major episode in the occupation of one society by conquerors from another. They encourage assessment of changes and continuities between initial conquest and consolidation of rule in Russia, and they allow analysis of methods of rule and of the impact of the conquest period. Once you have read the documents, I would like you to think about and discuss the following: What were the worst aspects of Mongol conquest and rule? What were the best aspects? Why and how did Russian commentary ultimately go beyond the initial horror stories? What did Mongols seek in conquering Russia? How do their goals compare with those of other major conquests in world history? Are there biases in the sources available, and do they distort our picture of Mongol rule? Why did Mongol rule last so long without a huge occupying force? Why did Russian leaders ultimately decide to contest the occupation and push the Mongols out? What were the long-term implications of Mongol rule for the nature of Russian culture and politics, including foreign policy? What were the impacts on Russian identity? Finally, how does the Mongol period in Russia compare with Mongol impact on other parts of Asia and Europe? PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ AND DISCUSS THIS DOCUMENT IN PREPARATION FOR MONDAY'S COURT CASE. Your thoughts?

The Mongol Empire Takes Shape

Ok, so yesterday we looked at the rise of Chingis Khan through the eyes of the Mongols. Now, I would like you to turn to Persian, Korean, Russian, and Western European sources in order to see how "outsiders" viewed the conquering nomads.

The documents that I would like you to read focus on the decades from the 1220s though the 1250s, a decisive time for the Mongols. At the beginning of this period Chingis Khan had already conquered part of northern China and was in the process of leading an invasion of the Central Asian region centering on present-day Uzbekistan. The Uzbek steppe, which included the flourishing caravan cities of Samarkand, Bukhara, and Balkh, was the midpoint of the overland Silk Road and the heartland of a vibrant Islamic culture. In conquering northern China and the Uzbek territory, Chingis Khan created one of the most extensive empires in world history.

But there were many more Mongol conquests to come. A nearly continuous string of military victories under the leadership of Chingis' son and successor, Ogedei (Greatat Khan, 1229-1241), and grandson, Mongke (Great Khan, 1251-1259), created an empire of truly unprecedented size. At the time of Mongke's death the Mongol boundaries included all of Central Asia, Persia, and most of Russia. When another of Chingis Khan's grandsons, Khubilai, succeeded as Great Khan in 1260, the Mongols were prepared to realize their greatest dream, the completion of their conquest of China.

Please click on the following link (Asian and European Sources on the Mongols) in order to read the aforementioned documents from outside perspectives. How do the documents help us to understand why the Mongol empire grew so extensively in the 13th century? Did the Mongol conquests inadvertently strengthen a sense of religious, ethnic, or national identity among their victims? Also, once you have read the documents I would like you to consider and discuss the following: What evidence does Juvaini provide regarding the importance of trade and Islam in 13th century Bukhara? According to Juvaini, what was the Mongols' attitude toward Islam? Does Juvaini appear to have been a Muslim? How might Juvaini's religious beliefs have shaped his account of the Mongols in Bukhara? Could the fire that destroyed the city's wooden buildings have been an inadvertent result of the fighting? What became of the people of Bukhara? Were religious considerations a factor in the Korean resistance to the Mongols? How does the Korean document shed light on the methods of warfare used in the 13th century? How did the Mongols, as pastoral nomads, learn the siege techniques they employed against cities in Central Asia and Korea? What feature of Russian political life worked to the advantage of the Mongols? How do you explain the chronicler's description of the Mongols as both "godless" and Mohammedan"? What was the likely religion of the chronicler? How might the Persian, Korean, and Russian accounts of the Mongols have reinforced a sense of national or religious identity in these countries? Which seems stronger in these reports, a sense of national or religious identity? How does the description of the Mongols in Hungary reveal their cleverness? Why did the Mongols evacuate Hungary shortly after their arrival? What features of Karakorum impress William of Rubruck? What did not impress him? How do you think the Mongols obtained the resources to build Karakorum? Why did they not move their center of operations to one of the cities they conquered? What did William of Rubruck observe about gender relations among the Mongols? Does his report imply anything about gender in Western Europe? How do the views of the "outsiders" compare with the "insider" point of view expressed in the Secret History of the Mongols? What differences do you see? Are there any similarities? In your opinion, which is a more valuable aid to understanding the past, an "insider" or an "outsider" account? Finally, how do the Mongols compare to the Xiongnu? In what ways had the lifeways of the nomads changed from the time of the Xiongnu? What were the continuities? REMEMBER, THIS IS A LOT TO CONSIDER, BUT IT SHOULD ALL BE CONSIDERED IN PREPARATION FOR YOUR COURT CASE ON MONDAY. Now, your thoughts...

