Claire: Persia vs. Greece

Though the era of the Persian Wars (early 5th century B.C.E) saw heightened conflict between the Greeks and the Persians, I agree with Bulliet in his assertion that both empires had commonalities in political strategy, social organization, and Indo-European language than meet the eye. However, differences in political organization and state religion did, in my view, have some advantages for the Persians.

The Persian imperial organization had to accommodate for their vast landholdings. Darius divided the empire into twenty provinces, each under the supervision of an appointed governor, or satrap. The hereditary role of the satrap meant that his family knew the local area well, which is a good model for municipal government. Though the royal road system allowed for slow communication back and forth to the central administration, Persepolis, most of these provinces operated pretty autonomously. The tribute system, however, illustrates that the citizens maintained an economic connection to the king. The idea of parsing huge territory into smaller, more manageable municipalities is comparable to the Greek polis system. There were hundreds of Greek poleis, however, and their complete independence from one another caused internal strife between poleis, less unification, and more political instability than in Persia.

Zoroastrian religion was also a smart political move on behalf of the Persians. Moral theology buttressed the king's power, and gave context for his rule and his relationship to the empire. In the Behistun text, Darius writes that: "The right, that is what I desire...the man who is cooperative, according to his cooperation I will reward him...I give much to loyal men" (114.) This passage reveals the morals held high in this society (morality, cooperation, loyalty,) and the king's relationship with the divine and his own endorsement of these values made his people more likely to follow suit and be content in being upright citizens.

Catie- Persia

The Greeks were not worth the Persian's time. One reason is that the Persian Empire was the largest yet. The Persians also had a very developed political system where the empire was divided into about 20 provinces that were each ruled by a satrap. The Persian Empire had access too a far greater amount of resources than the Greeks. Their geographic location gave them access to mineral recourses as well as wooded areas that gave them fuel and building materials. The Greeks needed to rely on importing resources because of their poor geographic location. The Persians also made great technological advancements such as underground irrigation channels. The Greeks were not worth the Persian's time because they simply didn't have any of the important resources that the Persian's had, a large empire, or an advanced political structure.

P vs G -rachel

One might be astonished about the statement “Greeks are a waste of time for the Persians”. Greeks have such a good reputation, why would they ever be looked down upon? There are many reasons for this. The Persian Empire was the largest empire ever established. “The Persian Empire, which dominated most of the Middle East, ruled over a greater percentage of the world’s population than any other empire in history” (US History). Then there was the Greeks empire which wasn’t as close in size to a small peninsula.The persians thought the empire was too small and poor to deal with. Another reason is because the Persians never thought the Greeks had a strong enough and unified government to be a threat towards them. Also trade was a huge reason for the persians to not consider the greeks because the greeks had very little goods and resources. The Persians had many valuable exports and  a collection of imports. Since the Greeks land didn't support them with enough resources they took in vast amounts of goods and resources to supply to there empire. The Persians were not going to waste there time trading with the Greek Empire who weren’t very well equipped. 

Persia - Carter

Spanning from the Indus River Valley to the Thracian Peninsula in Greece, and boasting the most unified political and economic that any civilization had been able to develop up to that point, the achievements of the Persians are nothing to be scoffed at. During its two century existence, the Achaemenid Dynasty managed to rise from a small family hailing from an obscure corner of modern day Iran, to the rulers of the world's foremost superpower. In order to accomplish this, they established several essential foundations to their empire

First, as the saying goes, they divided and ruled. They split the empire up into twenty different satrapies, which were essentially vassals states ruled by relatives or loyal followers of the Achaemenids, who possessed some degree of autonomy, especially as distance from the administrative center of the empire increased, but still expected to provide tribute to the king in the form of precious metals, militias and levies in times of war, or other valuable resources. Thus, they were able maintain a relatively high degree of stability, despite the vast amounts of land and disparate groups of people that they ruled over.

Secondly, they provided a cultural link in order to establish a common bond between these diverse peoples in the form of Zoroastrianism. In a time when religion was still mostly regional and poorly organized, Zoroastrianism was the first truly state-sponsored religion in a major empire. With this common ground in the form of religion, the Persians were able to unite in the worship of Ahuramazda, ultimately providing much legitimacy to the king, and further ensuring the stability of the realm.

Then, there were the Greeks. As a fiercely independent people, the only people the Greeks liked fighting more than other Greeks, was the Persians. At Marathon, and again at Salamis, the Greeks proved that they would unify against foreign threats, and that they were nothing to be trifled with militarily. Furthermore, Greece was a mountainous land, with little in terms of natural resources, so the Persians stood to gain little from its conquest. With already the greatest empire the world had seen, what reason did the Persians have to waste their time with those stubborn barbarians of the west?

Persia vs Greece - B.G.

     During the time of which two of the most recognized and distinguished Empires in human history existed, The Persian Empire and the Greek Empire. However, the Persians failed to see the importance of the Greeks or even consider them worthy. How is this possible? How can one Empire be blind to greatness of another? Well, there are actually quite a few reasons. To start, the Persian Empire was the largest ever seen, it's colossal military size and well branched out government dominated that of all other societies. The government was centralized, and yet spread out evenly between twenty different states, all of which answered to the King. The Persian King boasted extreme wealth throughout much of his kingdom. His people obtained the most valuable metals and other high demand resources, promising them a constant appeal to trade.
     The Greek paucity of trade, Empire size, and centralized government were all reasons pointing to the lack of attention from the Persians. The greeks were not viewed as a valuable subject for conquering because they did not possess needed resources and were well defended. To the Persians, Greece was a high stake + low value Empire, easily not worth their time.

Clayton-Persia and Greece

It is obvious Greece wasn't worth a minute of the Persian's time because during this time Persia had everything and having Greece would only be a tiny addition to their incredible empire and was worth the time or resources.  The Persian empire included many resource rich and culturally advanced civilizations with successful economies.  The geographic locations that Persia managed to conquer were perfect to spawn growth in its economy because of these areas each contributed by having rich resources and ideal location for transportation and trade.  The civilizations that Persia conquered had extravagant architecture and religion that was fascinating and they had their own cultural identity like Persepolis or Babylonia.  As an outcome of all this combination, the Persian empire developed its own culture and religion. In fact a new religion even rose from the Persian empire called the Gathas.  Gathas was interestingly centered around morality, and was based on a tale of a war that lasted a thousand years between good and evil.  Now, when we compare Greece to the Persian empire from a cultural and economic standpoint, Persia really tips the scale.  The Greek geographic location misses a lot of major components to build a successful civilization.  Greece is a arid plan separated by low mountain ranges with no navigable rivers for trade.  The only suitable agriculture from Greece was barley and a limited amount of olive trees along the coast.  Farther North there were lands where cattle could be raised and it contained small amounts of metal and timber.  The only way the declining Greek economy was able to survive was because of its peninsula form granted it access to other civilizations by sea that could give them their needed resources.  Greece also lacked a major cultural and religious infrastructure.  In fact, the culture derived from Northern European and Asia societies.  Greek culture was a lot like the cultures under Persian control.  Greek culture was very similar to Persian culture, although their values are what kept them apart, so their was no cultural difference that could have contributed to the Empire if Persia would have conquered it.  Although the Greek civilization at this time was very interesting, Persia had no economical or cultural gains from conquering Greece.

