Jeopardy Games

I took fantastic notes while playing the Jeopardy games, writing down specific questions I got incorrect and their correct answers. However, despite the extensive notes I took, I learned that notes really mean nothing, unless you can reread those notes later. Sadly I cannot do that, because I failed to press the save button on my notes. Therefore, Specifically I don't know what Questions I got wrong and which ones I got right. I do remember failing miserably at government questions, so I plan on focusing on those. And India, I'm gonna study India a lot too.

Monastery Focus Questions

Question Number 4:
Monasteries could be very useful institutions because they were filled with people willing to do work. Monks were only true monks if they "lived by the labour of their hands, as our father and the apostles did." Therefore, they were willing to work in fields if needed, helping the agriculture. Also Monks were willing to take in any traveler as if they were Jesus himself. This was useful for traveling merchants who needed a place to stay on their journey.

Question Number 5:
The Rule reflects society at the time showing the prominence of fear. Rules 44 and 45 state to "fear the Day of Judgement" and "to be in dread of hell". This shows the importance in religion mainly in the fear for their eternal souls. It generally warns against evil and hints at its consequences. The Rule encouraged monks to live strict lives so as to be protected from evil, aka anything not Godly or like God.

Bhakti Movement

I like these poems, although I tend to like poems in general. My favorite may be "In a Sudden" by Mirabai. The meter is interesting and It's very deep. These poems do represent India at the time because they speak of religion and caste systems. India at the time was in the struggle between Islam and Hinduism. "In a Sudden" seems to be about losing religion or converting, and a lot of people at the time probably went through this.

Islam Expansion...

... In the form of a show me presentation! Win.

Link: http://www.showme.com/sh/?i=92306

Constantine and Vladimir's Conversions

The only similarity between Constantine and Prince Vladimir's conversions to Christianity is that they both were royalty and in power at the time of their conversion.

Constantine, of the Byzantine empire, represents a milestone in Christian history because of the Edict Of Milan. In the Edict of Milan, he allows Christians to worship freely in him empire without fear of being persecuted. However, in his own Christian life, it is speculated that he only converted to appease his orthodox wife. Some can say that after his conversion, besides the Edict of Milan, he didn't do much to encourage Christianity, or a Christian lifestyle.

Prince Vladimir, on the other hand, was notorious for his party lifestyle, if you will. Prince Vladimir, is like Paul of Tarsus, in the way that he seemed like the last person who would spread Christianity. After converting, with no influence from any of his five wives, Vladimir seemed to do a complete 180 in lifestyle, divorcing (or at least getting rid of) his 5 wives, marrying a Christian Byzantine woman and taking an active part in spreading Christianity in Russia.

Byzantine Empire Architecture

The Byzantine Empire's architecture highlights arches, domes, and windows. A lot of the architecture must be left over from the Roman empire, and the Romans must have been very interested in showing off their beauty. Therefore I believe a lot of the architecture is designed to be decorative, with its arches and domes. I also believe it is functional. A lot the windows were stained glass or the walls featured paintings, usually depicting religion, Christianity. I assume those paintings were there so people who couldn't read religious texts would still be able to know the stories through the pictures. And the multitude of windows would allow lots of natural light.

Besides the stained glass windows in certain Catholic windows, I don't think American architecture is influenced in any way by Roman architecture. American architecture is much more modern. Still, decorative, but in a different way.

Constantinople Documents

1) This is written by Benjamin of Tudela, a traveling rabbi. This article admires Constantinople and it's people and buildings, while describing how Jews are treated in Constantinople. Even though the Jews seem to be treated badly there is an overaLl positive connotation. Addressing Jews.

2) Written by Robert of Clari. He describes the Greeks and how the captors of Constantinople were amazed with the city. He is writing to the general public.

3) Written by Nicetas Choniates. Describes the Latins destroying Constantinople art. They were unimpressed by the city. Written to the general public.

4) Not a very credible picture/map because it is not to scale. Depicts cathedrals, shows religion. Drawn to depict their defense because the city seems to be surrounded by fortresses and water.

5) Photo taken by unknown. Saint Sophia was built by Constantine,shows the new form of arcitechuture started by Constantine.

6) Written by George Acropolites. About this emperor Michael the 8th palaeologus and his visit to Constantinople, and the purpose of his visit. Depicting celebrations, and how he was humbled by it. He visited saint Sophia. He passed down the throne to the patriarch of constantinople. Document written for the general public.

7) Writter unknown, but from a citizens point of view. Admires the Venetians, battles that they won, only mentions Constantinople for it's trading port.

Document number one is the most credible. It is not biased because the traveling Jew is not from Constantinople. It also shows how positive it is because it describes the persecution of Jews but still admires the city. It describes specifically and with great detail the architecture and the events that take place in the city, it's people, and it's economy. This document best represents Constantinople.

Silk Road Map Project

I overall enjoyed the map portion of the silk road project.

1) 3 things that went well
---- Picking items to represent on the map.
---- Any class time spent ended up being very productive
---- The partner collaboration

2) 3 Things you weren't happy with
---- Our end product
---- Our scale
---- Overall weather whilst doing this project

3) What was hard/difficult about this project?
---- Doing the research for goods not represented in the book.
---- Figuring out a scale
---- The time crunch

4) Collaboration
---- Very good :)

5) What would you do differently if you had to do it again?
---- I would take less time trying to actually perfect the map, and more time trying to map out the trade routes accurately. I would also get my scale right the first time.

