When considering the question of the Prophet’s success in the Arab Conquests there are various factors that must be taken into consideration. These factors shape the success, give reason for the rapidity of the spread and illustrate why Arabia was so responsive to his message. Factors such as the state of Arabia and its pagan tribes, recent historic events and the dissatisfaction of the peoples, shape this drastic and historic change in the area. Arabia was in a constant state of war due mainly to the power struggle between the Sasanian and Byzantine empires; the emperors spoke different languages and believed in other religions than their peoples. There was little loyalty and it did not much matter to the folks under which rule they lived. The lack of community, a sense of unity between the various tribes in Arabia and multiple wars were predominant factors that made way for the imminent success of Muhammad in the Arab Conquests. From the time of the Prophet’s first revelation in 610 to the death day of the Prophet in 632, Arabia had undergone a drastic and, for such time limitations, incredible changes.
Starting with the geographical aspects it must be elaborated in context how the state of Arabia, the birthplace of Muhammad, was functioning and what its beliefs were pre-Islam. It must also be mentioned that in comparison to the rest of the Middle East, Arabia was considered fairly primal. It lacked any form of government or state policies as every clan was totally independent and had its own rules and leaders, called Shaykh. Such leaders acted as mediators to disputes and needs of the tribe. The tribes mostly lived off pasturage as opposed to agriculture, excluding the harams that were implemented on travel routes, in oasis and in junctures to neighbouring areas. These served as a common point for economic, social and political trade, as well as worship. Arabia was home to various pagan tribes, including the Banu Hashim into which the prophet was born,...
...Whatwas the importance of Muhammad for the success of the Arabconquests?
The role of Prophet Muhammad, as both a temporal and religious leader was undeniably an important factor in the success of the Arabconquests. These events took place between 622 and 750, first involving the establishment of a new unified polity in the Arabian Peninsula, then leading to a Muslim Empire which stretched from central Asia to North Africa and was one of the largest the world has ever seen. This overwhelming success merits explanation, yet this is difficult to establish with certainty, due to the small number and poor quality of surviving sources. Muhammad’s main role was to provide a unifying influence, both during his lifetime when he united a fragmented pre-Islamic peninsular, and after his death when the message of Islam contributed to the continuing formation of a prosperous Umma. Muhammad’s success arguably provided the platform for successors Abu Bakr and Umar to consolidate the expansion of Arab territory and power. However, other historians such as Crone and Cook have argued that Muhammad’s legacy was fragile, the caliphates such as Abu Bakr and Umar were of far more importance in the Arab...
...years before the effects of Trent had success on a ground roots level as they were implemented, but nevertheless Trent was very important in bringing about the emergence of a stronger Papacy in spiritual terms as well as ensuring that Protestantism could no longer attack the church with the curtailing of church abuses and putting much of the Churchs own house in order. As Euan Cameron put it, Trent saw the Catholic Church drop some of the excesses of the medieval period, affirm the role of the Catholic church and attack the exaggerated parodies of Protestant teaching.The first significant factor about the Council of Trent is that is actually met. It was of the utmost importance to religious development as it actually took place. Even Luther wanted a general Council called to be the arbiters in the dispute regarding his criticisms of the Church- when it finally did he claimed that the remedy comes too late. Similarly Contorinni had wanted a General Council in the 1520s as did Charles V, but Popes had often viewed councils with suspicion as they could be used to check their power. Previously the outcomes of councils in the early fifteenth century had been less than desirable for the authority of the Pope. Such a council of this significance was the Council of Constance in 1414-1418 which had claimed that supreme authority in the Church lay with the General Councils and not the Pope. Equally, a Council...
...Write the question number and give your essay a suitable title. EITHER
 TOTAL SECTION A: 50
SECTION B: LONGER TRANSACTIONAL TEXTS
QUESTION 2 • Respond to ONE of the following transactional writing tasks. • The body of your response should be between 120 and 150 words (approximately 12 – 15 lines). • Write down the number and the heading of the text you have chosen to write. • Pay particular attention to language, register and audience. • You are advised to spend approximately 40 minutes on this section.
It has been suggested that schools should organise a time when Grade 11 or 12 learners could have a week in a workplace of their choice so that they can experience what it is like to be employed. Write a persuasive letter to the Department of education suggesting this and offering reasons for your ideas. OR 2.2 LETTER TO THE PRESS
There has been a great deal in the press recently about bullying in schools. Write a letter to the editor of a local newspaper in which you express your views. OR 2.3 DIALOGUE
You have recently been on a Biology or Geography tour. Write a dialogue between yourself and a close friend in which you tell him/her all about it. NOTE: You must use the dialogue format. OR 2.4 INTERVIEW
Although you have no experience, you have applied to work in a veterinary surgery during the holidays because you have a great love for animals. Write the job interview that...
...To what extent was the League of Nations a success?
