Right from the very beginning we read of how important writing was for the ancient civilizations and and how it was a "central feature". Of course writing from the past gave us insight on how things may have been during the earliest days and perhaps what values the ancient people had and to also give us an idea of what they may gave been thinking.
One of the oldest writings ever found is the Epic of Gilgamesh. It is a rather lengthy story of a ruler and his many quests. I once had to read bits of it back at the community college, and even though I have forgotten a good amount of it, I remember it being quite interesting, especially coming from the earliest story tellers of all time. The part I greatly remember has to do when Gilgamesh loses his best friend, Enkidu, who goes along with him on his journeys. The gods try to kill Enkidu, which for a while he is able to avoid his unfortunate...eh future...but is eventually killed and Gilgamesh is devastated. Being completely new to death, he begins to realize the limitations to mortality which, in effect, begins to realize that he too is neither invincible. This leads him to finding eternal life which at the end of the story learns that it can not be granted to mortals and that someday he will die too.
While reading the little exert of the Epic of Gilgamesh I was kind of confused during a couple of parts because I didn't have a clue about what they were talking about. But for the most part it went over similar parts that I remembered learning about from my previous history class.
The Law Code of Hammurabi is a very interesting code that I am also familiar with from my previous class. It is a list of over a hundred laws that was created for the Mesopotamian culture. A quick glimpse at the code can quickly give you a feeling of how things may have been been in their culture. I actually enjoyed learning about this law system because it not only gave me a bit of insight on our past culture's values but it also explained how judgement was passed upon those who violated the code.
I am actually quite happy that our law system isn't identical to this code because depending on your personal status, the code can be easier on you or harsher on you. I feel that the code is actually unfair at time, especially since children don't have much of any say with this code. The Ways of the World stats the second code first under the category of On crime, Punishment, and Justice, and already it speaks of a way to tell if someone being accusing by another is guilty or not, but in a illogical way. You have to jump into a river, and if you survive then the accuser gets a large penalty against them self. Perhaps because of this law people didn't accuse each other very often. According to law number 5, a judge can also be penalized for making bad judgements.
Other portions of the code address slavery, mean and women, and the economy. Looking through these selected law gives a great idea of the values of the Mesopotamian culture and how they saw men, women, rich, poor, and slaves. A lot of it deals with "getting even." If you take something from one person, they will take back, legally. Or if you hurt someone, they can hurt you right back. However, the code also seems to address on if someone was to take something from another for a long time, they can keep it. In law number 30, if someone went out to war with no one to watch their possessions and someone else takes it for three years, they can keep it. The law also has laws against laziness as well. There are also portions of the Code that address divorce for a man and a woman or what penalties they must pay if they were to cheat on each other, or to leave each other. All of this shows many of things people shouldn't do keep the well-being of the people. The punishments are so great in some of the laws, showing what meant the most to the Mesopotamian people and also what they didn't want others to do or violate.
The final portion of the Chapter 2 documents go over Egypt and their values over life, death, and eternal life. I am sure I speak for most people when I say that ancient Egypt has to be one of the most interesting cultures to ever study about. There is so much history on them and a lot of it was very fascinating and created a lot of mythologies and stories that we still talk about today. The next set of documents show different spells and passages that the Egyptians would practice to help their journey to eternal life.
Andrew Murillo
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Friday, September 20, 2013
Chapter 2 First Civilizations
Hello Everyone! It's time for another Blog and it feels like it has been a while.
For some reason the beginnings and ends have always been the most interested to me. I have always been quite astounded of how things came to be or how things got to how they are now. In tonight's reading, the Ways of the World goes over the first civilizations that began it all.
At the very beginning of the chapter we get a little insight on how today people want to escape civilization, but the chapter primarily speaks about what started civilization. I kind of felt that this little section may have been interesting to bring up, but however it was really feels pointless. People will always complain, but a world outside civilization is not an easy one.
It is interesting how the creation of writing really had a big part in the creation of civilization. Written documents is extremely valued in today's society. If something is not in writing, it is not considered valid. Agreements, stories, lessons, expressions are all put down in writing. It plays a large role in our world and created a large role on the first civilizations.