A Persian Painting of Chingis Khan Leading the Charge

Chingis Khan and his soldiers relied on methods of fighting on horseback that, for the most part, had been pioneered during the first millennium B.C.E. by the Xiongnu and other Central Asian nomads. From the time of the Xiongnu onward, the military success of the nomads was based on the use of small but powerful compound bows, mass-produced socketed arrowheads made of iron, and improved saddles that provided stability for the riders. Early in the Common Era, the nomads added the stirrup to their horseriding paraphernalia.

An additional reason for the effectiveness of the nomad cavalries was their ability to fight as a cohesive force, a trait that was clearly evident among the Xiongnu and the Mongols. Perhaps the occasional emergence of an unusually talented leader such as Mo-tun among the Xiongnu or Chingis Khan was the decisive factor in bringing unity to the chronically feuding nomads. It may be that the anonymous Persian book illustrator who painted the above picture of Chingis Khan leading the Mongols in battle meant to capture some of the cohesion that the Great Khan was able to establish among his soldiers.

While studying the painting, I would like you all to think about and discuss the following: What military equipment is illustrated in the painting? Did the Mongols have the ability to produce all the equipment illustrated in this painting, or was it necessary for them to obtain some of it from sedentary peoples? In what ways has the artist depicted skill in horseriding? Finally, does the artist seem to have been biased, either toward or against the Mongols? Is this painting an example of pro-Mongol propaganda? PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO STUDY AND RESPOND TO THIS PAINING AS IT WILL BE ALLOWED AS ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IN THE COURTROOM ON MONDAY. Now your thoughts...

The Season 2 Finale: Chingis Khan and the Rise of the Mongols

Welcome to the Season Two Finale! The promise is that this will be an earth changing finale! The sudden rise of the Mongols under the leadership of Chingis Khan (or Genghis, as it is oftentimes spelled), the greatest of the nomad conquerors to come galloping out of the grasslands of Central Asia, has long excited the imagination of historians. When Chingis Khan was born around 1165 (and given the name Temujin), the Mongol region was politically fragmented. The Mongols were one of a half-dozen major tribes of migratory herders who claimed sovereignty over parts of the grasslands north of China. Conflict between the various tribes, none of whom had any particular advantage over the others, was endemic.

Temujin's early life, so far as we know, was little different from that of many of his contemporaries. His father, known as Yesugei the Brave, was a minor Mongol leader. When Temujin was about 10 years old, Yesugei was murdered by members of a rival tribe. The death of Yesugei was a disaster for Temujin, his brothers, and their mother, Hogelun Ujin. The family was abandoned by the other members of their clan, the Tayichiguds, and experienced much hardship for the next several years.

Somehow Temujin overcame these obstacles. He had a talent for establishing close ties with other nomads, some of whom were tribal elders. His ability as a military leader was extraordinary. Around 1185, when he was about 20, some of the Mongol elders elected him as their khan (tribal chief). Two decades later, following his leadership in the conquest of much of Central Asia, a Great Assembly (Khuriltai) of the Mongols designated Temujin as Chingis Khan (Universal Ruler). He spent the rest of his life expanding the boundaries of this conquest--westward toward Persia and southward into China.

Much of Chingis Khan's life will always be a mystery. Our best source for his life is a book called The Secret History of the Mongols that was written shortly after the death of the Great Khan. The author of the Secret History is unknown, but the book is clearly the work of someone who was a contemporary of Chingis, perhaps even a member of his household. Written to glorify Chingis and having some of the characteristics of an epic poem, the Secret History must be used carefully. Despite its limitations, however, the Secret History remains the best entry point into the world of Chingis Khan. I would like you to read excerpts from this document by clicking on the following link (The Secret History of the Mongols). When you are finished reading I would like you to think about and discuss the following: How does the Secret History help us to understand the reasons for the rise of Chingis Khan? What did the Mongols mean by "anda"? Why was anda important to the Mongols? What does the importance of anda suggest about the strength of kinship ties, tribal loyalties, and the stability of Mongol systems of governance? How does the Secret History explain the rise of Chingis Khan? What were his strengths? Does the Secret History reveal any of his weaknesses? How would you evaluate Chingis Khan as a manager/administrator? How did he select advisers and generals? What evidence do you find regarding the importance of familial, tribal, or religious loyalties to Chingis Khan? Why were the Mongol armies so successful? What does the Secret History reveal about Mongol beliefs and habits of mind? Does the Secret History help us to understand why the era of Mongol power was so brief? Finally, how does Chingis Khan compare to the Xiongnu leader Modun that you all read about a few weeks ago? REMEMBER, YOU HAVE AN IMPORTANT COURT CASE COMING UP ON MONDAY, AND IT IS NECESSARY THAT YOU READ ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IN ITS ENTIRETY AND COMMENT ON MY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS IN ORDER TO ARGUE YOUR CASE. Now your thoughts...

