Historical Puzzle Assignment

The first passage we read was definitely written by a Christian author.  You can tell this because the dating system the author uses is the Christian one.  The author states that the event he is telling of occurred in “the year of Our Lord 713.”  The use of “Our Lord” is a telling sign as to the beliefs of the author as well, since Christians refer to God as Our Lord quite often.  The second passage was also probably written by a Christian since, again, the author uses the Christian dating system.  He also uses several terms that Christians frequently use when he says they “cannot drive the out of Spain until the Divine Will orders them to be driven violently thence. Amen.”  He also says that the Saracens who remained at Libamine were “dealt with by the sword according to the judgement of God.”  The third passage was probably written by a Christian as well, since the author again uses the Christian dating system.  There weren’t any other points that I could see that made it obvious whether or not this passage was written by a Christian or a Muslim, but, as I said before, it was probably written by a Christian, due to the dating system.

The fourth passage was written by a Muslim.  You can tell this because the dates are those in the Muslim calendar.  The author also states at the end of the passage that “God sent help and the infidels were defeated and no longer made war.”  Muslims tend to use the word infidel more than the people of other religions, so the fact that the author uses it here leads me to believe that he/she was Muslim.  The fifth passage was also probably written by a Muslim author.  I say this because of what the author writes in the last line of the passage.  He states that the Spaniards “fought fiercely… then Almighty God caused Rodrigo and his men to perish…”  Muslims tend to refer to Allah as ‘Almighty God,’ which is what leads me to believe that this passage was written by a Muslim author.

The final passage is the hardest passage to figure out the author’s religious affiliation, since he uses both the Christian and Muslim dating systems in his writing.  However, I think that the author was Christian, for two reasons.  The first reason is that, whenever the author puts down a date, he always uses the Christian dating system first, and mentions what year of Justinian’s reign it was.  Then he writes down the Muslim date, along with the year of the reign of their ruler (at least I assume Ulit was the Muslim ruler at the time).  One of the comments the author makes also leads me to believe that he was Christian.  He states that the Muslims established “in unhappy Spain at Cordoba–once a patrician capital, always more beautiful and opulent than the surrounding areas, and the first bringer of civilization to the kingdom of the Visigoths–a barbarian government.”  The author is talking about the Muslim government established in Spain after their conquest, so this document obviously has an anti-Muslim bias.  The main differences I noticed between the passages were the dating systems used and the religious statements the different authors make.

I think that the fifth passage was the first one that was written.  I say this because it reads more like a story than an historical account, and it doesn’t include any dates, which probably indicates that whoever was being told of the events probably knew when they occurred, so the battle would have had to occurred near the time of the passage’s writing.  The next one in chronological order would probably be the third passage.  I say this because the date given in the passage is about forty years earlier than most of the other sources (it presents the date of this event as 711 C.E., whereas most of the other passages present the event as occurring in the 750’s).  This would indicate a greater familiarity with the event, which would mean that it was probably written earlier.  The next passage in chronological order would be the first passage, since the date it presents is fairly close to the one the third passage gave (this one gives 713 C.E. as the date for the event, the third passage gives 711 C.E. as the date).  Passage four would be the next written, since the date for the battle presented, 92, would correspond with about 714 C.E. in the Christian system.  The second to last in chronological order would probably be the second passage, since it lists the date of the conflict at 752 C.E.  The last written would probably be the final passage.  I say this because it lists both the Christian and Muslim dates, which indicates a little less bias.  It was probably written fairly recently.  The main differences I noticed were the tone of the authors (Muslim author, more exuberant and happy about the event being described, Christian author, sadder about the event being described) and the dating systems used.

Read Full Post »

Einhard Excerpts on Charlemagne

Einhard, being a close friend of Charlemagne, speaks of him in a very kind and gratifying manner, emphasizing his good qualities and minimizing the bad ones.  Einhard wrote these pieces to tell about the life of Charlemagne.  The first excerpt we read was on Charlemagne’s physical appearance, and Einhard describes him in great detail.  He talks about Charlemagne’s excellence in both swimming and horseback riding, the latter of which being highly regarded by the Franks.  He does give a couple of physical qualities of Charlemagne that could be considered ‘bad’ (a thick and short neck, and a rather prominent belly), though he minimizes these qualities by saying that the ‘symmetry of the rest of his body concealed these defects.’

