Homework Question 11/8/13

1) Q: According to the prologue, what was the purpose of creating this code?
A: The purpose of creating this code was to collect and revise the whole body of Roman theory of law, and to assemble in one book the scattered works of so many authors which no one else had ventured to hope for or to expect.

2) Q: What does this text cite as the source of Roman law?
A: The text sites that the Lex Regina, which states that all the rights and power of the Roman people were transferred to the emperor.

3) Q: What, if anything, does this text teach us about Byzantine society?
There are a numerous amount of references to God throughout the prologue, which leads me to believe that people in the Byzantine Empire were very religious. By stating phrases such as "lower animals", it is clear that the Byzantine Empire had distinct social classes. And lastly, the Byzantine's had a very fair justice system in my opinion, because it stated that "civil law: those rules prescribed by natural reason for all men are observed by all people alike, and are called the law of nations".

Byzantine Spice Chart

Decline of the Roman Empire

I do somewhat agree with the Monocausal Decay Theory. But, there are parts of this theory that I do not agree with. One part that I do not agree with is enviornmental degradation. This states that gradual environmental degradation caused population and economic decline, and this includes deforestation and and excessive grazing. Lead poisoning seems to be another part of the theory that I'm not too sure about as not everyone drank wine or cooked in lead-based pottery, but I do see how those who did were affected by the poisonous lead. But the part of this theory that I 100% agree with is the spread of disease. This was definitely a huge factor in the decline of the Roman Empire as diseases such as smallpox, measles, and even plague ravaged the empire. So all in all, I do agree with this theory of Monocausal Decay.

Han Dynasty vs. Roman Empire Venn Diagram

ROME POCKET MAP

Alexander the (Fill In The Blank)

Alexander the "Great" was without a doubt one of the most significant kings in history. He had superior war tactics than anyone during his time. And considering he was in his twenties when he took over his father's kingdom, this was nothing short of impressive. An example of how Alexander had superior war tactics is when he led his army thousands of miles to fight the Persians. Although outnumbered two to one, Alexander's army was victorious and defeated the Persians led by Darius. But even though he was a great battle planner, tens of thousands of his own men died in the process. And to add to that, he burned Persepolis to the ground and killed Cleutis in a drunken rage. For these three reasons, I DO NOT think that Alexander deserved to be called "Great"; even though he may have had a clear vision for the Greek Empire, he did not execute his plan in the best way possible. 

"Greece and India - Identity in Caste and Territorial Societies"- Response Questions

1) Q: What’s McNeill’s argument?

A: McNeill's argument was that both Aryan India and Dorian Greece developed in significantly different ways by the year 500 B.C.E.. Examples of this would be the way that both civilizations organized and administered their societies in completely different ways. 

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

A: McNeill defines Caste as a group of persons who will eat with one another and intermarry, while excluding others from these two intimacies. The textbooks definition of a caste is hereditary, unchangeable social classes, and that somewhat matches up with the definition McNeill provides.

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

        1) Ceremonial purity. 

        2) Poor and humble peoples had strong reasons for holding for clinging to caste. 

        3) The doctrine of reincarnation and of "varna".

4) Q: Are these convincing?

A: I would say that all of them are pretty convincing, but I do believe that the third feeling of the idea of caste is the strongest.

5) Q: Why did caste itself not cause strong political organization to form?

A: Most of the people felt loyal to their caste leading to a disengagement of state and politics.

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

A: An example of how there was a shift from deity pleasing to the act of worship itself would be the Aryan Brahmins thinking that if they performed rituals correctly that the gods would grant them whatever they wanted.

7) Q: How did the Upanishads change the nature of Indian religion and thus the goals of Indian society?

A: The Upanishads ultimate goal was to escape the endless cycle of reincarnation and not having riches, health, and a long life.

8) Q: How does McNeill define “Territorial Sovereignty?”

A: McNeill defines "territorial sovereignty" as self-governing city states that don't belong to any central bureaucracy.

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

A: The Greeks used the laws of nature and reasoning as an explanatory factor in organizing society.

10) Q: What was the consequence of the Greeks’ rigid adherence to the polis?

A: More people were involved in culture and politics, allowing Greek civilization to flourish.

11) Q: Do you buy his argument? Why or why not?

A: I do buy this argument because McNeill backs his claims up with accurate historical evidence.