Postclassical India map

Chinese influence diagram

Harun al-Rashid

I think this article is a good quality source because it seems to be evenly written. It mentions some good aspects of Harun al-Rashid such as his beautiful capital of Baghdad. It also discusses how the empire crumbled under his regime. Some questions I have about Harun is whether he was respected by his subjects and other aspects of his actual rule. The Wikipedia article answers some questions but others arose because of it. To refine a Google search I would add another keyword to my search such as "Harun al-Rashid" + "rule". I believe that Harun's fame comes from the A Thousand and One Nights book that fantasizes Harun al-Rashid. Those stories evolved into more and more fantastic tales that caught the eye of popular culture because of their interesting fantasy aspects. This Wikipedia article adds to it but also warns the reader to take the info cum grano salis because of the mythical features given to Harun al-Rashid.

Benjamin of Tudela's account of Baghdad

While describing Constantinople and Baghdad, I feel that Benjamin of Tudela is unbiased. He praises both cities very much, not seeming to have a preference for either one. He had praised Constantinople for its wealth, diversity, and entertainment. Similarly, Benjamin praises Baghdad for its splendid palaces, and righteous caliphs. Because Benjamin praises both cities fairly equally and doesn't seem to have a favored city, I believe that he is an unbiased source of information.

Islam map

Italicized question pg 350

The Quran's teachings on the relationship between Allah and human beings it similar to the views of Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Christianity. The Quran teaches that if humans do good deeds, such as giving to the poor, then Allah will reward them in a different life. Zoroastrianism also focuses on doing good deeds to please Ahura Mazda. Similarly, Judaism and Christianity emphasize pleasing their respective gods by partaking in good deeds. In addition, the Quran is similar to Judaism and Christianity in that it suggests praying to please their god, unlike the teachings of Zoroastrianism.

Foltz vs. Bentley

I believe that Foltz helps to support Bentley's point that conversion can either happen through voluntary association, assimilation/syncretism, or forces/pressures. Although Foltz cites slightly different reasons for peoples' conversion to Islam, they can all fall under the broader reasons that were put forth by Bentley. For example, Foltz claims that one reason for people to convert to Islam was for "the pursuit of patronage." Because Muslims seemed to have large amounts of power, people were more tempted to convert to take advantage of this increase in influence. Conversion for the purpose of pursuing patronage can most definitely fall under Bentley's reason of voluntary association, as converts are voluntarily associate with the religion. Foltz also cites Muslim dominance of commercial activity as a reason for conversion to Islam. A businessman would see potential benefit in converting to Islam as it would increase contact with other Muslim businessman. This reason can also fall under Bentley's reason of voluntary association, which seems to enforce that every religious conversion that occurs can fit into the three categories originally presented by Bentley.

Views of Constantinople

Ibn Battuta -
I think that Ibn's view of Constantinople is neutral because he talks about both positive and negative aspects of the city. Ibn mentions good parts of Constantinople such as its enormous size, its strong wall, and its great Hagia Sophia church. However, he also talks about negative aspects of the city. He says there is a river that is dirty and that the marketplaces and the churches are filthy. I think I can trust this source because it seems for the most part to be listing facts and it doesn't seem bias as he is emphasizing positive and negative aspects.

Benjamin of Tudela -
Benjamin's view is completely positive and only focuses on the good aspects of Constantinople. He mentions that it is a prosperous city, with lots of trade going on that occurs nowhere else in the world. Benjamin repeatedly emphasizes the wealth and beauty of the city. He states that the wealth of Constantinople is unmatched and the inhabitants are well-fed and well-read. I would have doubts about fully trusting this source because he seems to be overly positive about Constantinople. He mentions no negative things about the city.

Liudprand of Cremona -
Liudprand seems to abhor Constantinople. He states that he was rudely and disrespectfully greeted by the emperor's brother. Liudprand then goes on to say that the royalty figure he was taken to was hideous, making him love and venerate his own emperors even more. He also states that the citizens are scandalous and dishonest. This view cannot be trusted because he is writing to his own emperor who might be offended if he flaunts the positive aspects of the city.