Empires & Encounters, Strayer 14

24/11/2015

Don't get conquered by holidays and Strayer 14!

Hallie Schulze

29/11/2015 14:59:26

I've already done MQ's 1-6, but I don't want to just post all my answers on here, so I'll just do a couple I'm not completely solid on.

MQ #3: What was the economic foundation of colonial rule in Mexico and Peru? How did it shape the kinds of societies that arose there?

Commercial agriculture or silver/gold mining economies
-natives were forced to do the labor
Result: Social hierarchy
-resembled Spanish hierarchy
-Spanish settlers made up the higher class
-creoles were Spaniards who were born in the Americas
-peninsulares were people who were born in Spain
Result: Mestizo
-mixed-race population
-emerged because of the unbalanced ratio of men to women in the Spanish settlers (7 men to 1 woman)

MQ #4: How did the plantation societies pf Brazil and the Caribbean differ from those of the southern colonies in British North America?

-less racial mixing in N. America
-slavery was less harsh in N. America than in the sugar colonies
-by 1750, U.S. slaves were self-reproducing; later, almost all U.S. slaves had been born in the U.S. Slaves in Brazil and the Caribbean were mostly imported
-more slaves were voluntarily freed in Brazil
-In N. America, a any African ancestry meant the person was black; In Brazil, color was only one criterion of class status, a person's color showed their education

Please tell me what I can fix, how to make it more solid, etc. I really like the idea of the forum. I think we should use it more :)

Caroline O'Connor

29/11/2015 17:56:33

It looks like its just you and me so far, Hallie :)
I am going to try and answer MQ5- What distinguished the British settler colonies of North America from their counterparts in Latin America?

•The British settlers came from a more rapidly changing society than did those from Spain

•The British settlers were far more numerous than those from Spain

•After devastating disease wiped out most of the Native Americans in North America, their numbers did not rebound in the following centuries as happened in to the Aztecs and Incas

•Slaves were not needed in the agricultural economy of the British settler colonies dominated by numerous small- scale independent farmers working their own land

•The British settler colonies were without the racial mixing that was so prominent in Spanish and Portuguese territories

•The British settler colonies were far less interested in spreading Christianity among the remaining native peoples

•The church and state were not so intimately connected as they were in Latin America

•There was greater mass literacy than in Latin America due to the protestant emphasis on reading the Bible

•British settler colonies evolved traditions of local self-government

•Britain had nothing resembling the elaborate bureaucracy that governed Spanish colonies

Ok. So I feel like I have way too many points. Maybe some of them don't answer the question or could be combined? They are mostly just quotes straight out of the section in Strayer that is next to the question. Am I missing any points? I was considering adding a point about the reversing of roles of North and South America, but eventually decided it fell under the category of "related not relevant." Any and all help is much appreciated!

Bingham

29/11/2015 18:03:19

Well done guys.

Bingham

29/11/2015 18:33:17

Wait. British were more numerous? Sure about that?

Hallie Schulze

29/11/2015 19:58:44

Red book, page 638, Paragraph 2: "The British settlers also were far more numerous. By 1750, they outnumbered Spanish settlers by five to one." :)

Caroline O'Connor

29/11/2015 20:02:18

It is page 416 for my fellow yellow book people.

Adam Tawakkol link

30/11/2015 19:58:37

Hello Forums!

I am going to attempt MQ 10

In What ways was the Ottoman Empire important for Europe in the early modern era?

-They were an important trading partner to Europe, as well as a military threat.

- They impressed European thinkers and intellectuals due to their religious tolerance.

- The french found themselves allied with the Ottoman empire against Europe's common enemy of Habsburg Austria

- They ended the serious muslim threat to Christian Europe.

