Which is a reason that Europeans were able to carve out huge empires and ocean away from their homelands?

Matilda Smolij

5/12/2016 20:41:01

Here's my answer to MQ1, I am sure there is a lot more that I can add so please give suggestions.

MQ1: What enabled Europeans to carve out huge empires an ocean away from their homeland?
Europeans were closer to the America’s than the Asian states were.
Winds in the Atlantic ocean were more predictable and steady than those in the Indian Ocean.
Indian Ocean had rich market so Chinese, Indian and Muslim participants were not interested in venturing out into the Americas.
Europe had mapmaking, shipbuilding and navigation techniques which enable control of the Atlantic.
Europeans were motivated because they were aware of their marginal position in the rich world and were determined to gain access.
Europe was recovering from the Plague and the only way to prosper was to acquire more land.
European merchants no longer wanted to rely on Muslim intermediaries.
Desire for grain, sugar, meat and fish.
Driven by rivalries with competing states.
Wanted to spread Christendom.
Minorities wanted a new life.

Audrey Mills

6/12/2016 13:09:54

Hi! I really like your answer, but I would add something about how diseases that the native peoples of the Americas had no immunities to arrived sometimes even before the European settlers themselves, and either greatly weakened or wiped out their populations. Another advantage that the Europeans had was their gunpowder weapons (the native peoples had none at first), and their many domesticated animals that they brought with them. There is also an inherent violent streak in the European culture and mindset, and Christianity is an evangelical religion: both were motivators. Let me know if I forgot anything, or if I missed the point entirely!

Ava and Matilda

5/12/2016 23:00:06

Matilda and I attempted to do the seeking the main point question on page 618:
In what ways did European empires in the Americas resemble their Russian, Chinese, Mughal, and Ottoman counterparts and in what respects were they different?

European Empire and Mughals:
-Both empires were diverse and fragmented and had long been divided into a small states, principalities, tribes, castes, sects, and ethnolinguistic groups.
-The Mughals were very religiously tolerant and generally did not attempt to convert their peoples to one religion, whereas in the Americas Europeans found it necessary to try and convert the Native Americans to Christianity (in the case of Spain).

European Empire and Russians:
-Russian state did not pursue conversion with single-minded intensity that Spanish authorities exercised in Latin America especially if it threatened political or social stability.
-Mixed race off spring were assimilated into culture rather than identifies as distinct communities such as in Latin America.
-Similarly created empires based on conquest except Russians were absorbing territories while the empire was taking shape unlike the British who already had an empire.

European Empire and Ottomans:
-Both had a war-like mindset for conquest.
-Both eventually became very restrictive to women.

European Empire and Chinese:
Similarities: Gained large amounts of land through conquest
Differences: Europeans relied on maritime trade whereas China drew back from maritime voyages.
-Qing dynasty more accepting of other cultures than Europeans
-European economy reliant on slaves, China’s economy was not
-expansion in China necessary to protect empire from surrounding states, while European expansion was to gain resources
-Europeans wanted to convert others to Christianity while the Chinese were more accepting of other cultures

This is what we have so far, but there is still a lot missing. Any suggestions would be great. I hope we are on the right track!

Yasmeen Gaber

6/12/2016 17:48:20

European Empires and Ottomans:

-Ottomans were religiously tolerant in the Balkans, but not in Anatolia, while European Empires were generally intolerant of non-Christians
-Europeans reaped more material riches from the New World than the Ottomans did of Anatolian and Balkan conquered regions

For your last bullet on the Russia comparison, could you have meant that Russia absorbed Russian-speaking areas and lands based on proximity while the Europeans (i.e. British) constructed empires an ocean away?

Also, I'm not sure that you need the first difference under the China comparison, as it basically says the same thing as the last bullet, only the last one is more focused.

Bingham

6/12/2016 13:52:17

This one came up in every class I think.

How did Mughal attitudes and policies toward Hindus change from the time of Akbar to that of Aurangzeb?

Akbar recognized the fundamental reality that Hindus made up a majority of the population of the Mughal Empire. He acted deliberately to accommodate the Hindu majority through actions that included allowing the Hindu princesses that he married to keep their Hindu faith; incorporating a substantial number of Hindus into the political-military elite of the empire; supporting the building of Hindu temples; imposing a policy of toleration; deliberately restraining the more militantly Islamic ulama; removing the special tax on non-Muslims; and promoting a state cult that drew on Islam, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism.

Aurangzeb, on the other hand, reversed Akbar's policy of accommodation by taking actions that included the forbidding of the Hindu practice of sati; banning music and dance at court, as well as banning gambling, drinking, prostitution, and narcotics; destroying some Hindu temples; reimposing the special tax on non-Muslims; and posting “censors of public morals” to large cities to enforce Islamic law.