Questions on the Unit 6 Test?

I'm just getting this opened up, but the blog is open for discussion of tomorrow's test. I won't be around much this evening, but it's here for you to use...

IT'S COMING... THE SEASON TWO FINALE IS ONLY 1 DAY AWAY

The Americas are on the eve of invasion...

A weak Europe is transforming into something more powerful...

Once solid empires are mysteriously collapsing...

And ONE MAN with ONE GOAL seeks to change the world!

STARTING THURSDAY, DON'T MISS THE SEASON TWO FINALE!

THE WORLD WILL NEVER BE THE SAME

The Globe Watches an Obama Presidency Beginning to Take Shape

The 44th American President will come into office on January 20th facing obstacles far beyond what most presidents do upon their coming into office. President-elect Barack Obama is going to inherit a war in Afghanistan, a war in Iraq, the worst financial crisis in a century, and an environment also on the brink of total crisis. For these reasons, the world is watching Obama's every move in putting together a team to tackle these issues even before he takes office in January. This is a road to the White House that will be followed very closely to be sure. Obama's first job? Put together a cabinet. There are all kinds of ideas floating around as to who the selections will be. There was talk about bringing in Republican Colin Powell in as Secretary of Defense, but already that talk has slowed as the word is that he has shown little interest in the position. There is much more talk of keeping Republican Bob Gates in the position (he's currently Bush's Secretary of Defense) as both Democrats and Republicans agree he has done a phenomenal job in his attempts to re-stabilize Iraq since Donald Rumsfeld was pushed out. For Secretary of State there are a ton of names being thrown around: Democratic Senator from Massachusetts John Kerry, Democratic Governor of New Mexico Bill Richardson, and Republican Senator from Nebraska Chuck Hagle. Conventional wisdom currently is that if Obama selects a Republican for Secretary of Defense, he will likely go with a Democrat for Secretary of State to bring balance of opinion to the cabinet. If he goes with a Democrat for Secretary of Defense, there's a good chance that you would see a guy like Republican Chuck Hagle from Nebraska chosen for the Secretary of State position as the two men have worked fairly closely together in Congress already in Obama's time in the Senate. Democratic Governor of Arizona Janet Napolitano seems to be the favorite at the moment for the very important Attorney General position. The big question currently, though, is the financial crisis, and so obviously the Secretary of Treasury position may be one of Obama's first appointments as he needs to get someone appointed quickly to begin working as soon as possible with current Secretary Paulson. All kinds of names are up for this job. Warren Buffet was thrown around a bit, even by Obama and McCain during the debates, but the word is that he has little interest in the position. Larry Summers (Bill Clinton's Secretary of Tresury and more recently President of Harvard University), Paul Volker (former Chairman of the Federal Reserve), and Timothy Geithner (current head of the New York Branch of the Federal Reserve) are all top candidates right now. Interestingly, you will notice that all of these people are highly respected and highly intelligent individuals. We will know the new Treasury Secretary SOON, maybe as early as today, or perhaps next week. Obama is meeting with his economic advisers today and will be holding a press conference in Chicago this morning, so the financial crisis remains top priority. President-elect Obama has made one choice already for his staff and that is Congressman Rahm Emanual from Illinois, a close advisor of Obama's since day one. Congressman Emanual carries a reputation of a tough guy in Congress (his nickname is "Rahmbo") who knows how to get things done and get things done quickly. He was one of Bill Clinton's top advisers during the Clinton era (as I predicted already, expect somewhat of a return to the Clintonian style of politics with an Obama presidency) and he has been serving in the House of Representatives since 2002. Certainly he has his critics for being tough, aggressive, and abrasive in Washington. He's not the most liked person in Washington, but he's highly respected in Washington as the guy that knows how to get things done quickly. Although he's been called a lot of things, he's never been called stupid, as he's recognized as one of the smartest guys on The Hill. One of the major jobs of the Chief of Staff is to serve as the intermediary between Congress and the President, and with experience in both branches of government there are actually few that are more qualified for this position than Rahm Emanual. He is regarded as a centrist Democrat, and therefore not to far to the left or right politically, which falls in line with the Obama plan it seems. He's also proven that he can and will work with both political parties through working on welfare reform and NAFTA with both parties while working for Clinton. Most analysts that are in the know in Washington believe that Obama chose such an aggressive character to 1) balance out and compliment Obama's reputation for being rather low-key and lay back personality, and 2) not to bully Republicans, but to reign in and set in line House and Senate Democrats that think that with a majority they can run things alone and not have to play nice with the other side. I will also add that this is one of the toughest jobs in Washington, and the average Chief of Staff doesn't last past 2 1/2 years. In fact there has only been one Chief of Staff in American history to even last an entire term, and that was Harry Truman's. The point is that for this job a tough guy personality is almost necessary for survival. By the way, he is also Jewish, so that should lay to rest the downright silly talk during the elections about Barack Obama being anti-Israel. He certainly is an interesting first pick, so we'll have to see how things plays out. In the meantime, you can go to Emanual's official site to see his positions on various issues in the House by clicking here. The BBC also has a great profile on him that you can read by clicking here. In fact, the BBC once again proves itself to be the best news source in the English language by adding a new feature to it's lineup called "Obama's Presidency" where you can follow all the events leading up to inauguration day. Click here to explore that new section. This is once again proof that this is a global issue, and the world is watching. Finally, the Obama camp has been promising a new style of politics since day one of the campaign, and more evidence of that landed on the world wide web yesterday. Just yesterday the Obama team put up a new website that for the first time in American history gives Americans a transparent look at the presidential transition. The website is http://www.change.gov/. One thing that really stands out to me as different is a part of the website called "Share Your Vision." Essentially, this is a way for all Americans to speak up and talk to the new president about their personal vision for the United States. You are actually being asked by the president, "What do you think?" The exact wording at the top of the page is this: "Start right now. Share your vision for what America can be, where President-Elect Obama should lead this country. Where should we start together?" That is different. Keep in mind that the elections are over, so this is no trick to try to win votes. You can go directly there by clicking here. Again, this appears to be beginning of 21st century style politics, reaching out to the Internet generation. This is indeed a global transition, and the globe is closely watching.

