Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
32 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Who was Muhammad?
|
Born in Mecca, raised by his uncle, Muhammed was exposed to many religions at a young age. In 610, had a vision from god, started the new religion of Islam. Fled from Mecca to Medina (Yathrib) in 622. 622 marks year 1 in the Islamic Calendar.
|
|
|
|
Who was Abu Talib?
|
Muhammad’s uncle who raised him and, after his vision, protected him from the people of Mecca. Died in 619
|
|
|
|
Who was Khadijah?
|
Owner of a trade caravan and wife of Muhammad. Also died in 619.
|
|
|
|
What aspects of Bedouin culture did Muhammad embrace?
|
Muhammad, believe it or not, was born a Bedouin. He lived most of his life by Bedouin principles and traditions. However, when he became a prophet of God, he embraced only select aspects of his native Bedouin culture. For example, he did not like the idea of polytheism, or the burying of baby girls in the desert, and labeled those as barbaric, or against God’s will. However, he did embrace a few aspects of the Bedouin culture. One aspect was generosity, where in the Bedouin culture; one would give a passerby anything he direly needed, such as water or food. Another aspect was hospitality, where a nomad was expected to take in any traveler who wished to stay the night with them, and give them something to eat and drink. However, when next they meet, they may kill each other. A third and final aspect of the Bedouin culture would be the honor system. He approved the idea of one’s honor and dignity by not stooping to the level of a criminal or cheater in society, or helping someone in need, or even fighting in defense of your honor and dignity. Those three aspects were treasured by Muhammad and his followers, and continue to be a great part of the Islam religion today.
|
Muhammad embraced their ideas of honor, hospitality, generosity, and their strong fighting spirit.
|
|
|
Why were the Arab armies so successful?
|
Arab armies were successful because of their strong fighting spirit (seeing themselves as warriors of god, and their extreme expertise in desert warfare. Also, as Brandon stated, their promise of paradise upon their death was an incentive
|
Promise of heaven; Jihad, or struggle for the Muslim faith; promise of paradise if death occurred; zealous; expert desert fighters.
|
|
|
What impact did Islam have on women?
|
There were many different opinions on how the women felt about the laws of the Sharia in the Muslim faith. Some felt that they wanted the freedom of having an education, owning property, and getting a job, while others believed that true freedom was wearing the veil and being a good wife to their husband. The impact that Islam had on women was very complex. Instead of many women demanding the same thing, it is split down the middle, although the more common desire is to be free of the Sharia’s laws. The Sharia, or Muslim law code, forces women of the Muslim faith to wear a black shroud/veil that covers their entire body, including the face. It also decrees that it is scandalous to even reveal an ankle, wrist, or neck, making the women wear extra clothing even in the heat of summer. The Muslim laws also require that a married woman can only have one husband, even if she is widowed or divorced, while the men may have up to eight wives, as long as he financially supports them equally. However, being married to a man allows the women to not have to get a job, since the men pay for their lodgings and food. Although some women find this life totally acceptable, others have voiced their opinions after seeing the style of living of a woman in Europe or the United States, and wish to have a modern/secular state so they can live their own life.
|
They were more equal to men, compared to how things were before, and women were not killed as they were in Bedoin times. Women were allowed to practice Islam, unlike before, and overall, Women gained more rights.
Had to wear veil + lots of clothing; scandalous to even show an ankle or wrist; not allowed to be educated or own land; supported financially by the men |
|
|
What were the strengths and weaknesses of the Ottoman system of hereditary rule?
|
The main advantage was strong leaders (because weak and unpopular leaders would be killed), and the absence of others with possibly legitimate claims to the throne (because they were all killed). However, the system was to gruesome and inhumane for some rulers, who could not bring themselves to kill siblings, and eventually, the "cage" system was introduced, which ensured that incompetent, sheltered rulers with little idea of how to run an empire would have a claim to the throne.
|
During the height of the Ottoman Empire, the rulers had a system of hereditary rule, where the last brother left alive would rule the empire. This system initially proved successful, since it rooted out the weaker rulers, or those too timid to take the initiative to rule over the entire empire, despite a few deaths from aggressive siblings. But this soon proved to be too gruesome when an Ottoman ruler strangled more than a dozen of his younger brothers, some of who were still infants and children. When the Ottoman empire witnessed the long procession of small coffins down the main street of the capital of Istanbul, they realized that the initial system of hereditary rule was far too barbaric, and changed the hereditary system to the “cage system”. The cage system brought the princes-to-be up in the palace, but forbade them to leave the palace itself. This left out the usually violent change of power, making the system easier to bear with. However, rulers turned out to be weaker and weaker as the princes were spoiled rotten, and not educated about the outside world, preventing them from becoming knowledgeable and respectable men, and instead a 16 year-old boy would have the mind of a spoiled 9 year-old brat. This was even one of the factors that caused the eventual collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
|
|
|
Why did so many different empires emerge in the same part of Western Africa?