Alright the Greeks are absolutely bad ass.  Developing on a really rocky, and resource lacking, peninsula that jets out into the Mediterranean, it was obvious from the start that in order to ensure survival trade would be a necessity.  However, to the east the Greeks stumbled upon the absolutely mammoth empire, one larger then the world had ever seen.  The Persian Empire, being the size it was, was obviously politically well structured, at least in comparison to the Greeks who were just a bunch of city-states who would chill with each other as well as quarrel with themselves from time to time.  Due to Persia's large grasp on much of the known world, they not only had conquered land but ideas, many of which involved technological advancements that easily surpassed the seemingly less might Greek peoples.  These technological advancements, some of which involved transportation, allowed the Persians to manage their massive empire, however the political system that they developed worked seamlessly.  Essentially the empire was split up into 20 provinces and each province was managed by someone who was close to the Kings (Darius 1) family.  Each court was set up like the main Persian court, which resulted in a universal acceptance of the Persian government.  The other astounding thing that the Persians were able to do was manipulate religion to fit their political agenda.  Pretty much everyone in Persia loves Zoroastrianism, so obviously the government (I think it was Darius that did the most with this), used the underlying ideas that the religion presents to justify their desire to conquer everything.  Zoroastrianism essentially tells of a once perfect world that is in a long fight with evil, and humans need to help restore the world to unity.  So Darius pretty much says "Lets just conquer the world and make everything peaceful".  So when the Persians come up to the Greeks they just see them as another people that will soon be annexed into the Empire.

The Persians vs. The Greeks

Several factors could've affected the Persians belief that the Greeks weren't "worth their time". The most obvious one that relates most to common human nature is arrogance. The immense size of the Persian Empire was the largest the world had yet seen, however, with dominance often comes conceit and the belief that one is superior to another. This arrogance of the Persians was one of the factors that lead to their eventual demise.
The Greeks were also not a united empire and were therefore probably not seen as that advanced in the eyes of the Persians. Through taxation of the civilians, the Persian empire was able to construct an empire with exceptional infrastructure and by dividing the empire into 20 provinces, governing became easier and the empire was able to stay cohesive through seemingly loose ties with the bureaucratic headquarters at the center of the empire. However, this complex bureaucracy of the Persians was completely opposite the governing systems of the city-states of Ancient Greece. These city-states had been primarily founded upon the fundamental necessity of democracy. This difference may have been seen as a weakness to the Persians because they realized that their system of government was of relatively higher caliber.
The city states of Ancient Greece were also in constant war with one another. Sparta and Athens are the classic example of the perpetual conflict between the individual city states. From an outsiders perspective this is one of the qualifications of inferiority between what could be worse that instability among ones own people?
Also, in a very general sense, Greece was a relatively resource-poor region and their economy depended on raw materials from other cultures. It is also possible that the Persians found the Greeks to be a waste of time because the amount and quality of the goods traded wouldn't be as preferable.

Persia-Park

The Greeks were not a concern to the Persians, because the Persians were superior on every level.

1. Size- The Persians were the largest empire ever seen. To create an empire that large suggest superior technology, a good socio-economic status, and a well-structured political system.

2. Technology- For such an early civilization/empire, the Persians far surpassed others of their time. For example, they developed an underground irrigation systems, which allowed for farming in otherwise difficult areas. They created an effective way to transport water without losing most of it to evaporation due to the hot temperatures of the surrounding climate.

3. Socio-economic- Persian society was divided into three classes--warrior, priests, and peasants--and had a strong patriarchy. This created a structured society and is partially responsible for the accomplishments of the empire. The construction of Persepolis is a demonstration of the resources, economic power, and labor force of the Persians.

4. Political- Because the empire was so large, the Persians needed a new political system to maintain control. Darius I, who expanded the Persian empire the most, divided it into 20 provinces each led by a satrap. A satrap is like a governor who is related to the royal family, usually through marriage. This helped keep centralized power of a large expanse of territory.

The combination of these four factors made the Persians a force to be reckoned with, and so, from the Persian perspective, Greece posed no threat.

Finn - Greece and Persians

Despite the strong reputation of the Ancient Greeks, it is not absurd to think that the Greeks were not worth the time of the Persians. As a matter of fact it is completely understandable. First and foremost, the size of the Persian empire far outweighed that of the Greeks. The Persian Empire stretched as far east as the Indus river and as far west as Macedonia and Thrace, Bulliet said "In the sixth century B.C.E. the vigorous Persians of southwest Iran created the largest empire the world has yet seen" (108). In contrast, the Greek empire was not even close to the size on the small peninsula. Also, the other reason why the Persians did not consider the Greeks worthy of their time was because of resources and trade. In most cases, trade is vital to the success of an empire and the Persians had a number of valuable exports like iron, copper, tin, silver, and gold, they also took in a collection of exports. This balance of imports and exports created a very stable and productive economy, they were  able to sustain themselves. However, the Greeks had nearly no solid resources or exports. They had to take in a vast amount of imports to support their empire and its population, their land did not provide them with enough. With the size/expansion of the Persians in addition to their trade, it is a reasonable thought that they wouldn't stress over the Greeks.

Persians vs. Greeks - Rooddude

The Persians definitely should think that the Greeks are not worth their time, and the reason why connects to our discussion about trade today in class. Persia was located in Iran, a region rich with resources including iron, tin, and silver. The Greeks were on an essentially barren peninsula, and had to rely on trade to bring in most of their raw resources. In class we established a link between trade and empires, and in this case there is a connection. Persia was the stronger empire because they had the natural resources to be able to trade more, while the Greeks had to import everything. The dominance that Persia has over Greece is also displayed in the conquests of the Persians up until c. 500 B.C.E. Three kings of Persia from 550-500 B.C.E. were Cyrus, Cambyses, and Darius I, and in total these rulers were able to conquer a majority of the middle east including Anatolia, and even some Greek city-states. The Persians were dominant over the Greeks in every field and had no reason to fear the Greeks, let alone waste their time on them.

rachel-trade

In the Middle East and Western Asia their mode of transportation for movement of goods were the use of camels. Camels were relied on for easier transport of goods through the harsh climates. Camels thrived on tough desert. They are able to carry up to 300 lbs and go 15 days without a sip of water. Different technological innovations for example, North Arabian camel saddle, allowed for superior war tactics to be used. This was very important for trading along the Silk Road.Camels and domesticated horses were not the only reliable sources of transportation. The Indian Ocean Trading System was another trading technique for ships who were traveling a great distance or across water. Not only did the silk road transport goods and services but it also facilitated new religion ideas. For example, Buddhism was dying out but the Silk Road helped the spread of it which saved there religion. The transformation of technologies and agriculture caused the empires to rise. The silk road had a huge economic impact on many different countries. As the road grew many people became merchant workers to started making more money. Also there were a fall in the empires. Opposing religions started up a huge conflict which lead to warfare. This cause can lead to a huge decline in economic civilizations. 

