Questions about the material from weeks 5, 6, and 7 are posted in this discussion board. Each question is in a separate discussion thread.

Each student is to make four posts: two posts answer questions I pose in the discussion threads (due Monday 12/2); two posts reply to a classmates (due Wednesday 12/4). The posts that answer assigned questions are not full essays but contributions to answering parts of the question in least one paragraph. The replies must offer additional information, analysis, perspectives, and/or connections to today or other historical events.

Discussion posts must:

1. Make an historical claim. (Why is a person or event important? How does this material connect to another topic of the class or current events? What was the cause and/or effect of someone or an idea or an event? etc.)

2. Support your claim with factual historical evidence. Using the textbook and/or online resources in the class is required. Including additional outside sources is optional; however, students are to use qualified, professional sources only.

3. Include proper citation of borrowed material (textbook, online lesson resources, outside resources).
a. You must include citation at the end of each sentence (or group of sentences) that contains quotes, paraphrasing, and / or statistics.
b. You must also include correct bibliographic information at the end of your post listing the sources you used, in alphabetic order.
**See “Citation Assistance Resources” in the “Syllabus & Course Information” page of the class website for online help with citation.**

**Students may not add additional discussion threads. Students may ask questions within the discussion threads and answer one another’s questions.**

Discussion Rubric: Maximum Score = 100 Points

*Each discussion is worth 100 points. (Up to 25 points will be assigned to each of the two responses in a discussion for a total of 100 points.) The rubric below is a guide for grading the posts in the discussions. Grading will be based on the quality of the work, not simply minimum word count for each post:

• Responds, meets requirements (minimum 125 word response), analyzes, uses examples from reading, but also opens discussion for further inquiry; offers new ideas, connections, or applications; responds with depth and insight: 20-25 points
• Responds, meets requirements, but also analyzes, uses examples from reading: 15-19 points
• Responds, meets requirements, but informs or simply reports: 12-15 points
• Responds but does not meet requirements: 0-11 points
• reply to this statement
• 
  14. Explain why Japanese unity ended in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and how Japan became reunified. Include in your discussion the tactics used by Japan’s three “great unifiers”: Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Tokugawa Ieyasu. The island nation of Japan, in its relatively young history, has seen changes in leadership and government styles since its start. Throughout the periods of strong rule by emperors, to the military dictatorship of the shoguns, Japan has seen periods of both unity and fracture. An earlier period of Japanese unity ended around 1467 with Ashikaga Takauji’s seizure of power in Kyoto which led to civil war. This fracture was mended over the next few centuries, largely through military strength, by the daimyos Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Tokugawa Ieyasu. By the fourteenth century, the power of the emperors office had grown weaker, as the shogun began to take precedence in leadership. Emperor Go-Daigo attempted to reassert the power of the emperor, but Ashikaga Takauji betrayed him and took power. Ashikaga was not a strong leader however, and instability led the other feudal warlords, or Daimyos, to fight amongst themselves in a civil war to seize power for themselves. These struggles lasted into the 1570s. Since it wasn’t a simple two sided civil war, but instead was fought by various local leaders vying for power. Because of this they needed to form alliances. One of the deciding factors to the first significant unification attempt was the arrival of Portuguese and Spanish merchants and missionaries. One of the most important things they brought to Japan was firearms, which Oda Nobunaga used to take control of the capital and begin the process of reunification. He saw great success until his assassination in 1582. After he was killed, his second-in-command, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, took his place and finished the job of unifying large parts of the island. In an attempt to solidify his hold on power over the other lords, Hideyoshi plunged Japan into a bold attempt to conquer China. They started in Korea, pushing north, but China’s countermeasures stalled their advance and pushed them back. The defeat however did not lead to Hideyoshi’s removal, as he held his coalition together until his death. After he passed, the coalition that he and Nobunaga had built split in two, leading to another civil war. The final reunification of this period came when the eastern coalition, led by Tokugawa Ieyasu, won the civil war and took power in 1603. The rule of Tokugawa Ieyasu led to one of the longest periods of peace and regulation the island had seen, largely because of the fact that they introduced a hereditary shogunate, which meant that for the first time the shogun would pass the title down to their offspring. Tokugawa kept the lords together through strong centralization, and by rewarding loyal lords and watching disloyal ones. Tokugawa also instated what is known as the “Tent Government” in which the shogun officially took greater power than the emperor. He moved the shoguns headquarters to Edo, and forced opposing lords to reside in the capital, holding their families hostage to retain their loyalty. The struggle for power is the driving cause of both the fracturing conflict, and the eventual reunification of the island. Conflict for power led to the two civil wars of this period, and this same conflict allowed Tokugawa Ieyasu to eventually dominate the island. The fuel for these struggles was the introduction of firearms to the island, and the forming of alliances between lords.reply 2.The Mughal Empire’s stylistic influence is displayed when looking at architecture from that time. The mausoleums and mosques capture Mughal distinctive style, and they also show how much value the emperors placed on the city’s landscape. Patterns of World History states that, “nowhere was the Mughal style more in evidence than in the construction of tombs and mausoleums” (Desnoyers, et al. 472). The architecture from the Mughal Empire expresses the amount of power the empire had, how much of their resources were put into making these architectural structures, and how the empire prioritized them. In order to display their power, the Mughal Empire built grand structures. One of the most famous mausoleums from that time is the Taj Mahal. This is a tomb built to hold Shah Jahan’s favorite wife, Mumtaz (Jeffs 43:56-44:00). The Taj Mahal is a large mausoleum, which required much of the empire’s resources and wealth to construct. In order to have these, the emperor must have been someone with a great deal of power. Grand structures, such as the Taj Mahal were built when emperors had the influence to invest his resources into them. Another example is Fatehpur Sikri, which was built during Akbar’s rule. Architecture reflected Mughal’s culture and religion especially (Desnoyers, et al. 463). Mughal architecture blends influence from the Hindus and Muslims as a tribute to their cultural landscape. The grandness and prestige of the architecture was brought to life by the powerful emperors of the Mughal Empire. As mentioned before, the grand architecture did not come at a cheap price. They required much of the empire’s resources in order to be what the emperors envisioned. Patterns of World History states that, “during the high points of Mughal wealth and power, several Mughal emperors built entire cities” (Desnoyers, et al 472). It was not possible for the mausoleums and mosque to exist without the proper funding and materials. This eventually led to improper spending in the empire’s wealth. During the time of the Taj Mahal, it is said that 20% of the empire’s wealth was spent on the elite (Jeffs 46:54-47:00). Emperor Jahan had all the power to drain the empire’s wealth to fund luxuries, while ignoring the poverty that surrounded the elites. Several Mughal emperors prioritized monumental architecture to political efforts. An example is Shah Jahan, who’s political and militaristic power was less spectacular than his cultural power (Desnoyers, et al. 463). The emperors showcased Hindu and Muslim ties in their architectural style, which was tied closely to their governing power. Mosque were some of the most important projects, and many were built near government buildings to show the solidarity between the governing power and religious estates (Desnoyers, et al. 472-473). Placing high priority on building up the empire gave it a distinctive Mughal style. The Mughal Empire was monumental architecture played a large role in its power, resources, and priorities. The architecture serves as a stylistic staple of the Mughal’s culture. It embodies the blend of different religious groups and ethnic groups in the Mughal Empire. To build such monumental mosques, palaces, and mausoleums required for the empire to hold a large influence of power. They also drained much of the empire’s resources. Several emperors prioritized these buildings, and the lower class suffered because of this. The investment placed into these buildings is part of the reason the Mughal Empire eventually met its downfall. Remnants of Mughal Empire are seen with its grand architecture, showing that its influence holds a strong grasp on India’s modern development.