|
In western Africa, the area around the Niger river was once a region rich with a precious mineral: Gold. The gold figurines and body piercings were bought at a high price in trade towns, and helped powerful people in those towns grow even more powerful, and eventually start an empire. Many people of East and South Africa were drawn like bees to a flowerbed to the “gold empires” of Western Africa. Even the Niger river was an attractive location to build these “gold empires”, since they provided a water source for both farming and drinking purposes. These empires used their wealth to build grand armies, buy commodities, and even modern muskets and guns. However, whoever had the gold held the western region of Africa. When the gold supply dwindled, people would migrate to the areas where there was gold to be found. As the empires crumbled from increasing gold demand and dwindling gold supply, a new empire would rise in the area of the next trade city that had grown rich from the gold trade. This vicious cycle continued until all of the gold in the area had practically been stripped from the earth, and these empires ceased to grow any longer, reducing the western region of Africa to a system of small towns near the Niger river.
|
Salt and gold. Whoever controlled the salt and/or gold in that area of Africa could run entire empires in that region. The fact that there were many rivers and streams in that area only helped in the development of these vast, wealthy empires.
|
|
|
What caused World War I?
|
The super nationalism of the time, the desire for vast empires, the massive alliances (which were supposed to discourage war), the improved technology, the militarization/industrialization of the major European powers, and the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand by Serbian nationalists. After the assassination, Austria-Hungary issued many demands to Serbia, which the complied to. However, Austria-Hungary issued a demand which Serbia could not comply with so that they would have an excuse to invade Serbia. Russia, being a nation of Slavic people, felt it needed to protect its Slavic brother Serbia, and went to war with Austria Hungary. France was allied with Russia, and came to Russia's aide. Britain sat out of the war at first, but when Germany moved troops through neutral Belgium, Britian entered the war.
|
In the years before World War I, the world had changed drastically. It was a simple advancement in technology, from cultures initially sharing ideas (both technological and metaphysical), to the meeting of east to west, then, ultimately, the industrialization of the great powers of the world. When the industrialization began, countries began to mobilize their military forces, or militarized their countries as an act of show. However, this caused everyone to become nervous, and they soon began to hammer out iron-clad pacts, or alliances with other countries. However, when these alliances were made, the smaller countries began to become cocky since they had a couple of other countries watching their backs. This led to a few conflicts between countries. For example, when the French wanted Alsace and Lorraine back from Germany, they could not get it back since the Germans were superior in military strength, so the French could do nothing. Also, when the Serbians desired to create a southern Slav state out of Austria-Hungary, they were forced to keep quiet since they were heavily outnumbered and outgunned by the Austria-Hungary forces. But when a few radical Serbians assassinated Archduke Francis Ferdinand, his father decided that this could be used as an excuse to eliminate the Serbian thorn in Austria-Hungary’s side by force. However, when the Austria-Hungarians declared an ultimatum that Serbia could not accept (on purpose), and later attacked, while calling upon their German allies to assist, who quickly mobilized their forces, the French saw their excuse to attack Germany, and threatened Germany that they would attack if they did not cease their mobilization. However, Germany responded by continuing their mobilization, and France quickly called upon their allies, Britain and the Soviet Union, who both attacked Germany. This domino-effect brought the entire region of Europe under war, also known as World War I.
|
|
|
How was Adolf Hitler able to gain power in Germany legally?
|
Adolf Hitler was no fool. He had read many books on how to influence people, and made his impression on the German public. Although he wasn’t very popular initially, he gained more influence in the Reich when the Great Depression hit, and the German people needed someone to blame. Hitler provided the Treaty of Versailles for the German public to dump their blame upon. He then promised to undo the Treaty of Versailles, one term at a time, then appease the people by favoring the workers, and getting rid of the crazy democratic system of the Reich, along with the mess of the other political parties, and throw that system out the window. This brought the support of the military, who wanted to become stronger again, and make Germany a militarized state once more. He used the military to pressure President Hindenburg to promote Hitler to chancellor, who promptly did so to appease the people. However, he never executed his plan to balance out the power between Hitler and himself, creating an overbalance of power on Hitler’s side. However, Hitler still decided to achieve his presidency legally. When the Reich mysteriously burned down (possibly Hitler’s doing), Hitler immediately reacted by setting up ballot boxes, and placed Nazi soldiers to stand guard, heavily pressuring the people to vote for him. He was soon voted president, then changed his rank to something of a military dictator, finally finishing chiseling out a great foothold on which he would balance his power and authority.