Einhard also speaks of Charlemagne’s thirst for knowledge, and his patronage of many teachers of the liberal arts.  He talks of Charlemagne’s eloquence and how he wanted to learn many languages.  Einhard states the Charlemagne was fluent in Latin, and understood Greek fairly well, too.  This kind of description of Charlemagne emphasizes some of his great qualities, which was probably the intention of Einhard in the first place.  It shows him to be a man who wants to learn as much as he can, and also as a man who is a patron of scholars and teachers of the liberal arts.  He also had his children taught in the liberal arts, along with the more traditional Frank customs, such as horse-riding for the boys and weaving and clothing making for the girls.

Einhard depicts Charlemange as a man who could not bear to be separated from his children, a man who loved his family greatly.  This is just more good press for Charlemagne, and it puts an emphasis on another good quality of his.  He would have his children travel with him on his journeys, and they always took meals together.

Einhard emphasizes the contributions that Charlemagne made to the Church of St. Peter the Apostle in Rome.  He talks about all the money and other gifts that Charlemagne gave to the church, and how it was the one church that he loved above all others.  He also talks about the great number of gifts that Charlemagne sent to the popes of Rome.  This is basically included to show that Charlemagne contributed greatly to the Church, and that he was a very pious individual, another good quality, especially since he had the title of Holy Roman Emperor.

 

Read Full Post »

Ch. 8 and 9, Important ID terms

Justinian- Emperor of the Byzantine Empire from 527 to 565 C.E.  He re-conquered a large portion of the western Roman Empire, though all these gains were lost shortly after his death.  Son of a peasant-turned-soldier, he took great pleasure in aggravating the established elites of society, usually through taxing them heavily.  He built Hagia Sophia in Constantinople.

Theodora- Wife of Justinian

Lombards- Barbarian people who invaded Italy in 568 C.E.

Muhammad- Prophet of Islam, wrote the Quran, the Muslim holy book, and united the Arab people during the 620’s and 630’s C.E. He left the Muslim people with many advantages, including a dynamic social order, a sense of their unique access to God’s truth, and a sense that war against pagans and nonbelievers was not only justified, but also sanctified by God.

Islam-a religion founded by Muhammad, literally translates into ‘submit’ or ‘submission.’

Sharia- literally ‘the camel’s way to water.’  A religious discipline and a law code for the Muslim state

Caliph- the supreme Islamic authority, the ‘successor’ of the prophet

Shia and Sunni- different divisions between Muslim people.  One views the caliphate as the prerogative of the direct descendants of Muhammad, while the other believes that any member of Muhammad’s tribe could hold the position

Jihad- literally means ‘striving.’  A word used by Muhammad to represent both the internal struggle everyone must overcome, and to denote actual war, fought against enemies of Islam.  An appropriate translation of jihad would be holy war.

Constantinian model- a model in which the ruler of a state converts to Christianity, and the rest of the state follows.  Some notable rulers that followed this model were Vladimir of Kiev, Thorgeirr Thorkelsson of Iceland, and Harold Bluetooth of Denmark

Benedict of Nursia- a Christian monk who lived sometime during the 500’s C.E.  His book of rules for monastic life is widely recognized as the most influential in all of Church history.

Read Full Post »

Sima Qian Primary Source POV analysis

The tone of the source is one of a historian recounting the various exploits of a fellow servant of the Han, so, fairly unbiased, except when he talks about the Xiongnu, their enemies at the time.  He also gives Zhang Qian the credit that is his due, along with mentioning Kanfu as well, which is probably the most a Xiongnu slave could expect, however important his contributions to the journey may have been.  The account is made up of straight facts for the most part, such as the amount of time Zhang Qian spent in captivity (ten years on the first leg, one year on the return trip) and everything he learned about the lands that he had passed through on his journey.  Zhang Qian’s discoveries were actually very important for the Han dynasty.  His discoveries allowed the emperor to learn about potential allies and trade partners in the Dayuan, Daxia, Anxi, and the Indian kingdoms, connections he would have otherwise been unable to make.  This eventually led to the opening of the Silk Road, which brought great wealth to China (and eventually caused a trade imbalance between the Roman Empire, who were sending all their money to the East, and China, who were sending replenishable resources, such as silk).  The Silk Road also brought the Chinese into contact with many other cultures, including that of the Romans (who I mentioned earlier) and the Indians (the kingdom of Shendu that Sima Qian mentions was an Indian kingdom).

