Terms : Hide Images
| 7377396025 | 1. What were the changes and continuities in Second Wave Civilizations? | Continuities Changes ▪Monarchs continued to rule most of the new civilizations. ▪Men continued to dominate women. ▪A sharp divide between the elite and everyone else persisted almost everywhere ▪The practice of slavery continued. ▪Population grew more rapidly than ever before during this period. ▪States and empires expanded, growing in size, dwarfing in size the city-states of Mesopotamia and the Egypt of the pharaohs. ▪The rise and fall of empires had a dramatic effect on large populations inasmuch as that civilizations dissolved—for example the Mayans or Roman Empire. ▪New philosophical and religious systems provided the moral and spiritual framework within which people sought to order their lives and define their relationships to the mysteries of life and death. ▪China was the primary source of technological changes that included piston bellows, the draw-loom, silk-handling machinery, the wheelbarrows, a better harness for draft animals, the crossbow, iron casting, the iron chain suspension bridge, gunpowder, firearms, the magnetic compass, paper, printing, and porcelain. India pioneered the crystallization of sugar and techniques for the manufacture of cotton textiles. Roman technological achievements were apparent in construction and civil engineering—the building of roads, bridges, aqueducts, and fortifications—and in the art of glassblowing. ▪The emergence of a widespread and dense network of communication and exchange that connected many of the world's peoples to one another, especially through long-distance trade routes. (Original: pp. 88-91; With Sources: pp. 134-138) | 0 | |
| 7377396026 | 2. What is an empire and what does it do? | Empires are simply states, political systems that exercise coercive power. The term, however, is normally reserved for larger and more aggressive states, those that conquer, rule, and extract resources from other states and peoples. Thus, empires have generally encompassed a considerable variety of peoples and cultures within a single political system, and they have often been associated with political and cultural oppression. These imperial states governed by rulers culturally different from themselves, brought together people of quite different traditions and religions and so stimulated the exchange of ideas, cultures, and values. (Original: p. 98; With Sources: p. 144) | 1 | |
| 7377396027 | 3. How did the Persian and Greek civilizations differ in their political organization and values? | Persians: The Persians built an imperial political system that drew upon previous Mesopotamian polities, including the Babylonian and Assyrian empires. The Persian Empire was larger than its predecessors, stretching from Egypt to India, and ruled over 35 million subjects. The empire was centered on an elaborate cult of kingship in which the emperor was secluded in royal magnificence and was approachable only through an elaborate ritual. Emperors were considered absolute in their power and possessed divine right to rule by the will of the Persian god Ahura Mazda. They had an effective administration system that placed Persian governors, called satraps, in each of 23 provinces, while lower-level officials were drawn from local authorities. This system was monitored by imperial spies. Persia's rule of its many conquered peoples was strengthened by a policy of respect for the empire's non-Persian cultural traditions. Greeks: In contrast, the Greek political organization was based on hundreds of independent city-states or small settlements of between 500-5,000 male citizens. The Greeks didn't build an empire but did expand through the establishment of colonies around the Mediterranean and Black seas. Participation in Greek political culture was based on the unique ideas of "citizenship," of free people running the affairs of state, and of equality for all citizens before the law. Political participation in Greek city-states was much wider than in Persia, but it varied considerably between city-states and over time. Early on, only the wealthy and wellborn had the rights of full citizenship, but middle and lower-class men gradually obtained these rights in some city-states. Participation wasn't universal but was widest in Athens. The reforming leader, Solon, took Athenian politics in amore democratic direction to break the hold of a small group of aristocratic families. Public office was open to a wider group of men and even the poorest could serve. Athenian democracy was direct rather than representative. Nonetheless, women, slaves, and foreigners were excluded from the political process. (Original: pp. 99-103; With Sources: pp. 145-150) | 2 | |
| 7377396028 | 4. How was Athenian democracy different from modern democracy? | It was a direct democracy, rather than representative, and it was distinctly limited. Women, slaves, and foreigners, together far more than half the population, were totally excluded from political participation. (Original: p. 104; With Sources: p. 150) | 3 | |
