In Praise of Athenian Democracy

     Pericles describes Athenian democracy as an example institution that rivals their neighbors' forms of government. He notes that Athens is referred to as having a democracy because of the fact that the administration is in the hands of the majority and not the minority. He goes on to say that due to the fact that Athens has an established democracy, every citizen is treated equally under the law. However, he also acknowledges the fact that if someone does something great or selfless, such as leading a military victory, they will receive rewards. This is not to be confused "as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit." Pericles then adds that wealth is not a factor, and that everyone will be treated equally regardless of their social status. That being said, poverty should not be an excuse to avoid serving Athens, since everyone is equal under the law and therefore should contribute equally to serving Athens and the community. Pericles continues by stating that while people are allowed to do or think what they wish in the privacy of their homes, doing so in public will result in punishment as it is a violation and a disrespect of the law and the authorities.
     Pericles's argument for democracy draws from both fundamental principles such as human equality and from practical benefits that derive from such as system of government. Pericles first focuses on the importance of every citizen having their basic human rights. He then goes on to list the benefits of having a democratic society, such as the strength of the military and the copious amount of leisure time.
     Pericles believes that democracy produces ideal and civilized citizens. He notes that they have a lot of leisure time, and they take advantage and encourage that time. He then goes on to talk about the Athenian military and, although the youth spend much of their time training for battle, they still live at ease. Also, they are an open nation that values knowledge and does not rely on trickery but on "our own hearts and hands." Therefore, the Athenian society is an easygoing society, yet they are prepared for battle whenever they are called to do so. Pericles finishes off by stating that the Athenians are simple people in a simple society. He states that since everyone does whatever they are supposed to do to serve Athens, then they are able to live in peace and simplicity. However, if someone decides to serve their own household before the community, that is when the problems arise. Critics may have responded to Pericles's arguments by stating that they just lost the Peloponnesian War against Sparta, therefore Pericles does not know what he is talking about.
     Even though Athens lost the Peloponnesian War, I think Pericles's argument still has some validity to it, in terms of the other aspects of Athenian lifestyle besides its military. In terms of the military, I feel as if they may want to rethink some of their strategies and be less open. To me, it seems as if Pericles seems to be very arrogant, which distorts some of the descriptions he has of Athenian lifestyle. This arrogance could be due to the fact that Athens led the battle against the Persian army and won, prompting Pericles to believe that Athens was indestructible, resulting in him describing Athens in a more glorious light.

Chapter 2: First Civilizations

     I love how Strayer included the example in the beginning of the chapter of the Colorado woman asking on the internet for the best place to escape civilization. I never noticed the irony of that mindset before. I know countless individuals, myself included, who complain about society and long  to revert back to nature, when society is one of the most noteworthy accomplishments in human history. Maybe it just shows how humans in general are unsatisfied with what they have and take things for granted. Countless religions emphasize the desire to be one with nature and escape the toxicity of modern society.
     Another interesting point that was brought up was the fact that these first civilizations all started separately, but at around the same time as well. Not only that, but some of the aspects of these civilizations were similar to one another, such as how they all established around a river or water source. However, at what point does a chiefdom or village become a town or city? This question was interesting because what guidelines and what is the blueprint that we adhere to? Is there a certain amount of people that is required to be a town or a city? Or is it based on how much the society has, in terms of technological advances and political rulers? Referring back to the rise of the first civilizations, most, if not all, of these civilizations abandoned much of the lifestyle that rendered them egalitarian. With the rise of civilizations, women's roles, massive inequalities, state oppression, slavery, large-scale warfare, and diseases ran rampant. Although different from the modern view, slavery had its start when civilizations conquered other civilizations, and were not determined by skin color. In addition, a social hierarchy was established, with the ruling and upper class taking advantage of the lower classes, especially the slaves which consisted mostly of prisoners of war. Since these kings and rulers were regarded as god-sent, most people either did not want to challenge them, or worshiped them, regardless of how they were being treated. Something that I want to point out was when he was talking about what an outsider's perspective of visiting one of these civilizations would be like, Strayer continually used the pronoun "she." This threw me off and garnered my attention at the same time, since everyone is so accustomed to seeing the pronoun "he" being used when not referring to someone in particular. This only reinforces Strayer's position on females and how much he is against the dominant male Eurocentric viewpoint, which I love.