Most of the first civilizations seems to have been created around the Europe and Asia areas which is no surprise because that's where the last chapter left us off at. Also the civilizations that existed in the desert areas had little rainfall so they had to rely greatly on the rivers that crossed their regions.
I am not sure if this is commonly known but what was a surprise to me is that the first civilizations didn't start 100s of years ago but it is believed and through a lot of evidence that the first civilizations began around 3500 to 3000 BC! That actually doesn't really feel so long ago especially since we already have about over 2000 years of written history, and double what we already have, civilization feels like it isn't such an old thing.
One thing I haven't touched up on in this blog is that this era was known as the Agricultural revolution. Which I always found it quite surprising that it took thousands upon thousands of years for groups of people to figure out how to grew their own plants and gardens. I personally believe that it is possible that people before this era did know how to grew their own plants, it just wasn't as wide of a practice. Let me explain my theory. If you think about it, there was definitely rainfall even in the distant past. So this should had caused plants to grew later which brought fruit. Unless the early people completely ate every seed in the fruits, they may have just thrown their waste on the ground. Over time the seed would get berried into the ground and when rain came, there began to grow a plant into that same spot. Sooner or later I am sure some people would had notice that there is some kind of occurrence or at least catch onto some kind of pattern.
Anyways, as we may have guessed, with the up-rise of agriculture came greed. People could grow as much as they wanted and perhaps not all people were fair. Also, since growing takes work, I am sure there was thieves so these people had to protect their food, and store it. From these steps came a chain of events, such as laws, someone to keep these laws in order, and so came the beginning of a new culture and kind of government. This lead to the first civilizations that we come to study today.
I can keep going on about this chapter, since it is a relatively long chapter, but that perhaps I can leave the rest in another blog. I want to cap up this blog by talking about the world Civilization. It is in the title of the chapter, but what is civilization? This is a question that can actually take up an entire blog as the main topic. The entire chapter talks about the first civilizations and how it all began, but briefly at the end talks about its definition. Today it can be seen as a completely different kind of definition such as meaning what is up to date or what matches up with today's standards.I personally say it means a person or culture of people who can communicate, get along, understand each other, and live together. The opposite of this would be uncivilized. Of course, people fighting amongst each other may not be considered civilized. Now, other ways I have heard people describe the word is by saying it is when people are up with today's dastards, or on par with today's society. So basically if you don't keep up with the latest trends or what is going on in the world today you are uncivilized. I personally, disagree with this view of it. First off I would be then uncivilized because I don't care about having the latest things or keeping up with pop culture or having to follow the newest trends or even having to do things in a new way, I am very true to keeping things the same way I was raised, or how I always put it, old fashioned. This doesn't make me uncivilized, maybe boring to some people, but I still my life normally like anyone else, I just don't have all this extra stuff. Well, no matter how you look at it, this word may just be a word or opinion.
Andrew Murillo
For some reason the beginnings and ends have always been the most interested to me. I have always been quite astounded of how things came to be or how things got to how they are now. In tonight's reading, the Ways of the World goes over the first civilizations that began it all.
At the very beginning of the chapter we get a little insight on how today people want to escape civilization, but the chapter primarily speaks about what started civilization. I kind of felt that this little section may have been interesting to bring up, but however it was really feels pointless. People will always complain, but a world outside civilization is not an easy one.
It is interesting how the creation of writing really had a big part in the creation of civilization. Written documents is extremely valued in today's society. If something is not in writing, it is not considered valid. Agreements, stories, lessons, expressions are all put down in writing. It plays a large role in our world and created a large role on the first civilizations.
Most of the first civilizations seems to have been created around the Europe and Asia areas which is no surprise because that's where the last chapter left us off at. Also the civilizations that existed in the desert areas had little rainfall so they had to rely greatly on the rivers that crossed their regions.
I am not sure if this is commonly known but what was a surprise to me is that the first civilizations didn't start 100s of years ago but it is believed and through a lot of evidence that the first civilizations began around 3500 to 3000 BC! That actually doesn't really feel so long ago especially since we already have about over 2000 years of written history, and double what we already have, civilization feels like it isn't such an old thing.
