World History Homework Six Answers - Student Thirteen

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Michelle F

1. Identify the time period of the Middle Ages, and when the Crusades occurred within that period.

The Middle Ages was the time period from A.D. 500-1500. The Crusades occurred at several different intervals during this time period.
1st Crusade A.D. 1097-99
2nd Crusade A.D. 1147-49
3rd Crusade A.D.1189-92
4th Crusade (never reached the Holy Lands) 1202-04
Children’s Crusade 1212

Correct, may use as a model!

2. Who conquered the largest contiguous region in world history, and when?

Genghis Khan conquered the largest region from 1206-1227


3. Which of these modern countries were able to establish nation-states in the Middle Ages, and which were not: Germany, France, England and Italy?

France and England were successful in their attempts to establishing nation-states, while Germany and Italy failed and were subject to in-fighting.

Correct again!

4. Pick your favorite medieval architecture and describe something about it.

I like the stained glass windows of Gothic architecture. The skill that was shown in making them beautiful and durable (to have lasted until now, they must have been durable), is impressive.


5. Pick one of the African kingdoms described in the lecture, and explain it.

The Kingdom of Kongo contained Congo and Angola. They were a Bantu-speaking society and existed from A.D. 1000-1500s, when the Portuguese invaded Africa and introduced Catholicism.


6. Pick your favorite aspect of Scholasticism, and describe something about it, or your view of it.

I think the “proofs” of Gods existence sounded rather like circular reasoning. I think that it was a wise idea to bring logic and reasoning into the Church, but I think the existence of God is something that is difficult to understand, and even harder to “prove”. Attempting to “prove” something that cannot be proven sets the reasoner up for ridicule and makes him look like a fool. Another downfall of Scholasticism is that it is humans doing the reasoning, and, being imperfect, are liable to make mistakes. All things considered, however, I think it was a move the Church should have made years before.

Well done. You present both sides of the issue well, and state your view with clarity and reason.

7. Current events: What was the biggest effect of the Crusades in the Middle Ages, and why do people avoid using the term "Crusade" today?

It was your typical Middle Ages war: long periods of fighting, lots of bloodshed on both sides, sometimes it was hard to tell which side was the winner, and it was done in the name of religion. But there was one key twist. This war had been ordered by the Church authorities; it wasn’t just rulers deciding to use their religion as an excuse to expand their territory. It was something like Vietnam; nations engaged in war, yet unwilling to do what it took to win. It was something that was out of character for how Christians were supposed to behave, and it is something that would never be considered today. If any religious group stated their intention to retake the land that their religion was founded in, land that now belonged to another nation, the civilized world would be up in arms, appalled at the thought! The determination shown by the Crusaders was something else that would be foreign to today’s society. If we can’t get what we want instantly, it must not be worth having.

Excellent analysis!

H3. Do you think Joan of Arc had a calling from God?

Nothing is impossible; therefore it must be possible. But was it probable? How would a young girl know how to lead an army, and have the guts to do it? And how would she convince the ruler, and army commander that she was capable of doing so? She obviously was successful, but how? I think that without help from God, she would have been stopped. If it was not in God’s plan, He could have prevented it. I would say yes, she was called by God.


H4. Several young teenagers played a very influential role in history in this lecture. Is that to be encouraged today, or is it impossible now?

I think that our society has greatly lessened the importance of teenagers in the social experiment of adolescence. Instead of being required to grow up, and shoulder responsibilities, we are allowed, almost expected to be irresponsible, and are not encouraged to be influential. I believe that teenagers are going to be adults, and to not allow them to participate in history, to bar them from being influential, is to shoot society in the foot. We are going to be part of history; we are going to influence it. The best course of action would be to encourage and guide this, as opposed to continuing the failed experiment of adolescence.

Fantastic answer, may use as a model.

H7. Are nation-states needed to guard against future plagues?

No. I think that the next destructive disease is going to be man-made. (Most of the natural ones have a cure). I think it would probably be administered/caused by a government agency. Giving a government the power to protect a nation from such a disaster would give them too much power over the disaster. We know that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That power could be twisted, and the very agency we would be trusting to save us, could condemn us. Any sort of government/nation-state protection against a plague would have to be secured against corruption and infiltration. But I don’t believe they are needed, because I don’t believe they would do any good.

Terrific answer! Will use as a model.
Fantastic work again. One of the best homework papers in the class. 100/100. Congratulations!--Andy Schlafly 17:39, 15 March 2009 (EDT)