Trade- Catie

People traveled the Silk Road using camels and other animals. Pastoral nomads often provided these camels and animals. The Silk Road was an important trade route because it not only helped distribute goods and services, but helped spread religious ideas. The ideas of Christianity and Zoroastrianism were distributed via the Silk Road. There were also military advancements due to the Silk Road. Chariot warfare spread from Central Asia to the East and west. Ships were the form of transportation of the Indian Ocean Maritime System. The Indian Ocean trading system affected marriages and cultural diversity because sailors married women local to port cities. As a result their families were bicultural and bilingual.

Trade - Carter

As far back as the classical period of antiquity, the farthest eastern reaches of Asia have been inextricably intwined with Europe. Although it would not be until the medieval period that merchants would actually traverse the entire continent of Eurasia in one trip, trade was nevertheless occurring through a system of interconnected stages that spanned across mountains, deserts, steppes, and oceans. The most famous of these trade routes, is of course the Silk Road. Named for the commodity most commonly associated with the Orient by Europeans, the traditional Silk Road is actually several different routes that all connected China with the Mediterranean. There was the cheaper yet more dangerous northern route, which endured harsh deserts and seemingly impassable mountains, or the more circuitous southern route, which passed through India and Pakistan before linking up with the northern route in Persia. Then, there was the Indian Ocean Route, which was more expensive, but also faster, and less likely to be impeded by political conflicts. 

Each of these routes had advantages and disadvantages, but all of them accomplished the purpose of enabling an exchange of goods and ideas between the opposite ends of the vast Eurasian continent. While the practical purpose of these routes was to transport luxury goods such as silk, glass, spices, and manufactured items, they also facilitated the exchange of culture, technology, and even disease. For example, even long after the collapse of Alexander's empire, Hellenic cultural was still disseminating throughout the East, permanently influencing Indian and Chinese philosophies and aspects of their art. Later, technologies such as stirrups originated among the steppe nomads of western Eurasia, but due to the Silk Road, was soon found and adopted by civilizations on both ends of the route, fundamentally changing military tactics, and thus the course of history itself. Eventually, even religion was able to use the Silk Road in order to spread across the world, as Nestorian Christianity spread deep into the east along the Silk Road's various routes, while Buddhism would have never expanded as quickly as did without the Silk Road to abet its spread. These are only a few examples of the immense impact the Silk Road had upon history.

Trade - Finn

The Silk road was just one of several ways of which goods, ideas, and philosophies were transported from civilization to civilization. However, despite the positive effects of diverse and varying ideas, this transportation of thought led to the rise and fall of empires. To begin, the transportation of new forms of agriculture and technologies led to the rise of empires. Transportation of technologies like the saddle and chariot aided nations and militaries in movement. New crops and goods also helped the economies of civilizations. Yet these benefits were sometimes contradicted by negative effects. Opposing religions and ideologies commonly caused conflict and in some serious cases, warfare. For example, the oppression of Christianity by those who saw it as a threat was a major issue for civilizations. Opposing ideologies and warfare can commonly lead to the downfall of civilizations.

Claire- Silk Road and Indian Ocean System

The Silk Road and the Maritime System were similar in that they both allowed for the diffusion of religious customs and traditions (through missionaries, for example) as well as the spread of technological innovation, but the goods that they coincided with changes in the prominence of empires. The Silk Road was an integral connector between Asia and the Mediteranean region. India, Persia, China, Egypt and Rome all flourished during the height of the Silk Road, underscoring how important the network was for them economically. These regions fought for various aspects of control over the routes, for example, the Roman government set up a trading hub in Alexandria in order to turn more of a profit off of the spice trade. Spices had so much value that workers were often salaried in them, or they were used as currency.

However, as maritime technology rose, I would hypothesize that the prominence of the dusty, camel-spotted land routes of the Silk Road would be challenged by Indian Ocean trade. Port cities sprung up and became trade centers in regions that wouldn't have had that level of financial influx before, such as along the coast of Africa. Nations that prioritized maritime technology would gain better footing in the increasingly globalizing system.

The Silk Road and Indian Ocean -- Gebhardt

     The Silk Road was not just a path on which trading took place, it was an international exchange of cultures, religions, and ideas. These trading routes were not just responsible for the introduction of new crops and resources to foreign countries, they also brought about new technology developments, each having their own unique impact. Transportation technology, like Ox-drawn carts and the Camel Saddle, (accompanied with the stirrup) had huge impacts on some areas, changing they way they transported mass goods and their military strategies. Thus, we see the rise and fall of empires, the rise of those with the new technology advancements. As some benefitted from the outcome of new ideas, there were those that did not. As people associated with one another, so did their religions. The clash of different faiths lead to conflict, and ultimately oppression to Christianity from the Sasanid Kings who saw Christianity as a threat. During this period, we see trade expand to the Indian Ocean. The expansion allowed countries separated by land barriers to connect and obtain resources that were otherwise inaccessible. These seafaring traders developed cultural hot spots at landing zones, or ports. The constant flow of wealth and cultural diversity began the development of many big cities across the entirety of the continent.

T R A D E -Will

The spread of goods and ideas is something that defines varying human societies, as it reveals how each group of people function with people different from themselves.  For most of history, in order to trade goods, people would strap their wares to a camel or horse and ride them for extended periods of times, until they reached their destination.  This was ever present along the silk road, as well as from Asia Minor to parts of Europe.  These trade routes that eventually carved up the world are crucial to human development, not just for the spread of goods and technology, but the spread of ideas both political and religious.  An example of this is the spread of buddhism throughout India and China, as well as the spread of Christianity and Zoroastrianism throughout the Middle East and Mediterranean. All in all, the idea of traveling in order to trade with other peoples, is eerily similar to the migration that human populations had, and still continue to do.  People are off searching for new lands to call home, new goods to find and at the end of the day, this underlying trait is ever present in human life.

Silk Road and Indian Ocean Trade Routes- Phoebe

The camel was an essential mode of transportation that allowed for the movement of goods through harsh climate both in the Middle East and in western Asia. Different technological innovations relating to the camel like the military efficient North Arabian camel saddle (c. 300 BCE) and the creation of the stirrup (c. first few centuries AD in China) allowed for superior war tactics to be used and for greater efficiency of riding both the camel and the domesticated horses, were crucial to the trade along the Silk Road. However, camels and sturdy domesticated animals were not the only means of transportation along both of these trade routes. The Indian Ocean Maritime System, a trade network across the Indian Ocean and the South China sea, used specialized boats for their long journeys. These fine vessels of the seafaring people allowed for ease of transport of goods such as spices and manufactured goods from Asia to Africa and ivory and exotic animal parts from Africa back to to India, China and Southeast Asia. 

The movement and origins of ideas are significantly more difficult to trace due to the differing opinions of several historians. The Eurocentric historians will always conclude that superior technological ideas and theories must have originated from the Indo-European peoples, however, this textbook has debunked a lot of these biassed opinions. Nonetheless, in my opinion ideas are spread in much the same way. Contrary to what many people might assume, I am of the belief that ideas spread through observation rather than language. There were a plethora of cultures and languages in use throughout the silk road and communication must have been rather difficult. The study of other cultures by the traders and travelers of the silk road allowed these civilians to synthesize and transport vital ideas back to their native lands. Religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism and Zoroastrianism were also another medium by which ideas were shared and commonalities were found among the trades and travelers of the silk road. I hypothesize that the syncretism among several religions is due at least partially to the interactions among traders along both the Silk Road and Indian Ocean trading systems. 