One thing I haven't touched up on in this blog is that this era was known as the Agricultural revolution. Which I always found it quite surprising that it took thousands upon thousands of years for groups of people to figure out how to grew their own plants and gardens. I personally believe that it is possible that people before this era did know how to grew their own plants, it just wasn't as wide of a practice. Let me explain my theory. If you think about it, there was definitely rainfall even in the distant past. So this should had caused plants to grew later which brought fruit. Unless the early people completely ate every seed in the fruits, they may have just thrown their waste on the ground. Over time the seed would get berried into the ground and when rain came, there began to grow a plant into that same spot. Sooner or later I am sure some people would had notice that there is some kind of occurrence or at least catch onto some kind of pattern.
Anyways, as we may have guessed, with the up-rise of agriculture came greed. People could grow as much as they wanted and perhaps not all people were fair. Also, since growing takes work, I am sure there was thieves so these people had to protect their food, and store it. From these steps came a chain of events, such as laws, someone to keep these laws in order, and so came the beginning of a new culture and kind of government. This lead to the first civilizations that we come to study today.
I can keep going on about this chapter, since it is a relatively long chapter, but that perhaps I can leave the rest in another blog. I want to cap up this blog by talking about the world Civilization. It is in the title of the chapter, but what is civilization? This is a question that can actually take up an entire blog as the main topic. The entire chapter talks about the first civilizations and how it all began, but briefly at the end talks about its definition. Today it can be seen as a completely different kind of definition such as meaning what is up to date or what matches up with today's standards.I personally say it means a person or culture of people who can communicate, get along, understand each other, and live together. The opposite of this would be uncivilized. Of course, people fighting amongst each other may not be considered civilized. Now, other ways I have heard people describe the word is by saying it is when people are up with today's dastards, or on par with today's society. So basically if you don't keep up with the latest trends or what is going on in the world today you are uncivilized. I personally, disagree with this view of it. First off I would be then uncivilized because I don't care about having the latest things or keeping up with pop culture or having to follow the newest trends or even having to do things in a new way, I am very true to keeping things the same way I was raised, or how I always put it, old fashioned. This doesn't make me uncivilized, maybe boring to some people, but I still my life normally like anyone else, I just don't have all this extra stuff. Well, no matter how you look at it, this word may just be a word or opinion.
Andrew Murillo
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Looking futher. For anyone in class who may need help with the assignment
This blog is created mainly to add more to what I posted for Monday and to recap what was talked about on Monday and what I took notes on. I am also creating this blog to help guide others who may need help or guidance. This blog should help open your mind to the assignment.
After a class discussion, and by looking at other student blogs I have came up with a more detailed and stronger response/stance to the question: "Did the Paleolithic people more egalitarian than modern societies? The answer is without a doubt, Yes! but keep in mind, I am not saying they were completely equal. As I had posted in a comment, no matter what, there will always be people who have more skills in one thing than other or excel better than others. Not everyone shares the same talents and some people are just born to be good at certain activities. This is all true and can bring up a good argument but this does NOT answer the question.
Of course even the Paleolithic people had things that were not always equal. The men would hunt and the women would gather. Normally it wasn't the opposite way around. Also not everyone could heal. It is also implied that the women would fallow the men, as seen in Nisa's story when she said that one of her husbands would want her every night and she would just give in, or she was unsure about it him for several years but she still stayed with him. Also it seems that the women did not have a say on who they get to marry first. More evidence on this is found in Nisa's story. Again, this is all true, but even so it still does not answer the question.
The question is: are the Paleolithic people MORE egalitarian than modern societies? Of course they were. As stated in my earlier blog, either gender may divorce (same with our society though). Gods could be in either the form of a male or female, while today when we speak of God, God is normally described by saying "he" or "him" or "his" like "created in his image". Wives and husbands were able to share themselves with other "lovers". When it came to wealth, the people who lived in the bush are said to have nothing at all. When talking about power, either male or female can heal or be healed in the same way (by doing drugs, silly culture...oh wait...).
