Strayer 2, 2nd Ed., Foundational "Civilizations"

5/27/2016

Bingham

5/27/2016 08:40:01 am

Here I am, lurking in the background noise of your life. If you need help with this chapter, or the summer packet, ask away; or even better, post your answers to margin questions, and I'll give you some feedback.

Eliza Pillsbury

8/17/2016 10:08:14 am

I thought I would give the margin question for "Coercion and Consent", page 76, a shot.

What were the sources of state authority in the First Civilizations?
1) necessity: urban life required authority to solve widely-shared problems --> voluntary support from citizens
2) force: distinguishing factor of First Civilizations from earlier chiefdoms, authority willingly used power to compel obedience
3) religion: kingship was said to be ordained by the gods (could also be manipulated to gather support to overthrow established authority)
4) writing: symbol of the elite, propaganda, accounting (bureaucracy), calendars (ritual/ceremony), written law (writing became an "arena for social/political conflict" --> something leaders eventually fought to control)
5) luxury: associated with power/status, intimidated those who were not members of the elite

Do these points cover Strayer's summary? Are they too succinct? Let me know if I'm missing anything!! :)

Bingham

8/18/2016 01:08:01 pm

Yep, looks pretty good to me! Just the right level of detail while still keeping it brief.

Eliza Pillsbury

8/17/2016 10:13:27 am

I had a question on the Seeking the Main Point question on page 62.

What distinguished civilizations from earlier Paleolithic and Neolithic societies?

I know that civilizations represented a new form of society post-Agricultural Revolution.
- larger populations
- concentrated in cities
- rise of state authority (and use of force to gain obedience)
- greater inequality and oppression
products of civilization: art, architecture, literature, calendars, ritual sacrifice hierarchies (class, gender), slavery, warfare, animal-drawn plows, metalworking

Is this enough? I don't know if I need to know more specifics about the Paleolithic/Neolithic societies or if it sufficient to just know what made civilizations unique. Or if those are the same thing, I don't know. Thanks guys

Matilda Smolij

8/18/2016 12:36:55 pm

If you're looking for more specifics about Paleolithic vs Neolithic societies (from what I understood) Strayer mentioned that In Neolithic societies there were more profound differences in economic function, skill, wealth and status which created more division and inequality than in the Paleolithic societies.
Please correct me if I totally misinterpreted what Strayer was saying.
Thanks!

Matilda Smolij

8/18/2016 12:42:03 pm

I just realized I totally misread the question so please ignore my comment. Sorry!

Bingham

8/18/2016 01:15:00 pm

Very similar to the other question, huh?

Well, I'd add that those cities sometime supported populations in the tens of thousands, monumental architecture, and written literature.

I know it seems like the same thing, but beyond "greater inequality", I think you need to add elaborate class and gender hierarchies.

Amy Vaughan

8/18/2016 01:27:26 pm

I think that if you separated the listed characteristics into progress vs. setbacks, this answer could also work for BPQ#4.

Amy Vaughan

8/18/2016 10:59:43 am

Somehow I managed to miss this page and was commenting on the wrong forum haha. Here's my attempt to answer margin question 5 (pg. 73).

In what ways have historians tried to explain the origins of patriarchy?

-men were more capable of the "heavy work" required by agriculture, in comparison to women and their role of child-rearing (which was taking up more time anyway due to the fast-growing population)
-since men took over agriculture, women took over "secondary tasks" (food preparation, weaving, etc.), leaving them with less possessions to assert their status.
-women were associated with nature (reproduction), which became viewed as insubordinate to mankind/civilization.
-only men participated in war, which gave them the image of being powerful warriors/protectors
-men controlled women's sexual activity to insure that property was kept within the family. This lead to views of women as property and the practice of exchanging women as slaves, concubines (mistresses), and wives.

Bingham

8/18/2016 01:26:43 pm

But to address your question...