|
Basically, Nazi supporters pressured President Hindenberg to make Hitler chancellor. Hindenberg eventually put Hitler in power as the chancellor, in order to appease the people. However, his method of balancing out Hitler's power backfired, and Hitler became more powerful than ever.
|
|
|
How did Mustapha Kemal help shape modern Turkey?
|
Mustapha Kemal, or “Ataturk”, was an ambitious man who really changed the way Turkey operated. To modernize his state, he built buildings for public education, factories to provide jobs and promote industrialization, and even converted the Turkic alphabet to the Roman alphabet, so then people would be able to learn their language a little easier, and for the convenience of foreign traders/salesmen. However, a larger change was when he changed Turkey from a religious state to a secular state. This shift in law codes removed the Sharia as the national law code, and replaced it with a western-style of moralities and punishments. He also allowed women to choose whether they wanted to wear the veil or not, and allowed them to be educated, own land, and even get a job, to the delight of many Muslim women. However, this angered the devout Muslims, who argued that it was against the will of god to remove the Sharia as the national law code, which Kemal ignored. But these changes helped Turkey conform to the modern western ways, and has earned Kemal the title “Ataturk”, or “Father of Turks”.
|
He built up public infrastructure, instated a more western law system, made the government secular, gave women equal rights, and westernized the country in other ways. While he angered the fundamental Turks who believed in fundamental Islam, he was praised by the majority of Turkey, and is still celebrated to this day as "Father of the Turks."
|
|
|
What is Zionism and what impact did it have on the Middle East?
|
Zionism is the movement for a Jewish homeland. It impacted the Middle East because the state of Palestine was carved up into Israel, the Jewish homeland, much to the anger of the Arab world. Many wars have been fought in the Middle East over Israel, and many have died as a result of this fighting. The unrest in the Middle East continues to this day, as a result of the conflict between Israel and Arabs.
|
Zionism Hebrew: ציונות, Tsiyonut) is a nationalist[1] Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, calls for the self-determination of the Jewish people and a sovereign, Jewish national homeland"(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism).
|
|
|
Anyway, what is the cause of terrorism in the Middle East?
|
The cause of terrorism is mainly a response to failed diplomacy. Many of the same countries endorsing terrorism are countries which were unable to attain their goals through conventional diplomacy. People become terrorists most often when an atrocity is committed close to home for them, and they wish to retaliate against whoever did that.
|
Motivation for terrorism = to achieve goals through force or terrorism, or driven to terrorism by loss of someone or something, etc.
|
|
|
Who was Abu Bakr?
|
Oldest friend of Muhammad. Succeeded Muhammad as Caliph when he died. Reconverted many of the Beduin tribes who had left Islam during the Ridda. Began to attack Persians and Byzantines in order to expand Muslim Influence.
|
|
|
|
Who was Omar?
|
Continued to Expand Islam, taking Jerusalem in 636. He gave money to the families of soldiers. Assassinated by the Persians.
|
|
|
|
Who was Uthman?
|
Didn’t really do anything special.
|
|
|
|
Who was Ali?
|
Adopted son of Muhammad. Challenged for Caliphate by Muawiya. Lost. Followers of Ali and Ali’s children as Caliph are Shiites.
|
|
|
|
Who was Muawiya?
|
After Ali came to the position of Caliph, began a war against him for the title. Muawiya won, and began the Ummayad Caliphate. Followers of Muawiya as Caliph are Sunni Muslims.
|
|
|
|
Who was Harun al-Rashid?
|
Best known Caliph of the Abbasid Caliphate. Connected all Muslims into one Empire and got rid of labels for non-arab Muslims. Essentially equalized all Muslims.
|
|
|
|
Who was Al-Hakim?
|
Burned down the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, site where Jesus was buried. Because of this, Pope Urban II declared the first Crusade.
|
|
|
|
Who was Pope Urban II?
|
Declared the first Crusade in response to the burning of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
|
|
|
|
Who was Mahmoud of Ghazna?
|
Turkish Sultan who led annual raids into the Sind part of the Indus Valley beginning in 997
|
|
|
|
Who was Tamerlane?
|
Leader of the Tamerlane Empire, his Capitol was at Samarkand. He led two invasions into India to get money in 1398, crippling the Dehli Sultanate. Known as Timur the Lame.
|
|
|
|
Who was Babur?
