Map of India

Huran al-Rashid

I believe that the Wikipedia page of the Harun al-Rashid is a good one because there are many facts and it also gives the myths and stories of his life that could be taken into consideration. The page is pretty organized and its categorized into sections (Life and Anecdote). There is a lot of information in the life section and its well written in my eyes because it was chronological and it gave insight to his parents and their influence on him. I don't believe that this article is biased at all, but there are some stories and myths that could be not true. There are many facts, though, that do seem to be true. They could be open to be argued, but it seems highly unlikely to me.
I do have some questions about the stories he is in, but other than that, the article answers all the basic questions I had and added some more info to back up the answers. I rather like this article. I would go to the books referenced in the article or I would use the ever famous Google. I would filter my search by added more key terms to his name, like if I wanted to search his mother, I would put in " Huran al-Rashid's mother" and that would narrow down the search. To narrow it ever further, I could say "Huran al-Rashid's mother's influence" to find more about her influence on Huran's life.
The stories written about him add a spark to feed people's imaginations. There could be more stories written or different stories written that give different aspects and achievements that people find interesting. He is so prevalent in pop cultures because his life style can altered to fit into such poems and books, and the books about him from his time and the stories about him make him popular to be put into other works. His fame comes form his stories, in my opinion, and the Wikipedia tempers the fame he has becasue it's just general information about him and then mentions the books and the books are where his fame lies in.

Benjamin of Tudela

From reading the descriptions of Constantinople and Bagdad by Benjamin of Tudela, I believe that he seems unbiased. For the description of Bagdad, he talks about it in an almost indifferent view. He points out things that would work for strategies to overtake the city and it’s merely facts. He talks about the caliph and his role, the wealth of the city, and the location of the city. The same for Constantinople, although he talks about the location, the amount of business in the city, the wealth, and explains the city in the same manner as how he explained Bagdad, which makes me believe that Benjamin of Tudela is a reliable source to read and use information from.

The Expansion of Islam Map

Comparing the Quran to Christianity, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism

The Quran’s teachings on the relationship between Allah and humans are similar, but also different from the views of Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians. In Christianity and Zoroastrianism, the idea of a judgment day is there and the same principle is in the Quran, however, in the Quran, Allah is the only one who can pass the soul’s judgment. Allah can also get a little moody and angry at his people if they disobey him, which appears in Judaism and Christianity. Also, Allah is the only God ever mentioned in the Quran, it’s a monotheistic religion, which is just like Christianity and Judaism, too. Zoroastrianism has Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu. Islam also had one main prophet, which was Muhammad. In Christianity there was Jesus, and then in Zoroastrianism, there was Zoroaster. Each one of them founded their own religion and then tried to spread the word about it.  

The Islamization of the Silk Road

Foltz does prove Bentley’s point in the writing of The Islamization of the Silk Road, it actually says so before the selection, and it’s also in the text. Foltz has the three main themes in his wiring: voluntary association, syncretion, and pressure. An example of voluntary association of Islam would be Muhammad preaching to the people in Mecca about the divine voices of God he heard and told his followers God’s plan, which was all voluntarily and no one was forced to believe in his practice. An example of syncretion that happened was the principle of mawla, which was to have a new believe be paired with an older, experienced follower who would essentially be the newbie’s mentor and guide to the new religion. The pressure to join Islam could be about the marriage laws (a non-Muslim can marry a Muslim, but the children have to be brought up like Muslims) and business (merchants got better deals if they were Muslims since so many people were Muslims). I’m sure there is a better example for pressure, but I got confused when Foltz started talking about the rulers and the changing of capitals and keeping track of what religion was what.

Constantinople

1. I think the author of this reading is viewing Constantinople in a negative way. He describes the city in a way that makes me think that was trying to conquer it or destroy it. He described the churches as "too filthy and mean." The decription of the bazar itself wasn't positive; it was overall negative. When he described the church of Hagia Sofia, he seemed neutral because he didn't seem to exactly like it, but he didn't hate it either. I think this particular reading isn;t truthful because it seems too opinionated, but it does seem like a primary source so it has to be credible to some degree.

2. Benjamin of Tudela gives a distinct impression to the reader that his experience and thoughts about Constantinople are positive. He talks about the riches and all of the items found. He even mentions that Constantinople is a unique city: "It is a busy city and merchants come to it from every country by sea or land, and there is none like it in the world except Baghdad, the great city of Islam." He also seems awed about the entertainment that the emperor gives the people and that no other city in the world has that. I think that i can count this article as an accurate piece of history because it seems truthful and he's pointing out the good things of the city and not all of the day. He isn't trying to make the city seem like anything else but what he saw. He might have exaggerated some things, but I can't be too sure.

3. Liudprand of Cremona didn't like Constantinople at all. Apparently, his emperor wasn't given the correct respect and was called a king instead of an emperor: "He called you not emperor, which is Basileus in his tongue, but insultingly Rex, which is king in ours. I told him that the thing meant was the same." You can also tell that he doesn't like Constantinople because he insults their king by making him seem like an ugly and evil man. I'm not sure if this article is credible or not because Constantinople might have been awful and mean to the people who went there for royal business, and then if you were just visiting it could have been a pleasant experience.