Aztec-Inca Comparison Essay Discussion

All I can tell you guys is to be ready to compare anything tomorrow. Any aspect of either society is fair game. Three suggestions: (1) study over all notes you've taken over the past couple of days, including that chart that I gave you which is great for comparison essay preparation. (2) STUDY OVER THE RUBRIC FOR THIS ESSAY AND ANY NOTES YOU HAVE FROM COMPARISON ESSAY TRAINING DAY. This is super important because getting the format right is half the battle. (3) Use this blog to talk back and forth with each other to brainstorm comparisons and contrasts. This post is now wide-open for discussion...

An In Depth Look at the "Troubling" Civilizations of the Americas

It's always interesting to me how repulsive many Westerners find the cultures of Native Americans (Aztecs, Incas, etc) to be. At times we are so quick to pass judgement on past and current societies without really giving thought to historical context, geographic realities, etc. At any rate, I would like for you to read a very astute article written by a very astute historian by the name of William Prescott that offers some commentary on the subject. PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE because I feel it makes some excellent points that must be made. You can read it by clicking here. When you have finished reading this article, I'd like you to discuss the following: What special features of Aztec civilization must be explained? Are they really distinctive? What explanations are most persuasive in terms of historical sensitivity and contemporary standards? In your opinion, are there features of 21st century society that are similar to those of Aztec civilization and that later generations will need to explain? Your thoughts...