|
Founder of the Mughal Empire in India, Used Bows, Arrows and Cannon to defeat the elephants of the Dehli Sultan.
|
|
|
|
Who was Akbar the Great?
|
Golden age of the Mughals – started mansabdari system, rearranged taxes to ten year average, took enemy sons as ‘cadets.’ He also is remembered for starting the “Divine Faith,” a new religion that combined aspects of sufi mysticism, Judaism and Christianity. However, it was not very popular. Akbar was assassinated by his son, Jahangir
|
|
|
|
Who was Jahangir?
|
Not a very good ruler Empire was essentially ruled by his wife, Nur Jahan
|
|
|
|
Who was Shah Jahan?
|
Extended the empire south into the deccan plateau, moved the capitol to the newly rebuilt Dehli, Built the Taj Mahal for his wife Muntaj Mahal.
|
|
|
|
Who was Muntaj Mahal?
|
Wife of Shah Jahan. Buried in the Taj Mahal.
|
|
|
|
Who was Aurangzeb?
|
Most powerful of the Mughal Empires, extended the empire even further south into the Deccan. However, he was an Islamic fundamentalist (Sunni) persecuting all other religious practices in the Empire.
|
|
|
|
Who was Nanak?
|
Founder of Sikhism, a blend of Islamic and Hindu religions, in India. However, Nanuk and the followers of Sikhism were persecuted.
|
|
|
|
Palestine
|
Israel in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza
From the Palestinian point of view, Israel is an occupying power that encroaches on what little land they have left by building more and more illegal settlements and bypass roads, taking virtually all of their water, bulldozing homes, destroying olive groves, and engaging in endless humiliation rituals at road blocks. During the current occupation by the Israelis, Palestinians experience little to no self-determination and are at the mercy of what they see as capricious acts of state sponsored terror including arbitrary arrests, beatings, killings, curfews and collective punishment. Virtually all Palestinians living in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza have been touched by such acts. Everyone has a brother, father, mother, husband, wife or child that has been killed, wounded, or died for lack of medical care. Everyone knows a family whose home has been demolished or ancient olive grove uprooted. As a result, these are powerful influences in shaping the Palestinian narrative. As Palestinians see it, the Israeli occupation is the root cause of the current conflict. Palestinians want Israel to retreat to 1967 borders, which would leave the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza for a Palestinian state. This, they believe, is the way to peace. Israel's presence in the territories is an issue along which the Israeli narrative splinters. Not all Israelis support the idea of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. Nonetheless, the prevailing perspective generally holds that Israel is simply doing what other counties have done since time immemorial when they captured territory in war. The victors move into it in one fashion or another. To require something else of Israel is to impose a double standard and this carries with it suspicions of anti-Semitism, something about which all Jews must be ever vigilant. From the perspective of Israelis and Jews who do support settlements (or neighborhoods), Israel is not occupying the West Bank and Gaza. Rather it is building communities in Judea and Samaria, land originally granted to the Jews by God as stated in the Torah, or Bible. As for the current military operations in the West Bank and Gaza, the Israeli view is that they are unfortunate but a necessary means of self-defense in the face of unrelenting suicide bombings inside Israel. From this point of view, if the suicide bombings stopped, there could be peace. |
|
|
|
Israel
|
From the Israeli point of view, suicide bombings and other acts of violence inside Israel are a fundamental cause of the current conflict. These attacks on innocent civilians are immoral and tear at the fabric of Israeli society. They have increased at an alarming rate since the signing of the Oslo Peace Accords in 1993. The bombings and the carnage have touched every citizen in Israel. Everyone has a loved one who was killed or seriously injured, or knows someone who does. Everyone feels the terror of anticipating the next explosion and its bloody aftermath. What this tells the Israelis is that the Palestinians have no desire for peace and are bent on wearing Israel down with a war of attrition. Overrunning Israel, pushing her into the sea, is seen as the ultimate aim. To this the Israeli reply is "never."
For Palestinians suicide bombers are freedom fighters. They are martyrs avenging murders and assassinations committed primarily by the IDF. As Palestinians see it they are fighting for their homeland, for justice, against a mighty army with the only means they have available. Although Palestinians are divided on the morality and efficacy of such bombings, generally the motivation for the attacks is understood as the inevitable result of hopelessness about the future and, the feeling that there is nothing left to lose. They cite the endless round of humiliations including: houses being bulldozed; confinement to homes due to curfews that last for weeks on end; family and friends being killed or dying from lack of necessary medical care; their infrastructure reduced to rubble; an economy torn to shreds; relentless harassment by soldiers; and, everyday life irrevocably disrupted, among other injustices. "What is left to do?" |
|