I would have liked you to answer the question more the way you answered the other one. So anyway, I's tackle this one this way...

Transition from hoe and digging-stick agriculture (mostly women) to more intensive agriculture with animal-drawn plows and more intensive large-herd pastoralism (tasks that men were better able to perform, testosterone and all that.)

The growing population of civilizations meant that women were more often pregnant and even more deeply involved in child care than before.

Men, because they were less important in the household, were available to take on positions of economic, religious, and political authority as societies grew more complex. From these positions men shaped the values and practices of their societies in a manner that benefited them at the expense of women. In this development lay the origin of the ancient distinction between the realm of the home, defined as the domain of women, and the world of public life, associated with men.

Women had long been identified with nature because of their intimate involvement in reproduction, but civilization valued culture and the human mastery of nature through agriculture, monumental art and architecture, and the creation of large-scale cities and states. Some scholars have suggested that, as civilizations developed, women became associated with an inferior dimension of human life (nature), while men assumed responsibility for the higher order of culture.

Large-scale military conflict with professionally led armies was a central feature of the First Civilizations. With military service largely restricted to men, the needs of warfare served to enhance the power and prestige of a male warrior class.

The emergence of private property and commerce also may have shaped the status of women.

Restrictions on women’s sexual activity became central to ensuring that offspring of the male head of household inherited family property. Moreover, the buying and selling associated with commerce was soon applied to male rights over women, whether as slaves, concubines, or wives.

Bingham

8/18/2016 01:18:56 pm

I got fooled too! I get an email when someone posts,and I just clicked the link and responded to you. The title of that forum was also Strayer 2, but that was the first edition I did with you guys in May. For those of you that are curious about what we posted, http://www.binghamsplace.com/you-and-strayer/strayer-2-first-farmers

Cassie Barham

8/18/2016 02:57:22 pm

I have both an attempt in answering the second margin question (page 68) and a question in regards to it. As far as origins, it's clear that that comes primarily from the Agricultural Revolution, but in terms of "breakthroughs to civilization," I'm thinking this is referring to the factors that propelled the rise of individual civilizations?

In which case, from what I understand, the causes for this were the growing populations creating more congested, and in turn more competitive societies. Particularly in areas where rich agricultural land was limited, whether due to geographical reasons or because of competing neighboring civilizations, this was a principle motor for change. This is because it served as an inciter for innovation, such as plows and irrigation that could produce produce more food in response to the fact that opportunities for territorial expansion were not readily available. However, densely populated, circumscribed environments created more competition between rival groups, which generated repeated warfare. Losing groups were most often absorbed into the winning ones as a lower class, and the winning side became elite, with enlarged territory, a strong and organized state, and subordinated workers, establishing it as a civilization.

Am I missing the mark for the key breakthroughs, or am I headed in the right direction for what the question is covering? Thanks so much!

Amy Vaughan

8/18/2016 03:15:35 pm

I'm a little confused as to why the story of Paneb is included in the chapter. Is it to reveal that the usually idealized Egyptian state wasn't what it was all cracked up to be?

Cassie Barham

8/19/2016 10:36:38 am

That's my understanding of its inclusion. I think there is an element to the story that is also telling of the regard for pharaohs in Paneb's time. The power that pharaohs held was already in a diminished state, and this shows up in Paneb's blatant disrespect of a royal tomb, possibly reflecting how the reality in Egypt of that time was that Pharaohs were not so sacred as they once were, which doesn't correspond with idealized depictions of Egyptian civilization.

Bingham

8/19/2016 01:33:56 pm

Well, yes, it's useful for that, but Strayer's inclusion of Paneb's story has another purpose. However, it's part of a broader discussion I'd like to have with you in class. Will you remind me to discuss this?

Cassie Barham

8/19/2016 10:54:12 am

As far as the form of government of some of the First Civilizations (namely Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Chinese), is it correct to say they are theocracies? These three at least definitely seem to use religion as a primary guideline for authority and rule. If not, what form(s) of government would they be most like? Were theocracies generally abundant in early civilizations?