In regards to the interaction between the rise and fall of empires and the trade system, it can be inferred that with one empire obtaining superior technology and consumer goods, this empire will eventually rise to power as the technologies and goods of the other cultures will be inferior. 

Park-Trade Systems

The Silk Road and the Indian Ocean were both important trade routes between early civilizations and empires. The Silk Road was a land based trade route that connected European societies on the Mediterranean to those in China. The system was complex and created new economic interactions. Farmers and manufacturers were needed to produce goods to trade, wealthy elites were needed to buy these goods, pastoralists were needed to provide modes of transportation in the form of horses, camels, etc.,  and guides were needed to help travelers and merchants make it to their destinations. The Silk Road allowed for the exchange of food products across continents, along with manufactured goods, and technologies. Additionally, religion and ideas were spread easily through the many interactions between people of different cultures.

The Indian Ocean trade system, on the other hand, was more focused on the exchange of exotic or more valued products. Animals from Africa and ivory are a couple of examples. Culture was spread through marriage, because travelers and sailors married woman from foreign ports. As a result, the children were raised bilingually and with different cultural backgrounds.

Trade- KROOD

Trade moves goods and ideas, because trade routes are essentially just connections established between countries. If certain areas interact with others enough, ideas and goods are bound to permeate other cultures. For example, China would trade peaches and apricots, as well as spices like cinnamon for goods like jasmine oil, copper oxides, and precious stones. This was a basic exchange of goods, but it was the beginning of countries recognizing that other places had resources that they didn't. The exchange of goods led to the exchange of ideas, simply because it allowed people to have conversations with other people from other places. As a result of trade routes, the Sasanid Empire adopted Zoroastrianism as the state religion. Zoroastrianism was spread via missionaries on the silk road. This shows how trade routes effected the exchange of ideas because they provided the means for conversations to happen.

Warren - Judaism

        The history of the Jewish religion has been riddled with the separation and division within their religion. Throughout their history they have been separated and forced out of their homeland. This allowed Judaism to disperse their religion. The diaspora which occurred after the conquering of Jerusalem in 736BCE by the Assyrians continued to spread throughout the middle east. However they remained connected through the building and worship at the synagogues created where they settled. Because they were surrounded by Mesopotamian religion which was also mono-theistic. Because there was association because both religions were monotheistic Judaism was influenced by the Code of Hammurabi in the codification of the Hebrew Bible.
          The continuation of diaspora continued throughout the conquering of the Israelite population by Assyrian, Babylonian and Roman empires. This conquering by the roman army led into the Greco-Roman influence on their religion. The Romans were focused on the logical conclusion rather than faith. Their focus on the science pushed more pressure on Judaism and their ability to explain the answers of life. While their philosophers ignored the idea of a god controlling the outcomes of earth.

Generally speaking throughout the course of history jews have been mistreated quite often.  Their humble beginnings arose from a brave story of a man named Moses who rescued nomadic Israelites from slavery to the homeland, the current Israel.  These Israelites joined others and spread out across their country and eventually conquered the Palestinian Canaan during times of chaos.  They took over as a result of the collapse of Canaan.  During this time these people were simply likeminded individual tribes having similar beliefs, however, through good leadership and reform, they were able to build their own monarchial, monotheistic empire.  They were united under a wise and insightful leader named David who had an early role in the conquest of Israel.  When he died, he passed the throne to his son, Solomon, and during his authority his empire peaked.  Their traditions and economy flourished due to their dominance in monotheistic religion, powerful military, and successful trade through exploration.  During this time they reflected many characteristics of Mesopotamia, they invested lots of time and resources building places of worship and they influenced  commerce by trading many precious minerals and rocks that were available to them and their land. Conflict created a divide in this powerful empire which was the beginning of their decline.  As a result of their location, more ethnic Syrian, Babylonian, and Iranian people settled in their society along with their own adverse beliefs.  Do to their geographic area Judah was constantly in threat of other nearby polytheistic empires.  A century later, the great Israelite empire was toppled by a new Neo-Babylonian kingdom who attempted destroy not only their city but also their religion.  Luckily, many jews escaped to the beautiful islands of Cyprus, there, they were able to redevelop their society while sticking close together.  But during the fifth and sixth centuries the jews returned to restore their city of Jerusalem to its original culture.  The survival of the Jewish religion is truly incredible.  Through persecution and violence the jews still managed to carry on sticking together and continuing their rich traditions, from being enslaved to building a kingdom and taking refuge in Cyprus, they refused to accept other religions they were not passionate about.  They believed in one god and through that shared belief they are still able to be a major religion around the world today.  Perhaps it was because of all the oppression and hardship from other empires who didn't accept their religion that drove jews to be even more cemented together and to survive and carry on their culture.

Claire: Judaism

Early: Early Judaism placed value on logic, political power and hierarchy, much in the same vein of Greco-Roman traditionalism. Saul, the first king of Israel, proved that the absolute power of a monarch was an effective way to rule (political power). Building on his father's success, David completed the transition from tribe to a fully unified monarchy, complete with an (a) census, (b) tax system, and (c) standing army (logic.) Solomon continued this trend towards nation building by forming trade alliances that stimulated economic growth for the Israelites. The tradition became one of a synced Church and State; priests became the wealthy class and held higher class positions and contributed to a widening gap between rich and poor (hierarchy.)

Diaspora: While the monarchy split into Northern Israel and Southern Judah at the close of Solomon's rule, but these early Israelites united once more in order to combat the Assyrians (later Babylonians) and, once they failed, the ethnic composition of the empire diversified. Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar expelled working class Jews who united over their joint experience and their unyielding belief in a single God, Yahweh. Their monotheistic beliefs separated them from the Babylonians, and the Jews became a people without a homeland. Loss of political autonomy coupled with the experience of exile led to the formation of a distinct Jewish identity, complete with strict rules and rites (dietary restrictions, Sabbath celebrations and codes for marriage.) The diaspora experience was unique to the Jews and remains an fundamental part of their culture to this day.

Phoebe- Judaism

The cultures of Egypt and Mesopotamia alike revolved around monotheistic religions. This created severe social hierarchies in which those connected with god, or those humans considered "divine" had almost absolute power within the civilization. Although the Jewish religion evolved around the worshiping of one single god, Yahweh, the common suffering that was endured by the Israelites on their migration back to their homeland led by Moses, created a sense of unity that led to a more homogenous equality among all of the people of the Jewish faith. The strong union of all people of the Jewish is further shown by the fact that, despite the diaspora that occurred after the Assyrians conquered Jerusalem in 721 BCE, the Jews remained, and still remain, connected through synagogues and social functions. In this regard, the conquests of both the Babylonian and Assyrian empires and their eventual defete of the Israelite kingdom was not a detriment to the Jewish community. Instead, it strengthened Judaism as it spread it both regionally and globally while the common traditions of the faith were still maintained.
The ambiguity of history that is shown through the lense of the Hebrew Scriptures is another important key feature of Judaism as it showed the relationship between the Jewish faith and other cultures. The Hebrew Scriputes were compilations of materials that originated from different groups, like the Mesopotamians, and common themes of strength, order, and the importance of religious ceremonies can be seen in both the these scriptures and the earlier legal document of the Mesopotamians, the Code of Hammurabi.                                                                                                                                               Despite the fact that Greek myths attempted to explain the mysterious of nature and life, it was the speculations of human minds that lead to constructive inferences being made. While religion in other prior cultures had answered the fundamental questions of what a good life meant and how is nature was constructed, Greco-Roman philosophy contributed to the pontification about and discussion of these questions. Through observation of the natural phenomena around them and not the spiritual world, Greco-Roman philosophers presented rational explanations of the world and its scientific order without the operation of gods or religion to explain the existence of humans. In this way, power derived from scientific and not divine thought.