| 7377396029 | 5. What had the Greek victory against the Persians do for Athenian democracy? | The Greeks' victory radicalized Athenian democracy, for it had been men of the poorer classes who had rowed their ships to victory, and now they were in a position to insist on full citizenship. (Original: p. 105; With Sources: p. 151) | 4 | |
| 7377396030 | 6. After the Greco-Persian Wars, what were the causes and effects of the Peloponnesian War? | After the war, Athenian efforts to solidify its dominant position among the allies (Sparta and other Greek city-states) led to intense resentment and finally to a bitter civil war with Sparta taking the lead in defending the traditional independence of Greek city-states. In this bloody conflict, known as the Peloponnesian War, Athens was defeated, while the Greeks exhausted themselves and magnified their distrust of one another. Thus, the way was open to their eventual takeover by the growing forces of Macedonia. (Original: pp. 105-106; With Sources: p. 151) | 5 | |
| 7377396031 | 7. What changes did Alexander's conquests bring in their wake? | Alexander's conquests led to the widespread dissemination of Greek culture into Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, and India. The major avenue for this spread lay in the many cities established by the Greeks throughout the Hellenistic world. (Original: pp. 106-107; With Sources: p. 153) | 6 | |
| 7377396032 | 8. What happened to Alexander's empire when he died? | When Alexander died in 323 B.C.E., his empire was divided into three kingdoms that were ruled among his three leading Macedonian generals. (Original: p. 107; With Sources: p. 153) | 7 | |
| 7377396033 | 9. How did Rome grow from a single city to the center of a huge empire? | The values of the Roman republic, including rule of law, the rights of citizens, absence of pretension, upright moral behavior, and keeping one's word—along with a political system that offered some protection to the lower classes—provided a basis for Rome's empire-building undertaking. Victory in the Punic Wars with Carthage (264-146 B.C.E.) extended Roman control over the western Mediterranean and made Rome a naval power. As the empire grew, each addition of territory created new vulnerabilities that drove further conquests. Poor soldiers hoped for land, loot, or salaries. The aristocracy or well-connected gained great estates, earned promotion, and sometimes achieved public acclaim and high political office by participating in empire building. Roman conquests were spurred either by wealth, resources, and food supplies along the eastern and western Mediterranean. Rome's central location in the Mediterranean basin made empire building easier. Rome's army was the key to its success. It was well trained, well fed, and well rewarded. Rome's continued expansion had political support for the growing empire. This ensured that the necessary manpower and resources were committed to empire building. (Original: pp. 109- 111; With Sources: pp. 155-158) | 8 | |
| 7377396034 | 10. How and why did the making of the Chinese empire differ from that of the Roman Empire? | Unlike the Roman Empire (which was new), the Chinese empire represented an effort to revive an imperial tradition that already existed under the Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties. Because of the preexisting imperial tradition in China, the process of creating the empire was quicker, though it was no less reliant on military force and no less brutal than the centuries-long Roman effort. Unlike Rome's transition from republic to empire, the creation of the Chinese empire had only brief and superficial repercussions. (Original: pp. 112-114; With Sources: pp. 158-160) | 9 | |
| 7377396035 | 11. Compare the Roman and Chinese Empires. (Original: pp. 114-116; With Sources: pp. 160-163) | Chinese Empire: ▪The Chinese developed a more elaborate bureaucracy to hold the empire together than did the Romans. ▪Chinese characters, which represented words or ideas more than sounds, were not easily transferable to other languages, but written Chinese could be understood by all literate people, no matter which spoken dialect of the language they used. Thus Chinese, more than Latin, served as an instrument of elite assimilation. ▪Buddhism came from India and was introduced to China by Central Asian traders and received little support from Han dynasty rulers. ▪Under the Sui Dynasty, Emperor Wendi reunified China and Buddhism again gained state support, temporarily. After the collapse of the Han, Buddhism appealed to people who felt bewildered by the loss of a predictable and stable society. Buddhism eventually became one of several religious strands in a complex Chinese mix. ▪The Chinese empire grew out of a much larger cultural heartland, already ethnically Chinese. As the Chinese state expanded, especially to the south, it actively