Amy Vaughan

8/19/2016 12:13:00 pm

That's tricky, because while religion definitely had a strong influence over many of the First Civilizations, some were quite characteristic of monarchies (ex: Egypt and China). Pharaohs were hereditary sovereigns, as were the monarchs in China. Then again, the pharaohs were viewed as gods in mortal form, and Chinese monarchs were deemed "Sons of Heaven." Maybe it's a mix of the two?

Cassie Barham

8/19/2016 01:27:42 pm

I see what you mean. Looking back, I was thinking something along the same lines. I may also be way off with Mesopotamia in any case (I thought I read something about the prominence of religion in Mesopotamian states, but as I'm looking back through, I don't think I'm seeing it?).

Amy Vaughan

8/19/2016 01:58:01 pm

Mesopotamian cities were ruled by kings thought to be stewards of their city's patron gods (pg. 77). Also, a side question: Mesopotamia seems to be less of a cohesive civilization, at least in comparison to the more unified Egypt. In the sections comparing Mesopotamian and Egyptian patriarchy and government, is it referring to southern Mesopotamia (the city-states of Sumer), or Mesopotamia as a whole? Sorry if this question is confusing haha. I might be overthinking it.

Bingham

8/20/2016 02:37:48 pm

No, these are not theocracies. Every time a presidents gives a speech, he (maybe her) says, "and God bless the United States of America." That doesn't make America a theocracy.

Cassie Barham

8/19/2016 02:16:12 pm

For the third Big Picture Question: How do the various First Civilizations differ from one another? Is providing descriptions of what makes the First Civilizations unique sufficient, or should we go more in depth with their relationships and compare their similarities as well?

Cassie Barham

8/19/2016 02:24:59 pm

Eliza posed a similar question about the paleolithic and neolithic societies compared to civilizations, but I'm not sure if our process of comparison should be any different for the different civilizations

Amy Vaughan

8/19/2016 03:11:37 pm

I would look into characteristics such as forms of writing, political and economic systems, physical geography, religion, inequality, etc. and describe how they differ from civilization to civilization.

Eliza Pillsbury

8/20/2016 12:51:42 pm

Cassie, I am focusing on the characteristics that Strayer points out as being unique about each civilization. I think he does a good job of covering the topics that Amy mentioned, which are a great way to think about this question. Obviously a huge section is dedicated to comparing Mesopotamia and Egypt, so that might be a little different.

Bingham

8/20/2016 02:35:29 pm

How about SPICE themes?

Eliza Pillsbury

8/20/2016 12:58:02 pm

Here is my answer for the margin question for Patriarchy in Practice.

How did Mesopotamian and Egyptian patriarchy differ from each other?

Mesopotamia
-female sexuality was harshly and unjustly regulated
-extreme punishments for adultery for women, but men were permitted to sleep around as long as it was not with another's wife
-distinction between respectable women (must wear veils) VS non-respectable women
-unable to initiate divorces easily (much easier for the husband)
-wealthy women still viewed as dependent on husband
-"demotion of the goddess" not complete in Mesopotamia (still worshipped Inanna, goddess of sexuality and warfare)

Egypt
-women were legally equal to men
-able to own property
-could make their own wills, marriage contracts
-could initiate divorces
-not required to remain veiled
-royal women could hold political power

Eliza Pillsbury

8/20/2016 01:14:03 pm

I think BPQ1 is rather interesting of Strayer. It certainly invites conversation.

Strayer's definition of a civilization is a "new and particular type of human society, made possible by the immense productivity of the Agricultural Revolution" (p 62). Civilization is associated with an advanced level of politics, economics, agriculture, religion, language, etc.