I feel like this is enough, but there might be some more in the mess that is this section. Anything I can do to make it better?
And don't be surprised if I come back with more!

elle (praying hand emoji) norman

30/11/2015 22:00:06

Hey Adam, I actually disagree with the statement that the Ottoman Empire ended the Muslim threat to Christian Europe. Page 427, at the very bottom: "... the empire itself represented an enormous threat to Christendom generally. The seizure of Constantinople, the conquest of the Balkans, Ottoman naval power in the Mediterranean, and the siege of Vienna in 1529 and again in 1683..." You get the picture. They did have a policy of tolerance for their subjects, but they did not end the Muslim threat on Christendom.

cathleen

30/11/2015 22:21:32

just repeating what elle said, I think you're spot on except for that last point. Like the whole thing with the devshirme, the gathering of christian guys, who were taught turkish and converted, and then put in their army- that's terrifying. I'd be threatened.
The ottoman empire was tolerant and cool towards christendom (lighter taxes, less oppression under rulers, autonomy in affairs, some became ottoman elite, resembled akbar's mughal rule which isn't a bad thing because he was pretty chill), but poor balkans with the devshirme thing. Also the ottoman empire being so powerful-with all this conquering and sieging and naval power and overall flexing their muscles-is pretty scary. So for those reasons, the ottoman empire did not end the serious threat muslims posed to europe's christians.

Rose Dopkin

30/11/2015 23:20:05

I thought I’d try and answer MQ #7: How did the Russian Empire transform the life of its conquered people and of the Russian homeland itself?

For how the Russian Empire transformed the life of its conquered peoples:
- Russian authorities forced an oath of allegiance to the grand tsar on its native peoples.
- Yasak (tribute) was demanded.
- Epidemics damaged the native peoples since they held little to no immunity against foreign diseases introduced.
- They were pressured to convert to Christianity, although under the rule of Catherine the Great, there was a measure of religious tolerance for Muslims.
- Their hunting grounds and pasturelands were lost to Russian agricultural settlers.
- They became dependent on Russian markets for grain, sugar, tea, tobacco, and alcohol.
- Fees and extra challenges pressured them to abandon their nomadic ways.
- Many also were “Russified” and adapted the Russian language.

For how the Russian Empire transformed its own homeland:
- Russians, although still exerting political dominance, became a smaller portion of the population as other ethnicities were conquered and absorbed into the empire.
- Russia became one of the great powers of Europe due to the wealth of the empire.
- Russia became an Asian power.
- Because of its span, Russia struggled with identity (European vs. Asian power?)
- It became a highly militarized state due to the fact it bordered large civilizations.
- The highly autocratic character of the Russian Empire was reinforced.

This question was pretty straight-forward, but please let me know if there is anything you would change, add, or remove. :))

cathleen

2/12/2015 18:47:00

I meant to say something earlier, but there's a movie called Belle (2013) about a privileged mulatto in the 18th century that might be cool to watch in celebration of post-chapter 14. It's a really intriguing concept of someone being unable to eat with the slaves, but also unable dine with the white folk- constantly being too good/not good enough for either group and resting somewhere in the middle.

Micah Zimmerman

2/12/2015 21:54:33

(Wow, Its been a while) I am going to trying margin question 6: What motivated Russian empire building?

Russian attention was drawn first to the grasslands south an east of the Russian heartland

Russian were drawn across Siberia by opportunity, found primarily in the "soft gold" of fur-bearing animals, whose pelts were in great demand.

This all that I could find. Please give any useful feed back. Thanks in advance.

cathleen

2/12/2015 22:07:33

here, friend! These are some that I would suggest to add to your answer to beef it up. When answering this question and rereading the portion, I thought "if I were russia at this time, what would motivate me to empire build???"
Chronologically, Russia was drawn to grassland south and east into the heartland, but why? What motivated them to go here? --- security. They wanted security from the pastoral peoples who raided them
Russia also went into siberia by the demand of soft gold
But also, towards the end of this section, strayer talks about what political leaders thought of the Russian empire building process' goals, which seemed like motivations as well: defending the russian frontier, enhancing the power of the russian state; spreading christianity and civilization; enlightening savages.
I hope this helped!

Empires & Encounters, Strayer 14

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Archives

Categories