Final Exam

Question: Explain why some scholars have called the Ancient Egyptians a "death obsessed" culture. Do you agree?

Thesis: Ancient Egyptian culture had many beliefs about death and the afterlife, building huge pyramids juts for this purpose, and scholars are right to say that it was a “death obsessed” culture.

Primary Source #1:
“Ho! king Neferkere (Pepi II)! How beautiful is this! How beautiful is this, which thy father Osiris has done for thee ! He has given thee his throne, thou rulest those of the hidden places (the dead), thou leadest their august ones, all the glorious ones follow thee”
Pyramid Texts: The Dead Pharaoh Becomes Osiris (2022-3)
http://www.mircea-eliade.com/from-primitives-to-zen/167.html

Primary Source #2:
“I have not killed.
I have not given the order to kill.
I have not inflicted pain on anyone.
I have not stolen the drink left for the gods in the temples.
I have not stolen the cakes left for the gods in the temples.
I have not stolen the cakes left for the dead in the temples”
Book of the Dead: Chapter 125 The Judgment of the dead
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/BOD125.HTM

Primary Source #3:
“How sad is the descent in the Land of Silence. The wakeful sleeps, he who did not slumber at night lies still forever. The scorners say: The dwelling-place of the inhabitants of the West is deep and dark. It has no door, no window, no light to illuminate it, no north wind to refresh the heart. The sun does not rise there, but they lie every day in darkness. . . . The guardian has been taken away to the land of Infinity.
Those who are in the West are cut off, and their existence is misery, one is loathe to go to join them. One cannot recount one's experiences but one rests in one place of eternity in darkness.”
Of Silence and Darkness
http://www.mircea-eliade.com/from-primitives-to-zen/170.html

Explanation of Argument:
The Egyptian people had a god of the dead, Osiris, and they believed that when the Pharaoh died, he became Osiris. They also believed that when they died, they would be judged by the gods. A lot of their religious beliefs had to do with death, and so scholars are right in saying that they were obsessed with what would happen when they die.

Question: Considering all of the conflict of the first century BCE, was Rome better off as an 'empire' than as a republic?

Thesis: Rome was not better off as an empire because most of the emperors were power-hungry rulers who did actually care for the good of Rome.

Primary Source #1:
“But the successes and reverses of the old Roman people have been recorded by famous historians; and fine intellects were not wanting to describe the times of Augustus, till growing sycophancy scared them away. The histories of Tiberius, Caius (Caligula), Claudius, and Nero, while they were in power, were falsified through terror, and after their death were written under the irritation of a recent hatred.”
Tacitus: The Annals book 1 (109 AD)
http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/ancient/tacitus-annals.txt

Primary Source #2:
“His acts and words were equally cruel, even when he was indulging in relaxation and given up to amusement and feasting. While he was lunching or revelling capital examinations by torture were often made in his presence, and a soldier who was an adept at decapitation cut off the heads of those who were brought from prison.”
Suetonius (69-122 CE): De Vita Caesarum: Caius Caligula (110 CE)
http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/ancient/suetonius-caligula.html

Primary Source #3:
“Nero had the wish---or rather it had always been a fixed purpose of his---to make an end of the whole city in his lifetime. Priam he deemed wonderfully happy in that he had seen Troy perish at the same moment his authority over her ended. Accordingly, Nero sent out by different ways men feigning to be drunk, or engaged in some kind of mischief, and at first had a few fires kindled quietly and in different quarters; people, naturally, were thrown into extreme confusion, not being able to find either the cause of the trouble nor to end it; and meantime met with many strange sights and sounds. They ran about as if distracted, and some rushed one way, some another. In the midst of helping their neighbors, men would learn that their own homes were blazing. Others learned, for the first time, that their property was on fire, by being told it was burned down.”
Dio Cassius: Nero and the Great Fire (64 CE)
http://www.fordham.edu/Halsall/ancient/diocassius-nero1.html

Explanation of Argument:
As a republic, Rome did not have one all-powerful leader, but as an empire it did. Many of the emperors of the first dynasty were not good leaders, having many people put to death and Nero even burning down the city. Therefore, Rome was not better off as an empire, it was better off as a republic.

Question: Describe the importance of the Battle of Tours

Thesis: The Battle of Tours is important because if the Muslims would have been victorious against the Franks, Christianity would have been completely wiped out.

Primary Source #1:
“The Muslims planned to go to Tours to destroy the Church of St. Martin, the city, and the whole country. Then came against them the glorious Prince Charles, at the head of his whole force. He drew up his host, and he fought as fiercely as the hungry wolf falls upon the stag. By the grace of Our Lord, he wrought a great slaughter upon the enemies of Christian faith, so that---as history bears witness---he slew in that battle 300,000 men”
Chronicle of St. Denis (732 AD)
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/732tours.html

Primary Source #2:
“For almost seven days the two armies watched one another, waiting anxiously the moment for joining the struggle. Finally they made ready for combat. And in the shock of the battle the men of the North seemed like North a sea that cannot be moved. Firmly they stood, one close to another, forming as it were a bulwark of ice; and with great blows of their swords they hewed down the Arabs. Drawn up in a band around their chief, the people of the Austrasians carried all before them. Their tireless hands drove their swords down to the breasts [of the foe].”
Isidore of Beja’s Chronicle (732 AD)
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/732tours.html

Primary Source #3:
“Musa being returned to Damascus, the Caliph Abd-el Melek asked of him about his conquests, saying "Now tell me about these Franks---what is their nature?"
"They," replied Musa, "are a folk right numerous, and full of might: brave and impetuous in the attack, but cowardly and craven in event of defeat."”
Arabian Chronicler (732 AD)
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/732tours.html

Explanation of Argument:
The Muslims were favored to win the battle against the Franks, and they were not scared of losing at all. If they would have won, the Christian faith would have been demolished.

Question: Were the Vikings barbarians?

Thesis: The Vikings’ practices were much different than those of today, but they had very organized believes and they were certainly not barbarians.

Primary Source #1:
“Then Bur's sons lifted the level land,
Mithgarth the mighty there they made;
The sun from the south warmed the stones of earth,
And green was the ground with growing leeks.
The sun, the sister of the moon, from the south
Her right hand cast over heaven's rim;
No knowledge she had where her home should be,
The moon knew not what might was his,
The stars knew not where their stations were.”
The Poetic Edda: Voluspo
http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/poe/

Primary Source #2:
“In the beginning he established rulers, and bade them ordain fates with him, and give counsel concerning the planning of the town; that was in the place which is called Ida-field, in the midst of the town. It was their first work to make that court in which their twelve seats stand, and another, the high-seat which Allfather himself has. That house is the best-made of any on earth, and the greatest; without and within, it is all like one piece of gold; men call it Gladsheim”
The Prose Edda: Gylfaginning
http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/pre/pre04.htm

Explanation of Argument:
The Vikings had many religious beliefs. Their actions did not make them barbarians, because they did them solely for their beliefs.