Nisa: The Life and Words of an !Kung Woman

     While Nisa lived in more modern times, I still feel as if her account is still valid for understanding the life of much earlier Paleolithic people since it is better than nothing at all. There is evidence that she has had contact with a wider world as she mentions that she is not a village person and that she is someone who does not own anything and that certain people say that she is poor. Obviously, people from her own community would not say that she is poor since they are in the same position as she is. Therefore, she must have had contact with others who are more established than she is financially than she is. Plus, she is being interviewed by an American anthropologist.
     From what she is describing, the woman does not have a say in choosing her husband and whether or not she gets married. She notes that she did not love her husband and probably did not really know him that well, which points to the fact that they had arranged marriages. Eventually, she did fall in love with him after a while, but compared to contemporary society, that is very backwards. Usually, we would fall in love with someone, then decide to marry that person. Also, her ideas on sex was that "A man has sex with you. Yes, that's what a man does," (Strayer 48). Additionally, she says "I... gave myself to him, gave and gave. We lay with each other and my breasts were very large. I was becoming a woman," (Strayer 49). From what I can gather, Nisa must have been very young when she was married, probably before puberty. Maybe women in general all married young. In terms of sex, Nisa notes that she had multiple affairs, as did her fourth husband. She states "But I did have lovers and so did he.... Because affairs... is something that even people from long ago knew," (Strayer 49). She justifies this by saying that if she had more than one man, then she would receive multiple gifts. Therefore, only having one man would not be satisfying. In modern times, this would be seen with much disapproval.
     Nisa believes that God is stingy and his "heart is truly far from people," (Strayer 49). She goes on to say that God's ways are foul; first he grants her with a child, then takes it away from her and leaves her completely alone and in pain. She finishes it off by stating "That's the way it is. God is the one who destroys. It isn't people who do it. It is God himself," (Strayer 49). In terms of the curing rituals that she took part in, Nisa describes n/um and what is does to cure. Personally, I think she is describing a sort of drug, maybe even alcohol. Interestingly, she notes that sometimes n/um works and sometimes it doesn't, and that's because God "doesn't always want a sick person to get better," (Strayer 50).
     Overall, I get the vibe that Nisa's assessment of San life seems to be critical. Throughout the different topics she discusses in her interview, she always has something critical to say: She doesn't like stingy people who don't share what they have, she didn't like her husband at first and was upset when they were married, she denounces and blames God for all the pain and suffering she has felt for the loss of her loved ones, she wasn't a big fan of her fourth husband which prompted her to have multiple lovers, and she didn't like how the healing ritual made her feel.

Agriculture

     I thought it was interesting how the Neolithic or Agricultural Revolution occurred not in one area specifically, but separately and independently from one another throughout the entire world. Also, the fact that there are pieces of evidence that some Paleolithic societies had already demonstrated some knowledge and practiced certain aspects associated with the Agricultural Revolution even before the revolution itself began. It's amazing to me how this revolution all began with the digging stick or hoe. Considering how different the world is and how landscapes and terrains are different in other parts of the world, the fact that they all implemented horticulture, albeit with some variations, is simply astounding. I'd also like to note that while talking about the Fertile Crescent and how that was the area that first experienced a full Agricultural Revolution, Strayer again intentionally refers to the area as Southwest Asia rather than what we call it today: the Middle East. I love how he really tries throughout this book to remove the male Eurocentric point of view that we all hold in modern society and try to see things for what they really are. The Middle East is geographically Southwest Asia, so why do we refer to it as the Middle East? Because Europe is our reference point? That shouldn't be  how it is. Europe isn't the center of the world, so it shouldn't be our reference point.  Another point that Strayer is trying to emphasize is recognizing females as equal counterparts to men. Strayer has constantly tried to drive this point home, and not only does he provide solid, concrete examples to do so, he changes the language and vocabulary that we already know into what it truly is. For example, we've always been taught that the Paleolithic people were hunter-gatherers, with the male Eurocentric view again in place, even though Strayer notes that the females, or gatherers, provided seventy percent of the food and were essentially the breadwiners. Therefore, Strayer refers to the Paleolithic people as GATHERER-hunters, since they were, in fact, gatherers first, hunters second. I think it's great that Strayer is giving credit where credit is due, and if it were the men who had brought in the most amount of food, then Strayer would correctly refer to the male role first. He isnt placing females first constantly and disregarding the men. It just so happens that that's what he has to do since the male writers of history has constantly put men first and disregarded the women. Strayer is just being fair to history and honoring their memory correctly.

     Referring back to the chapter, I thought it was interesting how those in the Americas managed to be part of the Agricultural Revolution, especially since they lacked the domesticated animals native only in Eurasia. Granted, they focused mainly on hunting and fishing and eventually domesticated plants like corn and maize, since they didn't have wild wheat and cereals native exclusively in Eurasia. I think we also have to keep in mind is the fact that the Americas had a north/south orientation, which made it harder for them to spread agricultural practices and adapt to different climatic and vegetation zones. Eurasia, on the other hand, had an east/west orientation, which meant that agricultural practices were able to spread more quickly because they were entering similar environments. Overall, it's amazing to me how the globalization of agriculture spread, albeit slowly and taking at least 10,000 years to complete, from the Fertile Crescent and resulted in the creation of chiefdoms, village societies, and pastoral societies.

The Ways We Are

     Paleolithic societies were largely nomadic, therefore transportation of goods, if they had any surplus goods, was impossible. Also, these groups were very involved in personal relationships since each group consisted of only about twenty-five to fifty people. Because of these conditions, Paleolithic societies were very much egalitarian. Therefore, these people were free of the injustices and tyranny associated with a more civilized society. Although everyone was treated equally since there were no specialized jobs or leaders, men took on the role of hunters while women were the gatherers. This resulted in the idea of masculinity involving the killing of large animals. While the idea of a life free of the injustices of the modern world may seem like a utopia, these Paleolithic societies were not always harmonious. Men often engaged in bloody combat for a woman, while many of the men publicly beat their wives. Additionally, executions of disruptive individuals were common, proving that these societies had a problem with violence.