Read Full Post »

Ashoka’s Rock Edicts

Ashoka’s Rock Edicts from around 257 B.C.E. onwards show us that he converted to Buddhism around this time.  The edicts go from being glorifications of his conquests and the bloody slayings of his enemies before this date to sermons detailing the sacredness of life and how repentant he was regarding his previous actions of violence.  Ashoka’s perspective in all these writings is one of a devout believer in the things he is expressing.  The intended audience of the edicts would definitely be the people of the Mauryan Empire. Ashoka probably intended for his people to follow his example of living a Buddhist lifestyle, which is probably why he created these pillars in the first place: to inform his people of his new beliefs and encourage them to follow them as well.

The edicts deal with several things, including the value of hard work, which Ashoka calls exertion in his edict, and how sacred all life is, no matter what its form may be.  The one regarding the sacredness of life reads very much like a law, saying that His Sacred and Gracious Majesty the King (Ashoka) will no longer tolerate animal sacrifices or the holiday-feast, because he “sees much offense in them.” Ashoka clearly intends for this edict to be followed, since he states how distasteful he finds the sacrifice of animals and this holiday-feast thing, whatever that is, fairly emphatically (emphasis on the fact that he’s the king, etc.).  He also shows how he is following what he is imposing on his people, when he tells of how the royal kitchen will no longer slaughter any animals for curry.  This shows his people that he will do the same thing that he is asking them to do, which would probably make them a little more accepting of something as drastic as no longer having holiday-feasts or slaughtering animals.  The tone of the edicts is very straight forward, with Ashoka outlining his new beliefs, which he sees as the absolute truth of the world, and encouraging his people to follow his example and follow these beliefs as well.

Read Full Post »

Parthenon vs. Pantheon

The similarities and differences between the Parthenon, on which work was completed in around 432 B.C.E. in the Greek city-state of Athens, and the Pantheon, built for the emperor Hadrian around 125 C.E. in Rome, are many.  The first major similarity that one can point to is that both were built as temples to the gods.  But even in this function, there are differences between them.  The Parthenon was built to commemorate one goddess, Athena, the patron goddess of Athens, while the Pantheon was built to commemorate all the Roman gods and goddesses (which were Greek anyway).

The most major difference that can be seen is the actual structure of the two temples themselves.  The Parthenon is a rectangular structure, while the main structure of the Pantheon is built to contain a sphere (so, circular if you’re looking at it from above).  The fronts of the two structures look very similar, with space for sculptures and scenes above supported by columns.  The Romans took that a lot farther though, with a very large version of the Greek facade we see on the Parthenon (not the same sculptures or anything like that, just the general idea).  The columns are much larger than anything the Greeks ever used, and each column is one piece of stone, whereas the Greek columns were usually made in sections.  The columns of the Parthenon are of the Doric order, while the columns of the Pantheon look to be of the Corinthian order (basically, a lot more fancy).  The columns (and facade as a whole, I believe) of the Pantheon was made out of granite imported from Egypt, a symbol of their control over said area, whereas most Greek architecture (for public works at least) was done with marble, which is the case with the Parthenon.

The perfect sphere contained by the outer structure of the Pantheon is geometry made manifest, I suppose you could say.  It is a perfect example of one of the concepts the Romans borrowed from the Greeks (Euclidian geometry) and were able to use, in this case due to the fact that they had concrete.   The structure of the Pantheon would not be able to stay together without concrete; the enormous stress that the shape of the sphere would put on the walls would cause them to collapse unless there was something holding the stones together (the concrete).  The Greeks didn’t have any concrete or similar stuff (to my knowledge), so their buildings were just slab of marble on top of slab of marble.  This means that they couldn’t really achieve any of those complex architectural feats that the Romans were able to (concrete made a big difference).  An example of this would be the sparing use of the arch in Greek architecture, whereas the arch was very prevalent in Roman architecture (and then we have the Pantheon, which is really just a bunch of arches arrayed in a circular pattern on both sides of a horizontal plane, when you think about it).

Read Full Post »