This is all significant stuff, but it only comes from one source. This source is through one woman's story, and it may just be describing only her life, while others may live their lives differently. Also this story is a large assumption. Life during the Paleolithic days may have been nothing like this. These are all ideas to consider.
Andrew Murillo
After a class discussion, and by looking at other student blogs I have came up with a more detailed and stronger response/stance to the question: "Did the Paleolithic people more egalitarian than modern societies? The answer is without a doubt, Yes! but keep in mind, I am not saying they were completely equal. As I had posted in a comment, no matter what, there will always be people who have more skills in one thing than other or excel better than others. Not everyone shares the same talents and some people are just born to be good at certain activities. This is all true and can bring up a good argument but this does NOT answer the question.
Of course even the Paleolithic people had things that were not always equal. The men would hunt and the women would gather. Normally it wasn't the opposite way around. Also not everyone could heal. It is also implied that the women would fallow the men, as seen in Nisa's story when she said that one of her husbands would want her every night and she would just give in, or she was unsure about it him for several years but she still stayed with him. Also it seems that the women did not have a say on who they get to marry first. More evidence on this is found in Nisa's story. Again, this is all true, but even so it still does not answer the question.
The question is: are the Paleolithic people MORE egalitarian than modern societies? Of course they were. As stated in my earlier blog, either gender may divorce (same with our society though). Gods could be in either the form of a male or female, while today when we speak of God, God is normally described by saying "he" or "him" or "his" like "created in his image". Wives and husbands were able to share themselves with other "lovers". When it came to wealth, the people who lived in the bush are said to have nothing at all. When talking about power, either male or female can heal or be healed in the same way (by doing drugs, silly culture...oh wait...).
This is all significant stuff, but it only comes from one source. This source is through one woman's story, and it may just be describing only her life, while others may live their lives differently. Also this story is a large assumption. Life during the Paleolithic days may have been nothing like this. These are all ideas to consider.
Andrew Murillo
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Chapter 1 Documents | Egalitarian
This blog is in response to the question brought up in class: Was there more egalitarian during the Paleolithic era than there is now. Feel free to comment and make suggestions on the topic. Did I miss anything? Feel free to share that way others who may stop by this blog can view it too and have an easier time creating their response.
Egalitarian
Was
there more egalitarian with the Paleolithic societies than there is with modern
societies? The Documents section found at the end of Chapter 1 in Ways of the
World is definitely a perfect place to look to answer this question. There in
fact was plenty of evidence that there was in fact a society that had more
egalitarian than we see today. Before we take a look at the chapter we must
keep in mind that there was less possessions and valuables back in the day so
people were more living their life trying to live other than trying to obtain
some kind of status or goal. People didn’t need to work to get a bigger house
or obtain a better car, they worked to take care of their family, and to live
with what little they had. They didn’t have an interest in valuables and if
they did, it had a personal meaning, no a popular value like we have with
valuables we own today.
The
Chapter begins with a lady named Nisa talks about how she lived a gather-hunter
life. Everyone’s loved ones of that culture was seen as equal. Nisa saw her
children, her husband, her mother, and her father as equal. When they had died
she had the same amount of hurt for all of them. When it came to eating, or
hunting, nearby neighbors would share without expecting anything back in
return. Normally fellow neighbors had no problem with sharing their food with
others. Fairness played a big role in earlier cultures.
Another interesting
thing about equality in the past cultures didn’t just apply to food, and
perhaps tools. Another thing that may had been considered in a similar way was
lovers. Nisa explains how she would have several lovers. One would give her one
thing, and the other with give another, neither being more than another. Having
affairs was believed to be just something that was given to the people. This
didn’t just apply to the girl, but it applied to the man as well. He too would
have other lovers.
The
Paleolithic societies has shown a great amount of egalitarian during their
time. They shared their food, roles and saw everyone as another man or woman,
neither better nor worse. They did not see others as greater or did not try to
show off as the better hunter or husband. Those were both values that they did
not have neither did they find an interest in it. Those who did not share, did
not receive from others, but even that was very rare during their time. They
were fare and they even shared each other’s arguments. If one person was to be
rude to another, there would usually be another person, who was completely not
involved in the argument, who would back the other. The fairness and idea of
the past was much different from how it is now. There really was no greed or
selfishness during their time.