assimilated the non-Chinese or "barbarian" people. Similarities: ▪Both defined themselves in universal terms. ▪Both invested heavily in public works—roads, bridges, aqueducts, canals, protective walls--to integrate their respective domains militarily and commercially. ▪Both invoked supernatural sanctions to support their rule. ▪Both absorbed a foreign religious tradition—Christianity in the Roman Empire and Buddhism in China ▪Politically, both empires established effective centralized control over vast regions and huge populations. Roman Empire: ▪Politically, the Roman administration was a somewhat ramshackle affair, relying more on regional elites and the army to provide cohesion. ▪Latin, an alphabetic language, depicting sounds, gave rise to various distinct languages— Spanish, Portuguese, French, Italian, Romanian—whereas Chinese did not. ▪Unlike the Chinese, the Romans developed an elaborate body of law, applicable equally to all people of the realm, dealing with matters of justice, property, commerce, and family life. ▪Christianity was born as a small sect of a small province in a remote corner of the empire. From there, it spread slowly for several centuries, mostly among the poor and lower classes; this process was considerably aided by the Pax Romana. After suffering intermittent persecution, it obtained state support from emperors the help shore up a weakening empire with a common religion. ▪Rome's beginnings as a small city-state meant that Romans, and even Italians, were always a distinct minority within the empire. ▪Gradually, and somewhat reluctantly, the Roman Empire granted Roman citizenship to various individuals, families, or whole communities for their service to the empire. | 10 | |
| 7377396036 | 12. How was the collapse of the Roman Empire different from the Han Empire in China? | Roman Empire: The Roman Empire ended in 476 C.E. after a long decline; only the western half collapsed; the Eastern Roman Empire became the Byzantine Empire and maintained a tradition of Imperial Rome for another 1,000 years. Unlike the nomadic groups in China, who largely assimilated Chinese culture, Germanic kingdoms in Europe developed their own ethnic identity—Visigoths, Franks, Anglo-Saxons, and others—even as they followed Roman laws and adopted Roman Christianity. The population decline by 25% over two centuries meant diminished production, less revenue for the state, and fewer men available for the defense of the empire's long frontiers. In the western part of the Roman Empire, no large-scale, centralized, imperial authority, encompassing all of Western Europe, has ever been successfully reestablished for any length of time. Han Empire: The Han Dynasty ended in 220 C.E. after a long period of corruption, peasant unrest, and a major peasant revolt in 184 C.E. Internal problems were combined with external problems, as was the Roman Empire. There was an added growing threat from nomadic or semi-agricultural peoples occupying the frontier regions of both empires. The Chinese had built the Great Wall to keep out the Xiongnu and other nomadic tribes in the north. Various ways of dealing with these people was developed but over time the Han dynasty weakened and a succession of "barbarian states" had been set up in north China. Many of these rulers were assimilated into Chinese culture. The most significant difference between the collapse of the Roman and Chinese empires was what happened in China after the Han Dynasty. After 350 years of disunion, disorder, frequent warfare, and political chaos, a Chinese imperial state, similar to the Han dynasty, was reassembled under the Sui, Tan, and Song dynasties. Once again a single emperor ruled; a bureaucracy selected by examinations governed; and the ideas of Confucius informed the political system. (Original: pp. 117-118; With Sources: pp. 163- 165) | 11 | |
| 7377396037 | 13. What eventually happened to Western Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire? | Most of Western Europe dissolved into a highly decentralized political system involving kings with little authority, nobles, knights and vassals, various city-states in Italy, and small territories ruled by princes, bishops, or the pope. From this point on, Europe would be a civilization without a surrounding imperial state. (Original: p. 118; With Sources: pp. 164-165) | 12 | |
| 7377396038 | 14. Why were Europeans unable to reconstruct something of the unity of their classical empire while China did? | The greater cultural homogeneity of Chinese civilization made the task easier than it was amid the vast ethnic and linguistic diversity of Europe. The absence in the Roman legacy of a strong bureaucratic tradition contributed to European difficulties, whereas in China the bureaucracy provided stability even as dynasties came and went. The Roman Catholic Church in Europe was frequently at odds with state authorities and its "otherworldliness" did little to support the creation of large empires. European agriculture was not as productive as the Chinese agriculture, and didn't have as many resources available to them. (Original: pp. 118-119; With Sources: p. 165) | 13 | |