Finn - Judaism

After the Assyarian conquering of Israel, the Jewish homeland, many of these Jewish communities were deported and moved around the Mediterrean areas. However, despite the prediction that the Jewish faith would be disrupted and eventually broken, isolation actually helped grow these Jewish communities. The shared identity and culture these small groups experienced helped grow strong connections. Furthermore, because judaism was so exclusive (Jews can only marry other Jews), the small communities grew very strong. Overall, the dispersal and separation of the Jews after the Assyrian take over actually helped strengthen the foundation of Jewish culture throughout the area.

Greek and Roman ideologies were, for the most part, based upon logic and reasoning. This philosophy however, was crafted by the polytheistic religion that these societies followed. While they had thousands of gods and deities, they did not find strong enough answers to life questions in this religion. It was not as strict as others so without intense guidelines on how to live and act many questions flourished throughout society. And so, they resulted to science and logic to find answers in society.

Will Manory: Homework October 1, 2015

Throughout early human development, civilizations have developed religions that are rooted in polytheistic ideals.  Differing from this historical trend was the creation of Judaism, as the Jews took a monotheistic approach to honoring their God, Yahweh.  However it was not until the compilation of the Hebrew Scriptures, better known as the Tanakh, that truly solidified the monotheistic faith that the Jews so habitually followed.  Although for all the positives that came from banishing polytheistic views in the Jewish community, there were many negatives.  In a sense, the Jews self-segregated themselves as they developed rules in their society that were not denouncing of other peoples, but just not overly accepting.  An example of this is the rule that states no Jewish person can marry a non-Jewish person, which obviously creates a variety of possible mates, as well as excluding large populations of people.  This, in a way, is the earliest form of Jewish "arrogance".  This arrogance being viewed from the outside in, meaning non-Jews could have viewed the Jews as arrogant for not believing other peoples were "good enough" to marry.  

Having their historical lands being located in an area of the world that is very easy to invade, the Jewish community was constantly conquered by many different empires throughout history; such as the Assyrians, the Babylonians and even the Romans.  Forced to follow different laws, being subjected to varying forms of government, and constantly moving made the Jewish people one of the largest groups of people to not have a definite home land.  Although their constant migration could have created the stereotype that "no one wants the Jews", the Jewish populations became tightly knit over the centuries as they believed that their benevolent God would see them through to the promise lands.

Brad -- Judaism

     After years of prosperous life in Israel, the people of Judah were eventually conquered by the Neo-Babylonian army in 587 C.E. This Babylonian victory lead to the deportation of the wealthy and skilled inhabitants. After the Judah Kingdom was destroyed, the remainder of the population were left to roam in the Mediterranean. However, rather than forming a single, large party, the Jews were split into multiple small groups that dispersed into many different areas. However, the religion was not dismantled or destroyed. As Jews migrated, so did their religion. Between each village of Jews and other inhabitants, there was a solid sense of community connection and shared culture. Because Judaism was exclusive to Jews by marriage only, it became extremely exclusive, and highly desirable due to other religious aspects. The dispersion of the Jews formed the basis of the strongest and largest network of Judaism culture.
   
     Rather than including monotheism, the belief in one god, in the roman and greek religions, these worshipers answered to thousands of gods, all of which possessed their own characteristics and abilities. The number of gods in a religion has no relation to it's durability and amount of worshipers, or it's value. In Greco-Roman society, the core values were not centered on religious obedience, but rather in science. Both Romans and Greeks attempted to explain, scientifically and mathematically, how nature operates and how humans are involved in relevance to the rest of the world. Neither Romans or Greeks viewed religion as a way to explain the happenings of the world, most likely because they didn't see religion as a worthy explanation, and because they could never actually obtain an answer that they believed themselves. Scientific, mathematic, and natural proof satisfied the Romans and Greeks to life questions.

Kyle - Judaism

The Greek word "diaspora" describes the Jewish population after the Assyrians conquered their homeland of Israel, because this word refers to dispersion or separation. The Assyrians came into Israel and broke up all of the Jews by deporting them to different areas around the Mediterranean. The ethnic and religious scene of Israel also change because settlers from Syria, Iran, and Babylon diluted what was left of the Jewish population. Though this did break Jewish people up into smaller groups, this isolation made made them come together. As Bulliet puts it, "the exile sharpened their identity." Small groups built synagogues in order to bring others together, and in their isolation they built a strong sense of community. This also resulted in Judaism being an exclusive religion, because people could not convert. Jews could only marry other Jews, and they also had other strict rules such as dietary restrictions. It was a terrible thing to take away the homeland for the Jewish faith, but instead of crippling the religion, it caused them members to come together and to become stronger than ever before.

The Greek and Roman philosophies were based on logic and reason. This was because though the Romans and Greeks worshiped thousands of deities, their religion did not mention anything about how to live one's life. This left a hole to fill by Roman Philosophy. Philosophical conversations involved talking about big questions, but since these philosophers did not have religion to fall back on, they had discussions and answered questions based on reason. Asking these questions and attempting to answer them logically led to the first scientific vocabulary. Greek and Roman philosophers answered big questions using reason because they did not have ways to answer those questions with religion.

Will Manory: Homework September 30, 2015

To be brutally honest these ideas are so immense that it would be impossible to cover every aspect in a short blog post.  These three lifestyles, Confucianism, Doaism and Leaglism, all played a major role in the development of China, as well as effecting the daily lives of people across the developing Chinese empire.

Confucianism, to start, is quite fascinating, as the basic belief is that there is a natural harmony that links humans, nature and the universe together.  The most intriguing part of this belief however is the foundation that it built on family values.  This idea of the human family being the basis of all social interaction was so widely accepted that it even found its way into parts of the Chinese government.  It was so accepted that the Chinese word for state (guo-jia) literally means nation family.  If you think about it, the role of the family is to make sure all members are doing well and doing what they need to do, and in a way the Chinese government accepted this role of family to all of China.  Eventually the government was viewed as the moral guardian of people.

Doaism and Legalism seem to conflict more with each other than with Confucanism, as they both take the same underlying ideas, but instead implement them in different ways; Legalism taking the more law and order route, while Doaism falls into line with spirituality.  All in all, both of these lifestyles are very intriguing, although I would like to know more about conflict between the groups of supporters of each belief.