Yasmeen Gaber

6/12/2016 16:38:15

MQ3: What was the economic foundation of colonial rule in Mexico and Peru? How did it shape the kinds of societies that arose there?

-based on manoral feudalism--hacienda system--which utilized native peoples as de facto serfs--->subjugation of natives/social hierarchy placing natives at the bottom
-based in commercial agriculture and mining-->native peoples "employed" to work land-->fewer African slaves

I feel that I might be too vague and that accounts for the short list...what detail/new information am I missing?

Yasmeen Gaber

6/12/2016 16:40:38

MQ5: What distinguished the British settler colonies of North America from their counterparts in Latin America?

-British came from a more rapidly changing society than Spain
-Protestant vs. Catholic-->less missionary approach, more literacy (Protestants encourage the reading of the Bible)
-more self-governance
-less elaborate bureaucracy
-more numerous: 5 Brits for every 1 Spaniard

What else?

maurielle mcgarvey

6/12/2016 19:16:07

hi !
here's my answer to this question, i have a couple more points included that might be valid? or maybe completely wrong?

-until the 18th century, british colonies remained far less prominent on the world stage
-british settlers came from a more rapidly changing society
-many british settlers sought to escape aspects of an old European society, rather than to recreate it as spanish and portugese colonists did
-british settlers lacked spanish/portugese's colonial patterns of sharp class hierarchies, large rural estates, and dependent laborers due to their easy availability of land and outsider status
-british settlers were more numerous
-brits lacked racial mixing
-britain had less interest in spreading Christianity among the natives; the church and colonial state were less connected
-brits had a greater mass literacy rate
-british settler colonies evolved traditions of local self government more extensively than in latin america; less elaborate bureaucracy

Matilda Smolij

6/12/2016 21:42:23

I also said that many of the British settlers wanted to escape aspects of the European society and the Spanish and Portuguese were attempting to recreate it in some ways. Also, I think the British settlers had less racial mixing? I may be wrong.

Yasmeen Gaber

6/12/2016 16:44:55

MQ2: What large-scale transformations did European empires generate?

-trade: bullions, crops, plants, animals and people (Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade) traded across all four continents-->greater cultural interaction, the end of American isolation from Afro-Eurasia
-large-scale death: natives and African slaves majorly died by disease and hunger
-redefined European agriculture, farming techniques i.e. the potato became a major agricultural staple in Ireland
-established Europe as a world player and dominant society in the Old World

Is there anything that I think I'm saying that I'm really not/do I need to list more detail?

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 20:58:35

I think you can expand on trade a little more by also mentioning how exchange of ideas fueled the Scientific Revolution and the profits that came from trade among colonies served as a base on which Europe's industrial revolution was established.

Jacqui Touchet

6/12/2016 22:05:01

I also think you could add something about how horses affected Native American culture by enabling a more male dominated way of getting food which led to women losing some of their status as food producers. I'm not sure if that is large scale enough or just a random detail though.

maurielle mcgarvey

6/12/2016 19:25:37

what motivated russian empire building ?

-security from raiding pastoral peoples
-eastward expansion across siberia was driven by the demand for animal pelts (soft gold) on the world market
-westward expansion was driven by military rivalries with major powers of the region
-tribute from conquered people

am i missing anything ?

Bingham

6/12/2016 21:24:08

I think you could add that there was a motive to expand Christian Orthodoxy with the expansion of empire.

Niara Pelton

6/12/2016 21:04:53

• MQ3: What was the economic foundation of colonial rule in Mexico and Peru? How did it shape the kinds of societies that arose there?
o Economic foundation
 Commercial agriculture
 Silver and gold mining
o Effect on societies?
 Hacienda system- large estate owners employed native workers, peons, imposing high taxes, paying low wages, and trapping them in debt.
 Social hierarchy incorporating Indians and Africans- Spaniards (male settlers from Spain), Mestizos (mixed race people, half Spaniard half Indian), and Indians (indigenous peoples)

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 21:11:07

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

--Less racial mixing in North America
--The conditions of slavery slightly differed.In North America, slavery could be seen as less harsh than the sugar plantations in Brazil and the Caribbean. Slaves in North America also became self-reproducing.
--In North America, and trace of African descent in a person made them "black," regardless of whatever else was in their DNA. In Brazil, a person who was partially African and partially non-African was considered to be some other mixed-race category. In addition, color was one of multiple criteria determining one's class, and there was more mobility because of chances of "passing" in Brazil.
--In Brazil and the Caribbean, slaves were more likely to be set free by there owners and had more opportunities once they were freed than in North America.

Cassie Bathm

6/12/2016 21:18:25

MQ: In what ways might European empire building in the Americas be understood as a single phenomenon? And in what respects should it be viewed as a set of distinct and separate processes?

