Catastrophe of the Roman Empire

The wikipedia and I agree with each other. I agree that the reason many empires such as the Roman Empire declined because of various events that plagued it. Events such as invaders and disease led to their downfall. As stated by J.B. Bury, he says, "The gradual collapse of the Roman power...was the consequence of a series of contigent events." Besides the various events like diseases, the Roman's greed for power and land is what also made their empire more unstable. With the amount of land that they controlled, it was nearly impossible to keep all places stable.

Venn Diagram: Fall of Roman Empire and Han Dynasty

The Silk Road: A Simulation Reflection

Today was a rather interesting day. My class tried to play out what life was like during the time when empires used to travel the Silk Road for trading and business. I came to understand that life was not as easy as it looked; in fact, it was the complete opposite. The Silk Road was a dangerous place for all people traveling it because of the many possible negative outcomes that can arise from it. The Silk Road had both its benefits and downfalls for the societies that participated in it. Downfalls included things such as death, being robbed, or even having to hire guards to protect you. Benefits are given to those who can complete their travel safely and properly trade with other societies.


The actual simulation that was done in class today didn't work as planned in my group. My group was robbed and cheated by from other groups. Also, when other societies came to us looking for trade, we couldn't really ask for much or give much because we had lost a lot of money. The amount of cons overpowered the pros in this trading activity about the Silk Road. The greatest cons was the language barrier between societies which made trading nearly impossible and the person who controls the currency of all the societies (banker). The pros were the language advisers who could help trading with different societies easier and the banker who wisely used money. The language adviser in my group was Hammad and the banker was Jay. They both did great jobs, however, there was too many obstacles such as the low number of advisers/bankers to the rest of the class (societies). I want to know how real life advisers and bankers actually did this process because Eurasia has an enormous population and it's not easy to get around. Overall, I believe that this simulation worked wondrous for the class because it properly showed what trading felt like during the early days of the Silk Road. 

The Roman City Video

b) What is the Forum and where is it located? Why is that symbolically significant? What other Classical Era society located politics in this way?

- The Forum was a place of order and it was located at the heart of the Roman city. The Forum was full of life and activity as it contained various buildings such as temples, offices of the government, and theaters. The reason the Forum is so symbolic is because it's the center of attention and where all the main events happen. Another Classical Era society that located politics in the center of the city were the Greeks.

c) How does an aqueduct move water? How is this like or unlike the way a qanat worked in Persia?

- An aqueduct moves water by natural forces. It's used mainly in downward motions and this creates the motion needed to transport or move water to large populations such as cities. Stone blocks were used to build the many arches and supports to move the water to far places. The aqueduct and qanat are similar in that they each transport water through force, but the efficiency is where they split apart.

f) Why can’t Marcus Fabricius marry Aiden? How does this compare to attitudes about marriage in Classical Era India?

- Marcus Fabricius can't marry Aiden because of the fact that she is not a citizen of Rome. This fact relates heavily towards India and their caste system laws. In India, it's said that people can only marry if they're in the same social level (caste), while in Rome, you must be married to someone who has their allegiance to that specific city as you do and no where else.

Rome's Transition?

Rome transitioned from a republic to an empire because of the fact that its society couldn't be properly regulated fairly from the immense size of the land that they occupied.

Everyone in the world has a reason for doing something. In Rome's case, there must have been something else that made the societal laws break apart because order can remain secure under large territory if properly executed.

Greece and India

1. What’s McNeill’s argument?

- McNeill’s argument is that Greece and India developed societies that were different because of their cultural beliefs and structure.

2. How does McNeill define Caste? Does this match up with the textbook’s definition?

- He defines a caste as people who eat properly happily with one another and they marry their family members off. The textbooks definition spoke more about the actual differences physically such as more money or nobility.

3. What three feelings and thoughts helped to maintain the idea of caste:

1. The first was ceremonial purity

2. The second was similarity between people, something along the lines of a community

3. The third was the Varna Doctrine

4. Are these convincing?

- These feelings and thoughts are convincing because in a caste system, everything is based on social and political power. These ideas keep the caste system remaining harsh and strong.

5. Why did caste itself not cause strong political organization to form?

- The caste itself didn't cause strong political organization to form because they revolved around people who were self-centered and greedy. The caste members only were around other caste members instead of governmental organizations.

6. What causes Indian religion to shift from deity pleasing to the act of worship itself?

- The thing that caused Indian religion to shift from deity pleasing to the act of worship itself was praying. The priests or Brahmins of the caste system had integrated into the minds of people that their questions could be answered by the gods and that gave them a lot of power in society.

7. How did the Upanishads change the nature of Indian religion and thus the goals of Indian society?

- The Upanishads changed the nature of Indian religion and thus the goals of Indian society changed because of reincarnation. The main idea of their religion was based on the fact of breaking away from reincarnating and becoming one with Brahma, achieving a peace of mind.

8. How does McNeill define “Territorial Sovereignty?”

- McNeill defines "Territorial Sovereignty" by saying that each state has its own rights and ability to self-govern.

9. Why did Greeks turn away from religion as an explanatory factor in organizing society?

- Greeks turned away from religion as an explanatory factor in organizing society because it only hindered their progress; they couldn't make things up from the imaginations of people, they needed to use facts and state with reality.

10. What was the consequence of the Greeks’ rigid adherence to the polis?

- The consequence of the Greeks' rigid adherence to the polis was that there was no place for agreements, it was either they did something or not.

11. Do you buy his argument? Why or why not?

- The main idea of this article was that India and Greece are different societies. I agree that this argument is good because McNeill explains in detail why both these societies are different. In India, religion and social classes was more important than in Greece, whereas in Greece, trade and economy was more.

Alexander's Conquests

Aegean Sea Region

Alexander The Great: Was He Really "Great"?

After hearing and watching about all of what Alexander did, I believe he truly deseves the title: "The Great." He thought of and planned out various battles and conquests throughout his lifetime. It's almost unreal to believe that his influence spread over to many parts of the world such as the Middle East area. To become a great leader, that takes decades worth of experience. As history has shown, young rulers that don't know much of the world around them will easily be defeated by foreign enemies or internal conflict. Alexander is an exception to this, in his twenties, Alexander managed to do all these amazing feats. However, as all great people, there are always critiques about them. In Alexander's case, it was his heavy drinking ability. People believed that Alexander's character was too carefree and dangerous, but I believe that he always had a reason to do something. Alexander and his armies became drunk against foreign enemies in order to become more offensive and fearless. The title: "The Great" doesn't come into the hands of every ruler, only the wisest and most cunning individuals earn it. Overall, I believe that Alexander of Macedon earned his fame through effort and the urge to never give up