Warren Confucius Legalism Taoism

Confucianism, legalism, and Taoism were all major beliefs during the Chinese Dynasty era. Confucianism was derived from the teachings of the philosopher Confucius. Its main focuses and objectives for people were to characterize and observe the interactions between humans. Since human nature is very social then all focuses should be on the way that humans relate together. Because of this their focuses were on filial piety that is concerned with the relationship between young people and their elders and parents, and jen the relationship between people or their humanity. Confucianism also has a strong hold in government. They suggested that a good ruler could create a strong and bonded society and would be bonded with guo-jia or national family.

Daoism or Taoism addapted a lot of their ideas from the Confucius religion. However, they believed that the ideas used in Confucianism were not wide enough and needed to consider all of the universe rather than just the human element of a cosmic relationship between all. Dao is the path, the way that everything is completely connected and related to each other. This concept of only being a small part of the path means that all human actions influence and change the cosmic flow of the universe. The flow had two parts the negative and the positive. Each one was influenced by the people within it.

Legalism also adapted a lot of ideas from Daoism and therefore Confucianism. However they interpreted the same ideas very differently and often resulted in conflicts. Rather than adding and impacting the flow they believed that they were able to completely control peoples lives through the influence of government. They established many rules very unattainable and then enforce it with harsh punishment to maintain the order they required.

Carter - Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism in China

Throughout the long history of China, it has never truly been unified by a single religion or philosophy, as most other regions of the world have. Instead, various philosophies and schools of thought have vied for dominance over the social and political structure of China. The most influential of these have been the philosophies of Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism. 

Confucianism, arising from the revered scholar Confucius in the sixth century B.C.E., teaches that there is an inherent order within both the universe and human society, comprised of five basic types of relationships that govern all aspects of life. These basic relationships, such as the relationship between parent and child, could apply to every aspect of society, and thus establish proper guidelines for a stable and moral society. 

Daoism, on the other hand, rejects the Confucian belief that society is governed solely by the relationships between humans, believing that the Confucian view is greatly oversimplified. Instead, they argue, human society is merely a reflection of nature and its myriad of relationships. By following the Dao, or the Way, one lead a simple, yet pure and moral life, based off the interactions of the natural world around them. 

Finally, Legalism places far less faith in the capability of humanity to be inherently moral. Thus, it attempts to establish a foundation for a well-functioning society by ordering everything with a strict system of laws. These could vary from rewards for good behavior, to drastic punishments for perceived crimes, such as mutilation or death.

Overall, each of these philosophies experienced various periods of popularity and decline, with Legalism dominating China during the Qin Dynasty, Confucianism being state-sponsored during the succeeding Han Dynasty, and Daoism becoming widely accepted during the Tang Dynasty. Ultimately, these three competing philosophies would each project their own influence upon Chinese society, leading to the philosophical syncretism that we see in China today.

Kyle- Confucianism

Late Imperial China was a mix of several different beliefs including Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism.

Confucianism taught that the Universe had a "natural harmony" which connected everything from man to the stars. One of the main teachings regarding these connections is that there are five relationships between  people, and each of these relationships has clearly defined roles. Some of these roles include familial connections but others connect people to the state. This was a big selling point for Confucianism, because it meant that religion and government could work together. The job of the ruler in China was to educate and protect the people who he ruled over.

To Confucians, the word "dao" means path, but the Daoists believe that it pertains more to the way of nature as a whole. Daoism's main goal was to help people realize that they were part of a bigger flow of nature. Daists thought that Confucianism was too ritualistic, and went against the flow of nature. Daoism can be related much more to Buddhism, which is less ritual based and more about living your life a certain way.

Legalism was slightly influenced by Daoism, but instead of focusing on morality, they focused on law. This turned out to be more confrontational and aggressive than Daoism and Confucianism.

Confucianism, Daoism, Legalism (Brad)

In ancient China, three distinctly contrasting faiths absorbed the attention of the Chinese population for centuries. Taoism, one of the three faiths, emphasized the importance of living simply and peacefully. Taoists believed that government was unnecessary for guiding in the right direction, but rather that meditation was enough to lead those who practiced it to a life free from desire, stress, and conflict. Almost entirely paradoxical to Taoism, Legalism hugely accentuated the importance of government ruling and strict laws. More of a social belief system rather than a religion, this faith taught people that they were born with the intention to act improperly and that they could only be directed properly through rigorous laws with harsh punishments. Eventually, these same ideas would cause Legalism to die out. Finally, the third faith was Confucianism. This religion is often considered the median between the other two. Like Legalism, Confucianism believed in social order with government ruling. However, rather than enforce rules and punishments designed to be broken, Confucianism believed that leaders should lead by example and treat their people as they would want to be treated. Like Taoism, this religion saw the importance of living simply and without desire. Ethics and Morality were the most important values for Confucianists. This faith inspired good behavior and encouraged it rather than forcing it upon people, it is perhaps why Confucianism lasted for so long and was so popular.

Catie- Confucianism, Taoism, Legalism

A main focus of Confucianism was family. Family was the most important of social relationships. The government of China was based on family. The ruler was the Son of Heaven and the father of the people. Another important aspect of Confucianism was the idea of the perfectibility of man. Confucianism taught that perfection could be achieved through ritual. This idea was woven into the political system in China. The ruler educated and transformed the people of the state through moral example and meditation.

Taoists believed that Confucianism focused too much on people and not enough on nature. They believed that human actions should be connected with nature. Taoism also disagreed with the idea of ritual. I found it interesting that they were skeptical of language because it defines you as a certain person. 

Legalism was a way of controlling the people of China 

1.  Confucianism

Confucianism was centered on the proper balance of good relationships among civilizations and people and committed towards religion.  Confucius believed through proper and well executed relationships would promote a better way of life in civilizations.  Every relationship had someone who was superior and responsible for properly mentoring and guiding such a person.  There were many varieties of relationships but what stayed constant was that one who was older and more powerful would be dominant in this relationship.  Confucius prioritized family relationships and often associated politics with family, emphasizing the relationship between the family and the state.  Politically, the monarch was the state and his family were the people he governed.  This relationship allowed the superior figure to treat others well and with respect.  These series of relationships were to bring structure and peace to a society.  If a ruler had failed to complete his moral obligations to his people, the people were given the right to rebel.  Another aspect of Confucianism is enriching others through education and tradition.  Confucius strongly encouraged the practice of religion and the connection of religion to make one a better person.  He also wished that rulers prompt education by inspiring his people through personal rule, moral example, and even meditation while he was interacting with others in political matters.  

2. Daoism

Daoism revolved around making decisions and living one's life in relation to the flow of nature.  Daoism believed that if people strayed from the proper course of nature it would lead to violence and pain.  Instead of influencing a way to avert violence, daoists simply rejected it and stood against it.  Daoists were much more extreme in their rebellious views towards violence and considered it the ultimate action of defying nature.  It also avoided concern of material things such as civilization and politics because these things are artificial and morals are what people should be mainly concerned of.  Daoism stressed the absence of action and desire since it is not in accordance with nature and can only lead to suffering.  Daoists were not in favor of ritual and convinced others to simply follow their own path.  They also supported silence instead of speech due to it following the proper paths of nature.