Andrew Murillo
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Chapter 1 Out of Africa & The Ways We Were
Hello everyone. This my first blog of the semester and also my first
blog I have ever posted on the internet. So, this is pretty much a new
experience for me. I am doing this for my World History class at NDNU. I
have a lot of opinions and personal beliefs on things so I just ask
that we all be respectful of it and keep this a fun and educational
environment. Just remember that I am not here to change anyone's mind or
prove a point I am just simply reflecting on the readings for the
course.
The Ways of the World by Robert W. Strayer, begins in a similar way that several other history books begin that I have read in previous classes, from the beginning of time. It is interesting to me because many of these resources seem to have their own idea of how it all began. In fact, this book's version seems to be the most developed out compared to the previous versions that I have read about or studied about. I have always personally seen these things as just theories because they always seem to change over the years. the Big Bang theory, I thought was an old theory, but I originally first learned years ago that it dealt with two large orbiting bodies colliding into each other and the collision created the universe. Another theory I also read about was a ball of energy that kept condensing, until it underwent so much pressure that it exploded and created the universe. I don't ever take them as fact but as things that people seem to believe "may" have happened before. No one can ever know because no one ever lived that long to tell, but it is always interesting to me to see what people think.
It also seems that people still believe that we have evolved from chimpanzees somewhere in Africa. Interesting enough, our more modern time has only taken up 5% of the total amount of time that we have dominated the planet. This is all fascinating to hear that people believe this, but I have always been a religious believe and that animals and humans are two separate things and always have been.
After the book finishes explaining all this interesting theory stuff that you can hear in many completely different way from many different books is when you finally have me begin to actually learn about what most likely happened in our past. When the book begins talking about migration and how we advanced, then you have me convinced. Thankfully the authors begins talking about this quite quickly.
It is believed that the earliest forms of human revolution may have began in Africa. From there many of the earliest humans migrated, and hunted and gathered. They were the first to use tools to hunt for their food. They would use forms of rock, and stone and they later on experimented with its shape to see what different results they could come up with, for better or for worse. This section of the reading is what may have caught most of my attention because it was the easiest to relate to. I have heard it many times and even though the story may have been a little different every time I read it and it may had started in a different region, it is normally the same story. This story is normally the origins of hunting and gathering. I first heard of this technique back in my first year of middle school and I still continue to hear about it in text books today.
I seem to enjoy the structure of this book, much more over earlier textbooks that I read because of the order it follows. It follows an order of human progress, which is nice to know the book always keeps you at an easy pace to follow and doesn't jump back and forth between times and regions. The book continues on talking about more discovery of skills the earliest humans had acquired and how they used these skills to begin to travel. This was the earliest migrations that we know about.
I also had found it interesting that the book mentions about the ice age, and how humans had used it to their advantage to travel. I actually haven't heard about the ice age in quite a long time and wasn't sure if historians still believed that humans lived during those times. I remember learning about this technique of travel years ago, but I only heard it mentioned in class once and that was it. Most of the history classes I took after middle school were more about more modern history, and cultures. This book brings me back to things I haven't heard about in about over 10 years ago.
The remainder of the first part of the chapter went on talking about the human migration and how it may have happened what became of it. It became a bit harder for me to focus during this point, mainly because there was many dates that were being stated and a lot of different theories of how this all may have happened.
I feel that the section "The Ways We Were" was far more interesting to me. It spoke more about the development of humankind and create the roles of the woman, the man, and the teenagers in the different cultures that existed. The textbook also talks about the creation of leaders and rules, and sexual relationships between and man and woman. This kind of development has always been quite interesting for me to read about. For some reason I have always been intrigued in development and the process, time and effort it takes.
