Zach87's blog

I really enjoyed this class, as I thought I would before selecting it. This class was not for any academic or requirement filling purpose. It was a last ditch attempt to take some interesting classes before I graduate this May. Being in Stern I have not had the opportunity to take many interesting or engaging classes. The reason I knew this class would be interesting is because the subject matter is so fascinating. Travel is an integral and often confounding part of life. There is this innate desire within most people to travel. What I like to call, “the grass is always greener on the other side” attitude is very prevalent among all of us. There are so many different possible motives for travel: monetary, social, professional, discovery and so on. Some of the greatest and most memorable movies are the so called “road trip” movies. Where the main character and usually a couple of friends hop in a car and head off. Sometimes there is a defined goal, get white castle burgers at any cost; sometimes it is more loosely defined, find something better than their current situation. There is something within us that is drawn to and can relate to this type of movie. While studying the readings, I tried to understand them from the point of view of these philosophical questions. Why did Columbus devote his life to discovering other lands? Why did Ibn Batuttu decide to leave his small town for a life of travel without any resources or friends to travel with? Sometimes these answers were pretty clear and straight forward, other times not so much. However, overall reading these works and the discussion of them helped me to come to a somewhat better understanding of travel and the reasons behind it. It seems to me from time to time we all feel that need to escape and have a natural curiosity for what else there is in the world. As we mature from childhood to adulthood we begin to question what we know and want to know more about what we don’t know. There is an intense desire to learn more about the world and understand where other cultures are coming from. I think most of us agree that this can be done in only a very limited way through a textbook. This is why so many of us turn to travel. Just as we begin to open up to travel as we enter college age, we begin to turn away from it as we get older and the realities of life set in. Jobs, families and other responsibilities happen. This makes it harder and harder to travel as one gets older. That’s why I hope to do the after graduation obligatory one month of travel this summer with a few friends. I know I will be thinking of some of these works as I embark on my travels, so for this I am glad I took this class.

JerryReading this play made me think deeply about the element of betrayal as it relates to travel. This theme of betrayal was present in some of the previous readings and seems to be a theme among travel stories. What is it about travel that lays the seeds for rebellion, betrayal and deceit? Seemingly best of friends and allies can travel and quickly become enemies. Is it the stress of travel? Does travel cause, especially in earlier times, cause such levels of stress and anxiety that it drives people to turn on each other? On a much less extreme level than these famous travel stories, I know my family fought more when we went on vacation. And certainly these were not intended to be stressful quests! I do think it is a common thing for families to be at each others throats when they travel to a foreign place. What is it that causes this? On a similar note, I know best of friends who went to study abroad together and came back much less than best friends and sometimes even enemies. Perhaps this is because when people go abroad for an extended period of time, they see and experience things that change their perspectives. Their outlooks on life change and maybe their friends outlook doesn’t in the same way? In the case of some of our readings, it seems the betrayal was largely caused by greed. They were traveling for some gain, money, power or respect. Often one traveler would decide they wanted all the glory or riches for oneself and had no interest in sharing. But on a personal level, it makes sense to me how friends could come to hate each other on a epic journey. If you are stuck on a boat with someone for months on end, with very little resources or comforts, I can see how tension can form. This begs the question, is it a good idea to travel with friends?

ColumbusColumbus’s seemingly lack of anxiety and concern fascinates me. He was sailing off the side of the earth for all he knew, however he sailed on unconcerned. It is very interesting how he managed the fears of his crew. He lied to them in order to prevent panic. He was very aware of the possibility of mutiny, given what some considered a suicide mission.

I like the day by day account Columbus gives us. The sense of time is much better than some of the other travel literature we have read so far. The use of birds is fascinating. I wasn’t aware that one of the best ways to find land was to follow the direction of the birds. The speed of Columbus travel seems painfully slow compared to the speeds we are accustomed to. It must have been very boring and tedious. However, I can see how the discovery of the unknown at the same time could be exhilarating. Columbus does not betray his emotions often, mostly talking about the technicalities of his voyage.

It is somewhat disturbing to read in detail about Columbus conquering and taking advantage of the people he encounters. He has a very cavalier attitude towards it all, like it is his right to do as he pleases. It is also interesting how willing many of the natives he encounters are willing to assist him. They are very trustworthy and don’t seem all that suspicious of this foreign man asking where all their gold is located. It is amusing when Columbus makes a snide remark about not trusting the native’s perception of riches, as even a small amount of gold seems so valuable to them.

I am constantly struck about how amazingly entitled Columbus is. When you read a brief description in a textbook it is much less powerful than these first hand accounts by Columbus. He looks at everything through the lens of how he and his mother country can profit off of it. The contrast in motives of a traveler like Ibn Battuta or Marco Polo versus Columbus are very stark. Ibn Battuta and Marco Polo were mainly searching for faith, knowledge and fulfillment. While Columbus is strictly searching for riches and power. Reading these accounts make me appreciate the latter two much more.