3.  Legalism

Legalism was purely a system fueled by power and higher authority.  It was a technique used by powerful political figures to create a fully rational civilization and to increase economic progress and military strength.  They discipline all people they governed and structured their lives for them purely in the interest of the state.  Legalists persuaded farmers and soldiers through force and propaganda to persevere for their country.   Laws were put in place to ensure maximum yield and military victories.  Rewards were few and gruesome threats always possible if a citizen wasn't performing his duties the way he or she should be.

Confucianism, Legalism, Taoism

Confucianism, Legalism and Taoism are the three pillars of Chinese philosophers that influenced all actions in China. Confucianism is a religion that has been followed by the Chinese for more than a thousand years.It is characterized more as a system of ethical philosopher than a religion. Confucianism is focused on human relations. It tells us that “man was by nature a human being” (colombia.edu). The primary social unit was family. Family was a fundamental aspect to others. The virtue of filial piety was the foundation for all people. The government was responsible to transform and educate the people. This was accomplished by moral example and not legal regulations. Legalism is a totally different belief system. Legalism stresses the importance of emphasizing strict consent with the law. As for education,  one should only follow government officials teachings and laws. Taoism is very similar to Confucianism. The central value of Taoism is being in harmony with nature. Taoists felt that Confucianism focused too much on human nature. They preferred to understand the term “Dao” as a moral way. However Taoists viewed “Dao” as the way of Nature as a whole. 

Claire: Philosophies and their Relationship to China

1. Confucianism and Moral Order: Early Chinese government and society was organized in accordance with Confucian ideas of the harmony between man, nature, and the divine. Man was considered inherently social, and that there was a natural order governing human relationships. Because familial relationships were so sacred, the state was naturally modeled after the family in accordance with filial piety (paternalism.) The monarch was the "Son of Heaven," and the "Father to the People," illustrating the importance of a male head. The ruler derived his power by earning the Mandate of Heaven, and his primary role was to embody moral uprightness for his people. Confucians believed in perfectibility of man, and it was the ruler's job to personally lead his people to perfection through education and ritualization. Good morals were honored above all (ex: merit-based bureaucracy)

 2. Legalism and Absolute Law: Providing a sharp contrast to the morality-based Confucians were the pragmatic Legalists.  Confucian persuasion was matched by Legalist force; Confucian morality with Legalist law.  Human nature was fundamentally bleak in their eyes, and had to be controlled through a system of codified laws and harsh punishments. The Chinese learned the limits of force during the age of Legalism: while force was a powerful unifying and mobilizing force (public works projects and law enforcement thrived, centralized administration proved effective), it's harsh brutality led to it's eventual demise. However, it's structural strengths were eventually married with Confucian spirit, exemplifying syncretism.

3. The Dao Way: Deviating completely from both Legalist and Confucianist structure was Daoism, which stressed the importance of natural order as an organizing force. Daoists rejected discord and assertiveness, denounced violence, and revered the pure and simple. It gave people a "Moral Way" free of desire or humanly ties, urging followers to see their lives as part of a greater natural process.

Ellen on Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism in China

Confucianism, Taoism, and Legalism were three of the main belief systems that structured early Chinese society and politics. Confucianism was focused on human relations and believed that human nature can be cultivated to perfection. Additionally, the role of the government was central to this belief system. It was responsible for educating and improving the lives of its subjects through laws a political institutions that were focused on morals. Taoism was similar in this way as well. However, it took the concept of morality to a higher level. Taoists believed that Confucianists were too arrogant because they focused solely on human nature. "Dao," which means path or way, was the concept of how humans should act in respect to the Way of Nature. Taoism has a more simplistic approach to government and was focused on non-violence. Legalism, on the other hand, valued discipline and the government designed based off of this ideology had a strict legal system with harsh punishments to maintain control.

Each belief systems had their flaws, but the Chinese used a syncretism of the benefits to create a well structured society and government. From Legalism and Confucianism, laws with morals were developed, and, from Taoism, a broader sense of awareness was developed.

Rachel on Buddhism

For many years In India, social class was determined by birth. Now it is known as the Caste system.Each caste member had a set rule which meant you could only eat, live, and marry the people in your group. There wasn't a way for a caste member to improve there social class.They were in the same class for there lifetime but in order to be reborn into a higher caste they must live life supremely. This is a major example of why the Vedic religion is so strict. Many of the Vedic religion people hated this idea because they couldn't escape the caste system. This was where Buddhism came into place with there concept called Nirvana. This meant ultimate extinction of all sense of self in a mystical state. If nirvana is not achieved the soul is reborn.They teach that after death; a being will continue to be reborn until enlightenment is achieved. Buddhists believe that if you follow The Middle Way, the Four Noble Truths, and the Eightfold Path, that endless cycles of rebirth is achievable. Buddhism was based on the fact of reincarnation but nirvana was a concept that help the followers in the Vedic religion to escape themselves from the caste system. The core beliefs of Buddhism was a response to Vedic beliefs.

Brad's take on Buddhism

Before the Enlightened One began his journey across Asia to teach people the ways of Buddhism, the Vedic religions dominated the continent. Rigorously structured, Vedism disciplined it’s followers by demanding their frequent presence at rituals and required it’s peoples to abide by the laws that applied to their social class. Similar to Buddhism, Vedism predominantly focused on reincarnation, the belief that one would live again after they die. While this idea was hugely emphasized in both religions, one small detail between the two made a colossal difference when it came to choosing among them. Vedism declared that reincarnation was never ending, and that a soul would never be at rest. Buddhism promised its followers, that through hard work, they could obtain peace at death through Nirvana. Acquiring Nirvana took years of obedience and proper execution of Buddhist laws, but none the less, it saw an enormous development in religion as the most powerful of the Asian countries; India, China, and Japan, sought out an escape from Vedism. Buddhism was the answer to those who longer for Vedic change because it gave people a real reason to abide by religion.

Catie Buddhism Response

The core beliefs of Buddhism were a reaction to Vedic beliefs. Vedic religion created a strict caste system that was connected to the idea of reincarnation. People were born into one of four classes and could not move to a different class within their lifetime. In order to be reborn into a higher social class, followers of the Vedic religion had to live life admirably. People were unhappy with the idea that there was no escape from the caste system, but Buddhism offered the chance to achieve enlightenment and the escape of the caste system altogether. Buddhism also was based on the idea of reincarnation, but the idea of nirvana brought hope to people who felt trapped in the caste system. 

Carter Buddhism Response

The basic tenants of Buddhism at its core are certainly a direct reaction to the existing social structure of India at the time that Siddhartha Gautama lived. This is due to the fact that the social structure espoused by the Vedic scripture is heavily dependent on a fixed social hierarchy, with little to no class mobility. Of course, this entire system was bound together by the underlying belief in reincarnation, which kept people content with their lot in life by the simple reassurance that if they performed their societal role faithfully, then they would be born into a better situation in the next life.

So, while this social structure is certainly effective and stable, it is anything but fair, and suffering was ubiquitous for the majority of people. Buddha saw this suffering, and with the revelation that suffering could be alleviated only through the renunciation of worldly desires, proceeded to offer the people of India an escape from suffering inherent in the Vedic social structure. No longer were they trapped in a cycle of reincarnation and bound to their class, but by recognizing the Four Noble Truths, and adhering to the Eightfold Path, they could eventually achieve true enlightenment, and an end to all suffering, in the form of Nirvana. Naturally, some of Buddha's teachings would be distorted slightly after his death, leading to different schools of Buddhism in the form of Theravada Buddhism, which stays more true to the teachings of Buddha himself, and Mahayana Buddhism, which adapted to various regions by introducing Bodhisattvas, or other people that achieved enlightenment. However, due to the simplicity of its tenants, Buddhism has ultimately remained relatively unchanged throughout history. Regardless of when or where it was being taught, the teachings of Buddha have endured.