Single Phenomenon:
--Europeans shared similar technologies and resources in building their empires
--They extracted similar sources of wealth and resources
--They shared the same diseases as advantages
--They participated in the slave trade

Distinct:

--Settled at different times
--Condition of the Native population differed in each region
--The method of ruling and the type of economy differed depending on the culture of the conquering force

Niara Pelton

6/12/2016 21:18:33

• MQ4: How did the plantation societies of Brazil and the Caribbean differ from those of southern colonies in British North America?
o Caribbean societies produced for export, importing their other necessities
o Sugar plantations
o Massive use of slave labor, and the need to constantly import to replenish the slave labor.
o More diverse racial and ethnic makeup
 Brazil’s population largely from African descent
 Racial mixing
o British North American major crops were tobacco, rice, cotton, and indigo
o Less racial mixing and less acceptance of mixed race people in society
o British North America had a sharply defined oversimplified racial system as opposed to Spanish and Portuguese acknowledging a variety of racial groups
o Slavery was less harsh
o Slaves reproduced themselves, therefore there was no need for the constant importation of slaves
o More opportunities for freedom for slaves and mulattoes in South American colonies

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 21:24:14

MQ: How did the Russian Empire transform the life of its conquered people and of the Russian homeland itself?

Conquered people:
--had to take an oath of allegiance
--pay tribute
--experienced pressures to convert to Christianity
--loss of pasture lands and hunting grounds made them dependent on Russian markets
--local people had little immunity to some diseases

Russian Home land:
--Amount of Russians in the empire by comparison drastically decreased
--wealth of empire made Russia much more powerful
--Russia became much more militarized
--As Russia expanded both East and West, questions of identity arose

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 21:25:07

MQ: How did the Russian Empire transform the life of its conquered people and of the Russian homeland itself?

Conquered people:
--had to take an oath of allegiance
--pay tribute
--experienced pressures to convert to Christianity
--loss of pasture lands and hunting grounds made them dependent on Russian markets
--local people had little immunity to some diseases

Russian Home land:
--Amount of Russians in the empire by comparison drastically decreased
--wealth of empire made Russia much more powerful
--Russia became much more militarized
--As Russia expanded both East and West, questions of identity arose

Niara Pelton

6/12/2016 21:25:43

• MQ5: What distinguished the British settler colonies of North America from their counterparts in Latin America?
o North American colonists sought to escape rather than recreate old European societies.
o British settlers were had a bigger population than the Spanish settlers
o North American economy was composed of small independent farms, therefore they weren’t dependent on slaves and slave labor.
o North America had very little racial mixing
o The British colonial state was not intricately connected with the church, as in Latin America
o British colonies used traditions of local self-government

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 21:28:16

MQ: What were the major features of Chinese empire building in the early modern era?

--China's expansion was motivated by concerns of security
--Empire building increased its size territoriality and incorporated a number of non-Chinese people into the empire
--There was a sense of cultural respect, and assimilation to Chinese culture was not necessarily sought

Cassie Barham

6/12/2016 21:30:37

MQ: IN what ways was the Ottoman Empire important for Europe in the early modern era?

--was a trading partner
--was a military threat
--was considered impressive to some European intellectuals because of its religious tolerance

Yasmeen Gaber

6/12/2016 22:19:33

This probably goes under military threat, but it's also important to mention that the Ottoman Empire brought an end to Byzantine Christendom (you know, the fall of Constantinople) and secured Anatolia and some of the Balkans as part of the Islamic world rather than to Western Christendom.

Niara Pelton

6/12/2016 21:46:11

• MQ7: How did the Russian Empire transform the life of its conquered people and of the Russian homeland itself?
o Siberia and steppes
 Devastating disease epidemics inflicted upon the local Siberian peoples
 Had to pay a tribute, yasak, in furs
 Social pressure and incentives for Christian conversion
 Muslims forced to resettle
 Russian settlers overwhelming Siberian native peoples, reducing their populations
 Economies of Russian agricultural settlers was undermined due to the loss of hunting grounds and pasturelands
 Local people became dependent on Russian markets
 Pastoralists encouraged to abandon their nomadic lifestyles
 Mix raced Siberian and Russian peoples
 Peoples of Siberia and the steppes incorporated into the state and Russified, adopting Russian language, converting to Christianity, and abandoning their hunting and herding lifestyles.
o Russia
 Russian domination in population decreased
 Extensive Westernization as they expanded towards the Western frontiers
 Became and Asian power
 Evolved into a highly militarized state

Niara Pelton

6/12/2016 21:59:54

• MQ6: What motivated Russian empire building?
o South and Eastward expansion was motivated by the need for security and protection from nomadic peoples
o Expansion into Siberia was motivated by the economic potential of the fir from that reason
o Defending Russian borders
o Enhancing the power of the Russian state
o Spreading Christianity and enlightenment to the uncivilized people outside the empire.

Leave a Reply.

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.

Archives

April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
May 2016


Categories

All



RSS Feed