     Contrary to the impoverished view that modern people have on them, the hunter-gatherers actually had fewer working hours since they only worked to meet their material needs, thus leading to more leisure time. Granted, their life expectancy was low and were at the mercy of Mother Nature. However, the Paleolithic also substantially altered the environment around them, causing the landscape around them to change and led to the extinction of multiple species.

     While hard to pin down, there is evidence pointing to the fact that Paleolithic people did have a form of spiritual life removed from their ordinary lives, such as the presence of rock art in caves suggesting that there was a "ceremonial space" for these people. Due to the abundance of Venus figurines found in the areas inhabited by Paleolithic people, scholars believe that they worshiped a higher deity or Great Goddess, and had a cyclical view of time, as opposed to time moving in a straight line towards a goal that later Western civilizations were associated with.

     Over time, humans began to miniaturize their tools, analogous to the miniaturization of electronic components in the modern world. Also, due to the end of the Ice Age, species who were not able to survive the cold climate now flourished in the warmer climates. Because of the higher survival rate, societies were becoming larger and, therefore, had to settle down. This resulted in a gradual increase of inequality due to some individuals being more energetic or just plain lucky to come out on top. Interestingly, these people also created elaborate burial sites, meaning that there must have been a kinship or connection between the people. A separate burial site for dogs suggest that they were the first domesticated animal. One of the most amazing achievements of the Paleolithic people is the Gobekli Tepe, a ceremonial site in southern Turkey. This site involves construction long associated with agricultural societies exclusively, thus prompting speculation of the capabilities of the Paleolithic people.

Out of Africa to the Ends of the Earth: First Migrations

     Evidence has shown that humans first originated from Africa, with the first 150,000 years of human experience being on the continent. Homo Sapiens first emerged in eastern and southern Africa some 200,000 to 250,000 years ago. Although evidence is scarce due to the climate of the region as well as the sheer amount of time since, there is evidence of human activity in the region. These include human remains in areas where no other hominids had traveled before and evidence of technological innovations such as spears and hand axes, which later resulted in hunting and fishing. Grave sites indicate that these humans practiced rituals and other social behaviors. But the greatest feat of all is how these humans branched out of Africa into other parts of the world during the last Ice Age with only stone tools and hunting technology.

     From Africa, humans first migrated through the Middle East, then to Europe, and finally to Asia in the east. In the west, archaeologists have found that due to the colder Ice Age climates, those living in the northern part of Europe were pushed to the south to seek out warmer climates. Additionally, these people left behind cave drawings and paintings depicting their everyday lives and leaving images of human beings. In the east, in what is now Central Europe, Ukraine, and Russia, evidence shows these people developing various new technologies, such as multilayered clothing, pottery, and storage pits. They also lived somewhat underground with mammoth bones and tusks used to build shelter. Interestingly, these Eastern European peoples had numerous carvings of female figurines found all throughout Eurasia, raising questions such as the presence of a network of human communication, was the movement in Eurasia from west to east or vice versa, and what was the status of women in these communities?

     The humans who migrated to Australia came from Indonesia and had access to the boat, a new technological invention. Although Australia's population was limited, they had developed about 250 languages  and collected a wide variety of wild wheat. They also hunted a great amount of large and small animals. Along with their technological simplicity, they developed a new outlook on the world known as Dreamtime, which expressed stories through ceremonies and rock art. Dreamtime was a way for these humans to explain how the world worked and further reinforced how these peoples were part of an interconnected network.

     Due to the difficulty of traveling through Siberia, settlement in the Western Hemisphere occurred years after the settlement in Australia. Historians disagree about the method of transportation into the Americas, with some arguing that it was through the Bering Strait, while others believe it was by sea down the west coast of North America. The Clovis culture was one of the first defined and widespread cultures in America, with archaeological records indicating that Clovis men were hunters of very large mammals, such as mammoths and bison. However, during what scholars believe to be the end of the Ice Age, all traces of the Clovis culture abruptly disappeared. Historians connect this disappearance to the extinction of the mammoth, could mean that the Clovis people either hunted these animals to extinction, or died due to the lack of a food source from the suddenly drier climate. After the end of the Ice Age, various groups of people learned to adapt to their new climates, ultimately forming cities and states.

     The migration in the Pacific was remarkable, since it involved transportation through vast bodies of water. Additionally, the fact that many of these people, both men and women, traveled with plants and animals on board meant that they had intentions of colonizing other parts of the world. This resulted in the expansion of the Austronesian family of languages, making it the most geographically widespread in the world. In many of the settlements, two developments followed. One was the creation of a stratified society with appointed chiefs leading the commoners. The other was the rapid extinction of many of the region's animal species.

Yay I'm done!

Yay - I'm done!