In 1914 war broke out in Europe. The war ended in 1918 and Germany solely blamed. The end of the war was signed with the treaty of Versailles. From the war was born the League of Nations; who helped nations resolve disputes peacefully without going to war. When the League was formed, the defeated nations were not invited to join. The League originally had forty-two members. All forty-two members made up the assembly, who met once a year. As incidents occurred more often there was a smaller group of nations who made the council. The council had four permanent members Britain, France, Italy and Japan. From the beginning the league had a major weak point, which was the USA’s refusal to join, ironically it was Woodrow Wilson’s idea to form the League of Nations.
Most of the League’s successes were in the 1920’s, mainly problems to do with territory. In 1921 the League was invited to settle a dispute between Finland and Sweden. In between the countries were the Aaland Islands; both countries claimed the land belonged to them. The league awarded Finland the land, this was a success; moreover a lucky decision. In 1922-3, the League helped Austria and hungry rebuild their economy. The league succeeded in this situation, as it took effective actions quickly....
...for the Communist party because of things like the Gulags which helped industrialise Russia to where it was the most industrialised state at the start of the Second World War. It also helped Stalin gain control of the party by defeating his rivals on the right. On the other hand, collectivisation had many disastrous effects for the Communist Party, such as the great famines that killed millions of people.
Stalin’s personal and political gains were one of the greatest successes for the Communist Party that came from collectivisation. For a start, the idea of collectivisation was in direct opposition to his, now, rivals on the right in Bukharin, Tomsky and Ryhkov. Stalin adopted the idea of rapid industrialisation and getting there by force (the ideas of the left, of whom he just defeated) and in 1928 attacked the right wing. The right had a strong defence but in the Party Congress of 1929, Stalin came out on top and absolutely crushed Bukharin’s NEP and also, removing him, Ryhkov and Tomsky from the Politburo making sure they were no longer a threat. Furthermore, by 1930, over 60% of the farms were collectivised and in the elimination of the Kulaks, the Communist Party were on their way to becoming a true socialist state. However, the work effort by the peasantry on the whole was very small and this can be seen by the private areas of land given to the peasants, because there was a higher percentage of products grown...
...To what extent was the League a success?
The League of Nations was a group setup to maintain peace throughout the world, without using violence etc. and was created during the Paris peace conference although the president of the United States of America Woodrow Wilson originally thought it up.
The Leagues main objectives were to unite all nations in a parliament style meeting to discuss the independence of countries and to protect their borders, to protect the citizen’s lives and working conditions and to completely obliterate war by persuading the various nations to disarm.
From the time that it was created it had many obstacles to overcome such as how ironically even though the League was thought of by America they never joined it, therefore leaving Britain and France to Maintain the League and without the USA the economic sanctions that would be forced on members of the League wouldn’t mean as much due to America being a large economic power not restrained by the League.
Neither Britain nor France were powerful enough to lead the League due to them being weakened during WW1 i.e. they lost many troops from their armies and their economies were weakened and this paired with the fact that the League had no army of its own meant it had to rely solely on one members armies.
In addition to this the Council only met once a year whereas the Assembly met 5 times a year and...
...The First Crusade was cause by conflicts between the Christians and the Muslims for the Holy Land, Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the holy city for all three groups of different faiths; the Christians, the Jews, and the Muslims. For the Christians, Jerusalem was where Jesus was crucified and resurrected. For the Muslim, Jerusalem was the place where Muhammad had ascended to heaven. For the Jews, itwas their God's city and it was the sit of Solomon's temple. The main idea of the First Crusade was good against evil, in which the crusaders were on the good side and the Muslims and Jews on the evil side; after all they were the one who killed Jesus. The two main leaders that called for the First Crusade were Alexius I, emperor of the Byzantine Empire, and Pope Urban II. The First Crusade was an evil act against Muslims and Jews.
Greed and lack of knowledge mostly caused the First Crusade. The riches of the East lured many, mostly because younger sons in families lacked economic opportunity. During this time, the church was very corrupted and had split into an eastern and a western organization. To solve this problem, Urban II looked for something that would join all Christians and that is on e of the reasons why he started the First Crusade. Many people returning from the Holy Land were bringing home stories of the violence being...
...Was the conquest of Mexico justified? Was it the work of men carrying out God's will on Earth? Or was simpler than that? Was it just greed and jealousy, as old as Cain and Abel? This question can be debated to no end by people on opposite ends of the spectrum. The Spaniards were quick to justify their actions as fair, proper, and necessary. However, a more modern, western mind can certainly look at the events and judge them to be unjust, perhaps even evil a likening to the violence and prejudice shown to the American Indians by the United States government centuries later. This essay will discuss various points of view regarding to violence in Sixteenth Century Mexico and attempt to answer the question of whether or not it was justified.
The first point to take under consideration is why the Spaniards were there in Mexico in the first place. Diego Velasquez, the wealthy governor of Cuba, placed Hernan Cortes in charge of an expedition to Mexico. Velasquez charged Cortes with the authority to represent the Spanish crown and trade with the indigenous people he would encounter (Díaz). Obviously, Cortes had other plans. Whether he had concocted his scheme for the settlement of the lands he would explore when he accepted the position from Velasquez or if it was something he developed over time is unclear and irrelevant. The fact is that he was not given the power...