The Andean Kingdom of Chuquito in 1567

So today we move south into the Andes Mountains region of South America to examine the Inca empire on the eve of invasion. The Inca Empire began in 1438 when Incan armies subdued their home area of Cuzco in the highlands of southwestern Peru and ended with the conquest of Quito [Ecuador] in the 1520s. By the early 16th cenury, the Incan Empire stretched from Quito in the north to Chile in the south. The majority of the empire's 6 million inhabitants lived in the ares of present-day Peru and Bolivia. Three hundred years earlier the Incas were a small village community competing with other villages in the highlands of Cuzco. During the expansionary period, the Incas employed their traditional highland social practices as the model for imperial organization. The ayllu, the smallest Andean social unit, functioned on the basis of communal ownership of land, communal work practices and strong traditions of mutual aid for those unable to work. But ayllus, for many generations before the Incas began their imperial expansion, were also part of larger units, or chiefdom's. The organization of the chiefdom reflected a strong awareness of the economic potential of diverse ecological zones in the Andean area and revealed how the patterns of obligations to the chief enable maximum exploitation of these areas. In the highlands (altiplano) staple products consisted of potatoes, quinua [a type of grain that only thrives in highland areas and is also known as Altiplano rice], and llama and alpaca products. In lower areas on the Pacific coast and in semitropical valleys off the eastern escarpment of the Andean range, staple products consist of maize, cotton, fruits, and coca (used for chewing and in rituals). The economic goal of a highland chiefdom was to control as many ecological zones as possible. This same goal lay behind the Incan system of governance. The noteworthy characteristics of the Inca Empire, including forced migrations of people, road and bridge building, served not only to unite the empire but also to produce and distribute good from all ecological zones.

The Kingdom of Chuquito was a pre-Inca chiefdom located on the western shore of Lake Titicaca that was subsequently incorporated into the Inca Empire. A Spanish governmental inquiry of 1567 that I would like you to read clearly showed how the traditional patterns of obligations owed to the chief contributed to exploitation of various ecological zones. In order to verify accounts, Spanish officials took testimony not only from the chief but also from his subjects. You can read excerpts from this document by clicking here. Once you have read the document, I would like you to think about and discuss: What types of work and goods constituted tribute in Chuquito? What practices indicated that the relationship between the subjects and the chief was reciprocal? Compare Aztec methods of acquiring tribute to the methods used by the chiefs of Chuquito. What are the differences? What might account for the differences? A tribute system reveals the basic forms of social stratification. What are they in Chuquito? How do they compare to social stratification in Babylonia, India, Mediterranean area and China? Your thoughts...

Coatlicue: Just Your Average Earth Mother Goddess?

Coatlicue was the Aztec earth gooddess and mother of the Aztec war god and chief deity, Huizilipochtli. Through an outward display of terror, the eight-foot statue was designed to show the power of gods over mortals. Two snakes arise out of her neck to form her face. Blood serpents emerge from her wrists. She wears a skirt of snakes and a necklace of human hands, hearts and a human skill pendant. Of all the components of the statue, the necklace communicated clearly that human sacrifice sustained the gods and maintained cosmic order. You can see a larger version of Coatlicue by clicking here. So what do you think? What would your normal expectation of a portrayal of an earth mother goddess be? How does this statue compare? What does this statue convey about Aztec civilization? Your thoughts...

Tribute Under the Aztecs

Well ladies and gents, we have now arrived in the Americas on the eve of invasion. This will be a short time period dominated by two empires in two different locations with no apparent contact-- the Aztecs and the Incas. Let's take a closer look at the Aztecs through some documentary evidence. Aztec warriors, extending their rule outward from Tenochtitlan (Mexico City), conquered the other city-states of Central Mexico between 1420 and 1480. When the Spaniards arrived in 1519, the Aztecs governed an area inhabited by about 18 million people. Despite their recent military success, the Aztecs, when they first appeared on the historical scene about 1250, were uncouth barbarian invaders from the north. They were not responsible for creating civilization in Central Mexico but were its inheritors.

Before the Aztec appearance, the rulers of Teotihuacan (1-900 CE) and the subsequent Toltec Empire (1000-1200) established the essential features of civilization. Cultivation of maize was highly developed, particularly through the use of irrigation channels. Surplus production was obtained from local villages through a tribute system that funneled grain, and other products, to central government warehouses. This surplus supported a hierarchy of officials, who not only ran the government, but also devised calendars, built monumental shrines, created a religious literature, and led ritual observances that bound society together. Although these societies succumbed to barbarian invasions, civilization itself did not disappear.