In conclusion to the first blog of the semester, this textbook surprisingly seems to keep me interested. It feels as if it is more like talking to you, other than just stating facts and dates and just expecting you to remember them. The author really kept the reader in mind when it was being written. At times the author puts in questions such as "how did this become possible" or "what caused this to happen" or even the classic "what if" questions. In other words, this textbook makes it easy to read, and guides you through this long journey what happened in this world's past and who our ancestors were and how things got to be the way they are today. Already, I am beginning to feel more comfortable about this course and that the reading assignments may be more manageable then I first thought.
by Andrew Murillo
The Ways of the World by Robert W. Strayer, begins in a similar way that several other history books begin that I have read in previous classes, from the beginning of time. It is interesting to me because many of these resources seem to have their own idea of how it all began. In fact, this book's version seems to be the most developed out compared to the previous versions that I have read about or studied about. I have always personally seen these things as just theories because they always seem to change over the years. the Big Bang theory, I thought was an old theory, but I originally first learned years ago that it dealt with two large orbiting bodies colliding into each other and the collision created the universe. Another theory I also read about was a ball of energy that kept condensing, until it underwent so much pressure that it exploded and created the universe. I don't ever take them as fact but as things that people seem to believe "may" have happened before. No one can ever know because no one ever lived that long to tell, but it is always interesting to me to see what people think.
It also seems that people still believe that we have evolved from chimpanzees somewhere in Africa. Interesting enough, our more modern time has only taken up 5% of the total amount of time that we have dominated the planet. This is all fascinating to hear that people believe this, but I have always been a religious believe and that animals and humans are two separate things and always have been.
After the book finishes explaining all this interesting theory stuff that you can hear in many completely different way from many different books is when you finally have me begin to actually learn about what most likely happened in our past. When the book begins talking about migration and how we advanced, then you have me convinced. Thankfully the authors begins talking about this quite quickly.
It is believed that the earliest forms of human revolution may have began in Africa. From there many of the earliest humans migrated, and hunted and gathered. They were the first to use tools to hunt for their food. They would use forms of rock, and stone and they later on experimented with its shape to see what different results they could come up with, for better or for worse. This section of the reading is what may have caught most of my attention because it was the easiest to relate to. I have heard it many times and even though the story may have been a little different every time I read it and it may had started in a different region, it is normally the same story. This story is normally the origins of hunting and gathering. I first heard of this technique back in my first year of middle school and I still continue to hear about it in text books today.
I seem to enjoy the structure of this book, much more over earlier textbooks that I read because of the order it follows. It follows an order of human progress, which is nice to know the book always keeps you at an easy pace to follow and doesn't jump back and forth between times and regions. The book continues on talking about more discovery of skills the earliest humans had acquired and how they used these skills to begin to travel. This was the earliest migrations that we know about.
I also had found it interesting that the book mentions about the ice age, and how humans had used it to their advantage to travel. I actually haven't heard about the ice age in quite a long time and wasn't sure if historians still believed that humans lived during those times. I remember learning about this technique of travel years ago, but I only heard it mentioned in class once and that was it. Most of the history classes I took after middle school were more about more modern history, and cultures. This book brings me back to things I haven't heard about in about over 10 years ago.
The remainder of the first part of the chapter went on talking about the human migration and how it may have happened what became of it. It became a bit harder for me to focus during this point, mainly because there was many dates that were being stated and a lot of different theories of how this all may have happened.
I feel that the section "The Ways We Were" was far more interesting to me. It spoke more about the development of humankind and create the roles of the woman, the man, and the teenagers in the different cultures that existed. The textbook also talks about the creation of leaders and rules, and sexual relationships between and man and woman. This kind of development has always been quite interesting for me to read about. For some reason I have always been intrigued in development and the process, time and effort it takes.
In conclusion to the first blog of the semester, this textbook surprisingly seems to keep me interested. It feels as if it is more like talking to you, other than just stating facts and dates and just expecting you to remember them. The author really kept the reader in mind when it was being written. At times the author puts in questions such as "how did this become possible" or "what caused this to happen" or even the classic "what if" questions. In other words, this textbook makes it easy to read, and guides you through this long journey what happened in this world's past and who our ancestors were and how things got to be the way they are today. Already, I am beginning to feel more comfortable about this course and that the reading assignments may be more manageable then I first thought.
by Andrew Murillo
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)