But I am curious how everyone responded to the popular usage of "civilization"! I don't know if I have ever thought about what I mean if/when I use the term civilization in everyday conversation. Maybe more associated with the urbanized society in which most of the upper class lives? (Which is ironic, because ancient civilizations were the beginning of urbanization. I can't imagine they could have predicted just how much cities would develop)

Amy Vaughan

8/20/2016 03:04:03 pm

Strayer states that the popular usage of the word "civilization" is to imply "refined behavior" or "a 'higher' form of society," both of which suggest something positive or improved.

I use the term "civilization" to refer to early human societies/communities that bear enough resemblance to modern societies to be considered progressive/civilized peoples. (However, this brings to mind questions like, "How many modern qualities must a society have to pass the invisible line dividing primitive from civilized?" and "When does a chiefdom become a state?")

However, historians are hesitant to use the term civilization lest it imply that civilizations were superior to previous human societies, when, to be sure, civilizations did have their drawbacks. Also, the term "civilization" implies a unified group of people within a set boundary who share a culture, while in reality, citizens were more concerned with status than their inclusion in a large civilization, and there were no set borders containing a civilization. To avoid such implications, some historians avoid the word "civilization" altogether, replacing it with neutral terms like "complex, urban-based, or state-organized societies." However, Strayer uses it to describe a distinctive type of human society with cities and states and broad cultural patterns in particular regions.

(I started out with the intention to just answer your question, but ended up answering the whole thing. Do you agree with my other answers?)

Bingham

8/20/2016 04:47:23 pm

That's a pretty great answer!

Jacqueline Touchet

8/21/2016 08:50:30 am

I was wondering how specific we needed to be when answering the comparison margin question on page 80 (Comparison - In what ways did Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations differ from each other?). Mesopotamian and Egyptian societies had so many differences which Strayer then talks about for several pages, so should we include all or most of the examples he gives, or just the basics (for example "They differed in environment, culture, cities and states, and interaction and exchange). That seems a bit too vague for me, but I was answering it in a table and jotting down all of the examples he provides and my answer was pretty lengthy.

Amy Vaughan

8/21/2016 10:02:29 am

BPQ2: “Civilizations were held together largely by force.” Do you agree with this assessment, or were there other mechanisms of integration as well?

Strayer writes that states are what held civilizations together, despite inequalities of gender and class. The introduction of violence as discipline came about through the state, and while it did lower the crime rates, there were certainly other characteristics of state authority that made living in a civilization look attractive.
People living in densely populated regions wanted the organization/authority of a state that could solve widely shared problems (ex: irrigation planning, defense, internal conflicts).
State authority (as well as class and gender inequalities) eventually became the status quo and was even thought to be ordained by the gods (although religion was not always used to support the state).
Writing was used as propaganda in support of the state (was also used for accounting, calendars, and written law)
The luxurious and impressive lifestyles of the elite served to exemplify the power of the state and to intimidate those in and around it.
For civilizations like Mesopotamia, a tumultuous and warring environment made living in cities (under state authority) safer/preferable to being on the outskirts.

This looks really similar to Eliza's answer for the "Coercion and Consent" margin question. Am I missing something?

Yasmeen Gaber

8/21/2016 06:34:35 pm

Wow! Thanks for a great answer to go off of! However, I do think it would be essential to go back to the origin of civilizations, because, after all, what kept civilizations together is likely what caused them in the first place. Although there is a general consensus that the Agricultural Revolution caused these civilizations, they are also attributed to a missing coefficient, which has been theorized as the a growing population's need for a more complex society and the human need for order (which I believe you listed). These, I think, are the root early civilizations, and all of the benefits you listed and force were compensating agents, all of which held the societies of these civilizations together. In short, I don't think you're missing anything, but I find that the root causes are the most important in binding them through the ages. I hope that was remotely coherent and/or helpful!