After the demise of the Toltec Empire, civilization in Central Mexico consisted of competing city-states scattered around Lake Texcoco in the Central Valley. When the Aztecs conquered these city-states, they repeated the experience of previous intruders. Specifically the Aztecs took control of the a centuries-old tribute system. Spanish observer Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo y Valdés described that system and the poverty it caused. Secondly, because they were unwelcome conquerors, the Aztecs devised a politico-religious system that was based on terror. They demonstrated their power by obtaining human sacrificial victims for their war god Huitzilipochtli. I would like you to read the words of Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo y Valdés by clicking here. When you are finished reading I would like you all to discuss the following: What evidence can you find in this document that shows social stratification prior to the arrival of the Aztecs? How did the Aztec tribute system work? What does such a tribute system indicate about social organization in ancient Mexico? After the Spanish conquest, how might the Spaniards view the operation of the tribute? How might that view contribute to the structure of a new society? Finally, how did Aztec social structure compare with social structures in other traditional societies such as India or China? Your thoughts...

A New Chapter of American History Begins

At exactly 11pm, Senator Barack Obama was declared the President-Elect of the United States of America. Your 44th President of the United States of America- Barack Hussein Obama. The victory speech was pretty incredible and very well orchestrated and stated, and I've talked to people that agree and disagree with his positions on certain issues that all agree on the weight of this speech. You can watch it or read its full text by clicking here. I do encourage you to do so regardless of your political leanings. This appears to be the 21st century style of politics emerging as we speak.

Less Than 24 Hours Until the First Polls Close

Ok folks, so tomorrow is when we'll have an answer. Will it be McCain or Obama? I don't know about you, but for this history teacher, I'm ready for a definitive answer so that I can move on with analyzing and predicting the first 100 days of the new presidency. So what are the predictions looking like? Well, if you are to look at the four major polls, all point to an Obama victory (Gallup has Obama up by 13%, Rasmussen by 6%, Washington Post by 11%, and Ipsos by 5%). Three comments on that: 1) sometimes polling and voting have two different sets of results, 2) the popular vote doesn't win you the election, and that's what these polls are based, and 3) Senator McCain is no stranger to the idea of a big, seemingly impossible comeback. All things considered, therefore, this race is not sealed up. However, in looking at the electoral map (which DOES matter), Senator McCain is fighting an uphill battle at the moment. He is going to pull off some incredible surprise victories in a few states if he is going to win. Remember: the magic number is 270 votes to win this thing. Again, when looking at the state-by-state breakdown, all indications are pointing to an Obama victory. There are several interactive electoral maps you can look at online, and if you're anything like me, you can play around with various scenarios by giving McCain and Obama wins in certain states to see what it will take for either candidate to claim victory. I especially like the map on National Public Radio's website because not only can you play around with states, but you can also put your cursor over each state to see how far ahead either candidate is in each state. Right now NPR has Obama winning 291 to 247 over McCain. You can look at the map and play with it by clicking here. Ken Rudin, NPR's political expert predicts Obama in his final prediction. You can read his analysis of the race by clicking here. As far as the BBC (the most trustworthy news source in the English language) is concerned, they are predicting an even bigger Obama win. Right now they have the breakdown as 311 votes for Obama, 160 for McCain, with 67 tossup votes still up for grabs. Interestingly, BBC is boldly giving Ohio to Obama, and Ohio is an incredibly tight race, and Republicans have never won the White House without winning Ohio. You can look at that map, by clicking here. For my money, the best election coverage available is from the BBC, and you can look at full coverage of the US Elections 2008 on their special page by clicking here. What are the other major news sources saying? Well, next to NPR and BBC, I suppose the next most objective news source would be CNN, and their election coverage has actually been pretty impressive this year. I have especially enjoyed Anderson Cooper's always objective and responsible journalism on AC360. What are CNN polls saying? Again, an Obama victory is predicted. Right now they have Obama with 291 votes, McCain with 157, and 90 toss-up votes still up for grabs (but again, even if McCain won all 90 toss-ups, he still doesn't win). Essentially, what McCain is going to have to do is pull off a few surprise wins in a few states that Obama has a comfortable lead in to even make it interesting tomorrow. CNN has another analysis page that is pretty fun to read through, and you can look at it too by clicking here. The next best and responsible news source here in the United States would be ABC News, and currently, again they (in the ABC News/Washington Post poll) have an Obama win predicted with Obama taking 349 votes and McCain 189. You can look at their coverage by clicking here. I don't have much use for the rest of the news sources out there in this country. I find them to oftentimes be agenda-driven and irresponsible in their coverage (especially MSNBC and Fox News, which, although on opposite ends of the political spectrum, both have proven to be irresponsible, agenda-driven, and just plain poor in their coverage of the daily news), but for whatever it's worth, here's what the rest are saying: CBS News is playing it cool and has Obama leading 259 to 163 with 116 toss-up votes up for grabs (click here to see that one). MSNBC has Obama winning with at least 286 votes to McCain's 157, with 95 toss-up votes for grabs (click here to see that one). Finally, Fox News also is predicting an Obama victory (if Fox is saying Obama wins, the McCain camp has to be nervous) with Obama taking at least 286 votes, McCain 163, and 89 votes still up for grabs (click here to look at that one). So that's it folks, that's about the most exhaustive predictions coverage you'll get on any teacher's blog. So now all we can do is sit and watch the votes come in. Here are three states to keep your eye on around 8pm tomorrow evening: Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. If Obama wins these three states (and we should know this before 9pm) game over, Obama takes the election. If Obama does well on the east coast and Great Lakes region, it's an Obama win because McCain will clean up in the heartland, but Obama will sweep the west coast giving him a decisive victory by around midnight eastern time. Does sectionalism still exist in this country? Looking at the maps, regionally we are still very much a divided people sadly. If you want to discuss anything else regarding the election here, feel free. However, please keep the conversation to general predictions, POLICY discussion (for a handy guide to where both candidates actually stand on actual ISSUES, the BBC has a nice guide that you can read by clicking here), and please folks, I'm begging you, please make sure that your comments are accurate and well-thought out. PLEASE NO MUD-SLINGING OR DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER of either candidate. I've heard enough of that from both sides, and I've seriously had enough. If you've "heard" something about either candidate, please make sure you check the facts before posting here. The easiest way to do so is to click on the link here for factcheck.org. This is a bi-partisan non-profit website that is concerned with one thing and one thing only: THE TRUTH! Hmm... my kind of people. Their archives are full of information to clear up things we've "heard." Please follow the rules I'm laying out on this post folks because I am beyond wanting to clear up half-truths, misconceptions, and flat-out false statements as I had to do on my last post on the subject. I was reluctant to make this post, but I've been asked by several to put up an election day post for you all to discuss it, so due to popular demand, here it is. Please be responsible with it. Ok folks, I'll see you on Wednesday, hopefully with a clear announcement of who our next president is.