| 7377396039 | 15. Why were centralized empires so much less prominent in India than in China? | Politically, the civilization emerged as a fragmented collection of towns and cities. Indian empires failed to command the kind of loyalty or exercise the degree of influence that Chinese empires did. An astonishing range of ethnic, cultural, and linguistic diversity characterized this civilization, as an endless variety of peoples frequently invaded and migrated into India from Central Asia across the mountain passes in the northwest. In contrast to China, India's social structure, embodied in the caste system linked to occupational groups, made for intensely local loyalties at the expense of wider identities that might have fostered empires. (Political fragmentation and vast cultural diversity) (Original: p. 119 and p. 121; With Sources: pp. 165-167) | 14 | |
| 7377396040 | 16. Give examples of Ashoka's reign over the Mauryan Empire. | Initially a ruthless leader (268-232 B.C.E.) in expanding the empire, Ashoka converted to Buddhism after a particularly bloody battle and turned his attention to more peaceful ways of governing his huge empire. His decrees outlined a philosophy of nonviolence and of toleration for the many sects of the extremely varied religious culture of India. Ashoka abandoned his royal hunts and ended animal sacrificed in the capital, eliminated most meat from the royal menu, and generously supported Buddhist monasteries and stupas. He ordered the digging of wells, the planting of shade trees, and the building of rest stops along the empire's major highways—all of which served to integrate the kingdom's economy. He retained the power to punish wrongdoing, and the death penalty remained intact. Ashoka's policies were good politics as well as good morality. They were an effort to develop an inclusive and integrative moral code for an extremely diverse realm. (Original: pp. 120-121; With Sources: pp. 166-167) | 15 | |
| 7377396041 | Helots | conquered people in Sparta who lived in slavelike conditions (Original: p. 103; With Sources: p. 149) | 16 | |
| 7377396042 | Solon | a reforming leader in 594 B.C.E. who emerged to push Athenian politics in a more democratic direction. He abolished debt slavery; access to public office was opened to a wider group of men, and all citizens were allowed to take part in the Assembly. (Original: p. 104; With Sources: p. 150) | 17 | |
| 7377396043 | Hellenistic Era | the period from 323 to 30 B.C.E. in which Greek culture spread widely in Eurasia in the kingdoms ruled by Alexander's political successors. (Original: p. 107; With Sources: p. 153) | 18 | |
| 7377396044 | Punic Wars | three major wars between Rome and Carthage in North Africa, fought between 264 and 146 B.C.E., that culminated in Roman victory and control of the western Mediterranean. (Original: p. 109; With Sources: p. 155) | 19 | |
| 7377396045 | Patricians | wealthy, privileged Romans who dominated early Roman society (Original: p. 109; With Sources: p. 155) | 20 | |
| 7377396046 | Plebians | poorer, less-privileged Romans who gradually won a role in Roman politics (Original: p. 109; With Sources: p. 155) | 21 | |
| 7377396047 | Caesar Augustus | the great-nephew and adopted son of Julius Caesar who emerged as sole ruler of the Roman state at the end of an extended period of civil war (ruled from 31-14B.C.E.) (Original: p. 112; With Sources: pp. 157-158) | 22 | |
| 7377396048 | Pax Romana | the "Roman Peace," a term typically used to denote the stability and prosperity of the early Roman Empire, especially in the first and second centuries (Original: p. 112; With Sources: p. 158) | 23 | |
| 7377396049 | Wendi | Sui dynasty emperor (ruled 581-604 C.E.) who reunified China after 350 years of turmoil from the collapse of the Han Dynasty (Original: p. 115; With Sources: p. 161) | 24 | |
| 7377396050 | Wudi | Han emperor (ruled 141-86 B.C.E.) who began the Chinese civil service system establishing an academy to train imperial bureaucrats (Original: p. 116; With Sources: p. 162) | 25 | |
| 7377396051 | Yellow Turban Rebellion | a major peasant revolt in China in 184 C.E. that helped to lead to the fall of the Han Dynasty (Original: p. 117; With Sources: p. 163) | 26 | |
| 7377396052 | Eunuchs | in China, castrated court officials loyal to the emperor (Original: p. 117; With Sources: p. 163) | 27 | |
| 7377396053 | Xiongnu | nomadic peoples to the north of the Great Wall of China who were a frequent threat to the stability of the Chinese state (Original: p. 117; With Sources: p. 163) | 28 | |
| 7377396054 | Aryans | indo-European pastoralists who moved into India about the time of the collapse of the Indus River Valley civilization; their role in causing this collapse is still debated by historians (Original: p. 119; With Sources: p. 165) | 29 |