WILL BUDDHISM RESPONSE

Although not a story of creation, the path that the Buddha follows is one of self-reflection, as well as one of learning to experience all that the world has to offer.  Differing greatly from most ways of Western thinking, the Buddha began his life as a slave to materialism before then rejecting everything he had in order to pursue a homeless life style that revolves around the starvation of the body in order to learn about the universe.  This story, told for five hundred years before finding its way to scripture, is one that electrified the Indian subcontinent, and one that continues to peacefully bring people together.

When the Buddha was first born, India was divided amongst 16 (maybe 12 not sure) kingdoms.  Although they all shared the same underlying religious belief they were distinctively separate.  The Buddha's ability to understand the world for what it really is, is what leads him to unify all of India under his ideals.  This not only liberates the people of the subcontinent, but it allows them to escape this Life-Death cycle that has been in constant order for many years.  The Buddha, by creating Buddhism (if you can phrase it like that) gives the people of India a new lifestyle that promotes peace, while also maintain the rigid caste system, which has the primary purpose of controlling people.

In the long run, Buddhism has a really cool story, although it does not do what the majority of other major religions do.  It doesn't tell us where the world came from.  So I guess, if I could ask the Buddha, where does the Earth come from, and who or what created the cycle of reincarnation?

Theo - Buddhism and Hinduism

I would agree with the statement that suggests that Buddhism was at least, in part developed as a result of the beliefs expressed in Hinduism. This is because Hinduism was developed and made as a religion that was focused on one's self. Like Hinduism Buddhism has a large focus on the the striving for personal perfection and achieving enlightenment.  Although Hinduism was and still is, for the most part, a polytheistic religion the focus was more on the individual spirit and soul rather than the deities. Their focus is on Karma, making sure that their soul is in the best position possible to move on to be a better form after reincarnation. In the same way Buddhism is focused on the soul rather that a deity. Buddhism is focused on one's self, but rather than making themselves more pure or more holy in hopes to be reincarnated as something better they go in the opposite direction and make themselves as humble and lower themselves. Their goal was to achieve a metaphysical, inner bliss known simply as enlightenment. Their entire focus is on achieving Nirvana rather than glorifying a deity. Humbling yourself, desiring nothing, and meditating until you achieve a sense of enlightenment are, although very different from Hinduism, share a lot of the same principals.

Claire Buddhism Response

The Verdic religion was a really good mechanism of social control. The creation myth itself (that stated that a creature was sacrificed and the different social classes sprung from the various parts of it's body) underlined the permanency of the social hierarchy set in stone by the Verdic texts. Because people felt that their position in life was deserved, the only thing they could do was put their heads down and do their prescribed work in hope for good karma. Buddhism shook this up. It gave people a way to achieve inner peace (nirvana), in this life.

Siddharta was also a captivating leader. He traveled around Asia sharing his truth and his Middle Path with all people who would listen, regardless of class (!!) In this way, the Budda was countercultural. Buddhism gained support of the general population because it was so inclusive, and legitimacy through royal endorsement such as that of Asoka. I think the reason Buddhism made such a mark is because it's founding tenant resonates with all people, regardless of class/status/race/ect: life is suffering.

Buddhism Statement Response

Verdic religion, although popular, created a slew of problems throughout India. The caste system which was created for example, oppressed thousands of people and put them in a position which was impossible to escape. One could not improve their current situation, only hope for something better after reincarnation. It was horribly strict and did not provide much hope or optimism for something better.

However, this way of life was reinvented with the introduction of Buddhism to Southeast Asia. Buddhism presented the possibility of freedom and liberation for those who wanted to improve their lives and spirit. Although reincarnation was still a strong force, it was a more optimistic approach to the idea. One could find eternal peace and a greater understanding of the world despite their present situation. This was a wildly positive movement because of the liberation and optimism it granted to thousands of people.

Ellen's Response to Buddhism Statement

The caste system in India is an example of how strictly structured Vedic religion was. Those who practiced this religion were born into a caste and varna, each with a specific set of rules that guided an individual's daily life. There was no ability to improve one's social class during a lifetime. Instead a person had to accumulate enough karma, so he or she could hopefully be reincarnated into a higher caste. The system was rigid, and each persons' role and identity were predetermined before they were born. According to the Vedic religion, there was no way to escape this cycle; reincarnation was eternal.

Buddhism became dominant in Southeast Asia because it liberated those who were unhappy that one's spirit could essentially never rest. Both the Vedic religion and Buddhism have a strong focus on reincarnation, but what was appealing about Buddhism was the concept of Nirvana. By following the Middle Way, the Four Noble Truths, and the Eightfold Path, a person would be reincarnated into an animal/human being/etc. until he or she achieved a broader understanding of the world and stopped suffering. At this point, Enlightenment can be achieved and one would reach a state of Nirvana, escaping the cycle.

In my opinion, Buddhism makes so much sense, especially Theravada Buddhism. According to The Art of Buddhism, "an individual is responsible for his or her own journey towards enlightenment." The concept seems so simple, so my question is: Why is Buddhism not a more popular religion?

Kyle's response to Buddhism statement

The Vedic Religions were centered around ceremonies and rituals. This was a cramped and restrictive religion, and could even be described as a "spiritual vacuum". This created a negative connotation to the Vedic Religions, because at times it seemed like the rituals were more important than the gods themselves. There was a "spiritual hunger" during this time which had people looking for some kind of change. Buddhism was exactly the kind of change that people were looking for. The Buddah offered an escape from the constant cycle of death and rebirth: meditation. Through meditation, people could get out of the cycle of constant suffering temporarily, or if they were able to achieve a state of enlightenment, they could be free forever. The Buddah was preaching hope to a group of people hopelessly ensnared in a rigid caste system. Buddhism is a reaction to the Vedic religions because it gave people hope in a hopeless religious social system.

Brad's view on Diamond's view

I believe that Jared Diamond brings important recognition to opinions about agriculture that do not always receive attention. While a few of his points are somewhat extreme, they are all insightful and well backed with evidence. The point of his that concerns/interests me the most, is his entirely negative take on agriculture, and his belief that it has hindered human progression, and at times, made life worse than it had to be. He argues that health problems and poor diets became widely common in agrarian communities because their food carried diseases that the human body was unfamiliar with, and unable to defend from. While he is right that agriculture occasionally made life unnecessarily problematic, when looking back over the thousands of years between now and then and the distance humans have come in all aspects of life; politics, economics, and society, that issue was minuscule, and as far as I am concerned, has not hampered the improvement of humanity. I believe that Diamond misses an important aspect of agriculture, and that is human unity, a common consensus in communities. Agriculture taught people how to work together, how to function as a unit to accomplish a task that benefited everyone in the community. While Diamond brings about strong points against agriculture, I must ask him, where would we be without it?