Ancient Travel What immediately strikes me about Ibn Batuta’s works is the contrast between his story telling and some of the other works we have read. Ibn Battuta seems much more in touch with his emotional side. Right off the bat he describes how he burst out in tears early in his travels from the persistent feelings of loneliness. He shares with us his dreams and desires. On the other hand, some seemingly emotional occurrences he glosses over. He doesn’t spend too much time on his weddings and failed marriages. It is very interesting what he chooses to elaborate on and what he chooses to gloss over. Perhaps this is a product of the cultures he lived in. The whole idea of travel during those times versus modern travel is fascinating to me. Would I have been more likely to travel then or today.? On the one hand there is the pure level of difficulty associated with travel in those times versus today. If I was to travel then I would not be able to communicate readily with family and friends from home. I would have a much higher chance of death along my travels. The physical and emotional tolls were clearly much greater. On the other hand, perhaps the rewards were much greater. You got to see a world outside your own you knew very little or nothing about. Where as today, we can learn about any place in the world in less than five minutes by skimming a wikipedia page. This is not to say that reading a wikipedia page is the same as actually traveling to a far off destination, but there is definitely a fantastical aspect of ancient travels that is absent from modern travel. You can see things you have never heard of or ever dreamed of. You could meet whole societies of people you never knew existed. You could be worshipped or admired places you went, just because you were so different. Although, this could work against you, as you could also get punished by death for being so radically different. The thrills and unknown associated with ancient travel just can’t compare to today’s travel. Today travel is more and more about vacation and getting away. Ancient travel seemed to really be about learning and expanding your horizons. Ancient travel was definitely more along the lines of study abroad. However, you didn’t get to do it with a group of peers and a very structured itinerary. I wonder how many Ibn Batutas and Marco Polos there were that we simply don’t know about. It almost seems by chance that Ibn Battuta decided to have his travels transcribed. Basically his friend suggested it and he agreed it wasn’t a bad idea. There must be some world travelers out there who didn’t record their stories. You have to wonder what fantastical things they saw that we will never know about. You have to wonder about all the stories and rituals that have been lost to history forever. I guess this is what makes Ibn Battuta and Marco Polo so famous, they bring to us so much knowledge that we would not have if it wasn’t for them. It is fascinating to read, but at the same time it really makes me wonder of all the lost stories out there.

EntourageMarco Polo must have been a really likable guy. Kublai Khan really liked Marco Polo. He liked him so much, he helped him travel the world and gave him insider access to his royal lifestyle. Marco Polo was basically Kublai Khan’s Turtle. He entertained Kublai Khan so Khan let him follow him around most of the time.

Something that really fascinated me in Marco Polo’s description of Kublai Khan was his astute understanding of politics. He, like any successful modern leader, was a shrewd politician. Sure, Kublai Khan believed in Christianity more than all the other religions. However, he was smart enough to know that if he admitted this he would be taking a huge political risk. Thus, he kept quiet and laughed at the suggestion that he do so. He pretended to be something he wasn’t. It is amazing the power religion played during those times. Kublai Khan was a man who could take a father’s daughter with no protest. He could crush any slight upheaval or rebellion easily, even when most of his army was at war. But if he was to choose an unpopular religion, it would have been political suicide and his power would have disappeared. For instance, we may have passed many barriers when it comes to holding higher office, such as race and gender. However, I don’t think we have come close to getting over the religion litmus test for higher office. Our leaders are expected to be religious. If you are an atheist or agnostic you have no chance of being president in this country, at least if you admit it. And you better know what your religious leaders are preaching, or it could cost you your political career, as almost happened with Obama and his infamous Revered. Kublai Khan understood all this and he didn’t even have to win general elections. Kublai Khan was also a shrewd leader because he knew how to spot talent. Those who succeeded with a 1,000 man army, got promoted to a 100,000 man army. It seems Kublai Khan surrounded himself with talented people and not necessarily just friends he owed favors to. A modern example of this would be President Obama with his “Team of rivals”. He is surrounding himself with experienced people such as Hillary Clinton, but not necessarily his best friends. On the other hand, when a leader surrounds themselves with old buddies, we see what can happen ala Bush.

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

What intrigues me most about The Histories is the style it is written in. Everything is very quick and rapid fire. Herodotus seems to know a little about a lot. There isn’t too much time spent on any one particular subject. Herodotus bounces from subject to subject seemingly without much concern for developing a thesis. I think this style is partly what makes his accounts so entertaining. Reading through his writings, it is hard too get bored because some new fact or subject is constantly being introduced.

I also like the way Herodotus approaches his accounts, basically stating: “Look, here is what I heard in my travels. I can’t swear if it is true or not, but deal with it.” In today’s world we often focus too much on obtaining absolute proof and are too quick to accuse someone of lying. I would argue we scare people off from sharing their experiences or things they have heard because they don’t have 100% proof that it is true. This obsession with proof can hurt the pursuit of knowledge and learning.

I appreciate Herodotus’ approach and attitude. He shares everything he saw and heard without hesitancy. Others can worry about verifying later, which they certainly did. Based on my limited research it seems like lots of people went out of their way to disprove some of Herodotus accounts.

It is interesting the emphasis all the cultures he visited placed on animals. They seemed to have a specific use for every type of animal. The use wasn’t always the most practical either, often serving some spiritual purpose or higher being. I find it disturbing some of the things they did to animals in the name of religion or superstitions. However, I can understand how some of these rituals can develop. In a time of relative uncertainty and without a limited understanding of science it makes sense that civilizations looked for comfort in rituals.

Water seems to be a big theme in Herodotus writings. Clearly the placement of water was very important in shaping civilizations in that period of history. It seemed water was the source of both life and death, much as today. However, we have better mechanisms to deal with water than they did during those times. It seems like many of the civilizations did not have a full grasp on how to manage water and were subject to the whims of nature.

Overall, I very much enjoyed Herodotus writings. He has a very easy to read style and way of reporting things. I guess this is what made him the first successful historian, as he is often credited as being, although heatedly debated at times.