Bri Al-Bahish

8/21/2016 10:50:18 am

I'm a bit confused about where the chapter ends. It looks like it stops on page 91, but there are several pages after that belong to "part two." Is Part Two: Second-Wave Civilizations in World History included in what we are supposed to have down for the test?

Cindy Xia

8/21/2016 01:37:46 pm

Yes, the chapter ends on 91. At least the packet version stops at 91.

Amy Vaughan

8/21/2016 03:02:16 pm

When Strayer discusses Mesopotamia and compares it to Egypt, is he talking about Mesopotamia as a whole, or the city-states of Sumer (southern Mesopotamia)?

Yasmeen Gaber

8/21/2016 06:43:18 pm

I believe he is talking about Sumer because he starts out talking about Sumer and the city-states to contrast the government structure with that of unified Egypt, and he discusses "Mesopotamia's" downfall with the invasion of Akkadians, Babylonians and Assyrians, both the former and latter of whom are Mesopotamian. However, there are later parts, like when he's talking about trade, when he groups Mesopotamia together, but in those cases, he specializes when he gives an example, and when he gives a generalization, it's pretty safe to assume Mesopotomia as a whole. Thanks for asking, I didn't even realize I was confused about that until I had to look for the answer!

Jacqueline Touchet

8/21/2016 04:15:03 pm

Amy Vaughan

8/21/2016 04:27:42 pm

#8: In what ways did Mesopotamian and Egyptian civilizations differ from each other?

Mesopotamia:
Social:
-stricter gender inequality than that of Egypt (documented in written laws)
-division of women into respectable and nonrespectable
Political:
-made up of over a dozen separate city-states each ruled by a king representing the city’s patron deity
-warfare b/w city-states pushed people to urban centers for protection
-no over-arching state authority to prevent internal conflicts (eventually such conflicts combined with the deteriorated environment left the city-states weak enough to be overthrown by northern peoples)
Interactions-Environment:
-Tigris and Euphrates rivers rose unexpectedly, causing more harm than help to agriculture and the community.
-open environment left Mesopotamia more susceptible to invasion, contributing to the pessimistic Mesopotamian mindset expressed in the Epic of Gilgamesh
-overuse of environment left Mesopotamians with no trees and salty soil
Culture:
-impressive architecture (walls over 20 ft tall, ziggurats)
-abundance of temples for ritual performances
-first system of writing (cuniform)
Economics:
-market places with manufactured and crafted goods
-high levels of urbanization within cities

Egypt:
Social:
-less strict gender inequality (women had more legal rights, and female monarchs could even rule)
Political:
-formed from several existing chiefdoms
-individuality of cities was less important
-ruled by pharaohs (believed to be gods in human form)
-pharaohs lost their influence and Egypt dissolved into local principalities for several centuries
Interactions-Environment:
-typically reliable flooding of the Nile River served as a natural system of irrigation (however such dependency could lead to famine when the river failed to flood)
-natural barriers (deserts, mountains, seas, cataracts) offered free security/protection from invasions, contributing to the generally optimistic mindset of Egyptians
-less intrusive methods of irrigation helped to sustain the environment
-available travel both ways on the Nile allowed for trade, communication, unity and stability
Cultural:
-believed in an afterlife
-impressive architecture (pyramids as tombs for pharaohs)
-successful system of writing (hieroglyphs)
Economic:
-less urbanization (unlike Mesopotamia, outskirts were safe enough to inhabit)

Hopefully my organizational methods are understandable. If there is something I need to add, please let me know!

Bingham

Welcome class of 2019. Some years students collaborate in this space effectively, some years not so much. One thing I know, collaboration significantly enhances learning. If you want access to my thoughts, this is the collaboration space to use. Most people propose an answer to margin questions, big picture question, or anything else related to managing Strayer. Other people can then comment leading to a stronger answer. I'll keep an eye on these pages, and pop in when I think you need me.

Strayer 2, 2nd Ed., Foundational "Civilizations"

Leave a Reply.

Bingham

Archives

Categories