The Mayan Story of Human Creation from the Popol Vuh

So what was society like in the Americas outside of the Old World Web? In some ways, there were some unique societal characteristics that were completely different from the Old World Web (bloodletting rituals being an obvious thing), but for the most part, it's apparent that when a society begins settled agriculture, all of those societies develop along similar lines (whether they have contact with other agricultural societies at all). This can be seen very clearly in looking at the development of Mayan society. Although only four books of the Maya remain (the Spanish burned the majority of Mayan texts during initial contact), what we do have available is still very revelatory. One of the texts that does remain available is the Popol Vuh. Popol Vuh relates the Mayan story of creation. Literally translated as the "Council Book," it also served as a source of advice for the Lords of Quiché, a Mayan center of civilization located northwest of Guatemala City during the post-classical era about 1000. The lords used the Council Book at meetings to interpret signs, particularly omens related to death, famine and conflict. Descendants of these ancient lineages wrote the only extant version of Popol Vuh between 1554 and 1558. They wrote in the Mayan language, using the Roman alphabet. Francisco Ximénez, a member of the Dominican Order, discovered and translated the manuscript into Spanish about 1701.

As related in the story, the gods of sky and water created the earth in one attempt. By contrast, the creation of humans took four attempts. The first three were defective and spawned other types of creatures. Even on the successful fourth try, the gods lather changed the outcome because the humans were too perfect. Between the three failures and the fourth try, Popol Vuh related numerous adventures of the gods and how they influenced cosmic and earthly conditions. They created the planets, sun, animals, trees, corn planting, artisan activities, and ball games. The document I would like you to read is an excerpt from Popol Vuh (that you can read by clicking here; just read pgs 145-148) that recounts the Mayan story of human creation.

When you are finished reading, I'd like you all to discuss the following: Mayan gods created humans from corn. What does this belief suggest about the Mayan world-view? Why and how did Mayan gods alter their human creatures? What does this imply about the relationship between human and gods? Compare the Ancient American accounts of the origins humans, relations of humans to Gods and relations among the Gods to Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Hebrew, and Hindu accounts. What do the comparisons suggest about the relationship of religion to politics and society? Your thoughts...