Jesus Vs. Others

Jesus taught his disciples and listeners to be good. That matches up with basically every other religion out there. However, Jesus's moral teachings, at least on the sermon on the mount, was more about how to treat other.

Jesus taught that even if someone is terrible to you, to treat them with kindness and goodness. This does in a way follow with the basics of Zoroastrian morals, however Zoroatrian is never this specific.

Confucius also valued goodness, but not to everybody. the lower classes were supposed to have more respect to the higher classes, or the lower in a specific relationship have more respect for the higher in a specific relationship. So like women, usually the lower in most relationship, are stuck with nothing.

Daoist morals are more about detachment. So in a way, if a daoist gets wronged, like the christian, the daoist wouldn't actively get revenge. But for the daoist it is more about not caring and less about being good.

Buddhists, although unlike christians in many ways, are like Christians in the way that they strive to do good, so that they in turn eventually get that good returned to them. The only difference is that Christians believe that good will come in the form of heaven after death, and Buddists believe that it will come back because of Karma.

Hindus are almost completely different from Christians. All a hindu was required to do was to follow caste rules. If your caste required you to be good, then that was great, if it didn't that was good too. Christians believed no matter who you are, you have to be good.

Empires

Empires form when there is a strong leader to take a city-state to the next level. The Qin dynasty, the first chinese empire, had Qin Shihuangdi. The first emperor of the Qin dynasty, he increased his power as a type of monarchy and standardized laws to unify China. Although the Qin dynasty was short lived it began the cycle of powerful empires in China. In Indai, the first longlived empire began when Chandragupta Maurya takes over and expands. Rome follows this same pattern, when Julius Caesar declares himself a dictator. He changed Rome from a republic to an empire. All these major empires were brought about by powerful leaders who created a imperial government with themselves as the head.

Wikipedia Vs. Textbooks

I think the text book does the better job, when it comes to getting information. Wikipedia gives very general information; information purely on the surface. When trying to find information on the origin of Jainism on wikipedia, all I got is that Chandragupta Maurya was a follower. The text book was the one who gave me actual details on Mahavira, who was called Jain by his disciples. The text book goes into more detail. I think classes should definitely be based on textbooks. People wouldn't learn anything if a class was based on wikipedia. There would be general understanding, but never details.

Bhagavad Gita, Zarathustra, Confucius

"How do these reflections on caste duties and detachment in the Bhagavad Gita compare and contrast with the moral and ethical teachings of Zarathustra and Confucius discussed in earlier chapters?"

Both Bhagavad Gita and Confucius's teachings focus on action. However, Bhagavad Gita specifically states, "Your business is with action alone, not by any means with the fruit of the action." This means not to care what comes out of your actions but to purely act. Confucius also teaches people to act. However, Confucius believes everyone should be good upright people. If an action led to death, Confucius would admonish the action.
Zarathustra does not focus so much on action. He focuses more on truth and goodness. So like Confucius, Zarathustra would admonish the act of fighting, because of its destructive nature.

Blog Posts

I think grammar should definitely be considered when grading blog posts. It shouldn't be the deciding factor of the grade, and it shouldn't be graded as strictly as someone would when reading an essay, but it should definitely be considered. I can write my opinions and use my own voice without ritin lik3 dis. This isn't a text message, it still counts as school work, so it shouldn't be completely relaxed. I do think, however, that the number one grading criteria should be content. Did I even address the question? I can have gramatical errors and still get a 3 if I got my point across. Also, I think the only reason someone should get a 0 is if they didn't write a blog post. Or if the blog asked for information on Central Asia and someone decided to write about ponies.
I think blogpost allows people to subscribe to eachother. If so, everyone in a class should subscribe to eachother, and if they feel like responding to a post, they can. If not, then thats fine too.

Government in Terms of Confucius

Book I. 2         Yu Tzu said, “It is rare for a man whose character is such that he is good as a son and obedient as a young man to have the inclination to transgress against his superiors; it is unheard of for one who has no such inclination to be inclined to start a rebellion. The gentleman devotes his efforts to the roots, for once the roots are established, the Way will grow therefrom.  Being good as a son and obedient as a young man is, perhaps, the root of a man’s character.


Although I don't know much about government, I think a lot of congressmen are guilty of not being as, "good as a son and obedient as young man". I think a lot of men would take the time to cooperate with president Obama instead of criticize him if they followed this "rule". Being good and obedient would mean, at least to me, that someone is working for a greater good. That, to me, means cooperating instead of being stubborn and obstinate against anything. As far as I have seen, republicans say that President Obama is too liberal. Democrats say that President Obama is not liberal enough. To me, being good and obedient means being willing to compromise.

Alexander the Great?

Alexander does deserve to be called the great. He demonstrated incredible abilities even at a young age by taming a horse that professionals couldn't control. He demonstrated great charisma and tactical skills with his armies. He persuaded a homesick army to continue fighting and traveling to defeat bessus, despite Bessus not even being a true enemy. They followed bessus, purely because of Alexander's personal vendetta. Although he was a drunkard and seemed to have no purpose other than revenge, he was tactful and charismatic and a powerful leader.

First Post

History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again

-Maya Angelou