Silk Road
From wsuwiki
The Silken Thread of Time
The Silk Road is the greatest network of road ever to exist in the world. Extending 5,000 miles over land and sea, the Silk Road provided the greatest spread of ideas and trade throughout the world. Traditions, religions, foods, ideas, and much more traveled throughout the routes daily changing the life’s of everyone who came in contact with it. The Silk Road started in 105 or 115 B.C and flourished until the 15th century, when the Silk Road suddenly came to an end (Franck 1). The reason surrounding this collapse have been researched and debated but still no conclusion has been decided upon. Did multiple large events lead to the collapse of the Silk Road, or was it little factors over time that contributed to the destruction of the Silk Road?
Large factors contributing to the destruction of certain historical event tend to take place at the end of the timeline. Of course this makes sense because some large event took place and thus altered the history of the subject for good. The factor wouldn’t be considered large if something large did not happen because of it, making these factors easier to trace. Many scholars believe that the fall of the Mongol empire caused the destruction of the Silk Road. Other believed this was the sole factor that contributed to the end of the Silk Road. Past scholars didn’t realize that the Mongol empires destruction was due to multiple major events taking place over time. The story of the Silk Road started way back in the 13th Century when the Mongols ruled much of Asia, including Persia and China. Europeans during that time traveled the Silk Road many times exchanging ideas and goods. Trade between everyone was peaceful; this time was called pax mongolica. But the Silk Road itself feed the fire which led later to its destruction. Through the Silk Road, religion traveled like wild fire. Islam in particular during this time clawed its ways through many countries converting everyone in its path. Persia through the Mongols “adopted Islam in about 1295 and, at the same time, threw off all semblance of subservience to the great khan […]” (Franck 252). Many scholars now feel this act was the igniter to the destruction of the Silk Road. During this time many other countries were converting of Islam. Some Scholars believe Europeans and other countries were forced to stop using the road because many had shut down their trade to non Muslims (Khazanov 235). Others believed that there were wars talking place and traveling the routes had become a matter of safety. Most scholars believe in the second idea because historical text has said that “many khans attempted to provide security for merchants and other travelers along the road” (Franck 251). Scholars believe that the drop in bandit raids are attributed to the idea that they could make more money providing security along the road (E.T. 164). Though this particular bit of information may not be true, scholars can only assume this must be the case, and luckily for me provides insight into how the scholars thought. Also assuming these acts were direct causes to the increase in religious terror, one can only link these ideas to the destruction of the Silk Road.
“In 1368 the Mongols were expelled from China, the open highway of the past 100 years was no more” (Franck 259). During this time Buddhism, Islam and Christianity were fighting over who would dominant the Chinese religion. When China broke away from Mongol control, the Silk Roads control also shifted slightly as the Chinese now gained power over their territory. To guard their newly reestablished land the Chinese added to the great wall further closing themselves off to the outside world. But behind those walls the Chinese were warring amongst themselves. Some scholars believe that the “Silk Road was unaffected by the depression taking place in China” (Hedin 227). Sven points to a different affecting factor, the desert. “You have to travel through many fearful barren deserts if you wish to reach China” (Sven 227). These deserts would pose a problem as more towns get destroyed due to religious conflict, thus widening the area of desert. To bring the Silk Road back under control, a central Asian leader called Timur Lang decided to grab control of the Silk Road after the Mongols expulsion from China (Franck 261). Timur wanted “all trans- Asian trade to pass his way along the old lines of the Silk Road” (Franck 261). Even though Persians were not doing any better in trade, Timur decided to march though Persia turning everything to dust and transporting everything of value to a central city named Samarkand. Sven most likely is talking about the old Persia cities destroyed by Timur when he is referring to the increase in desert villages. Timurs attempts to alter the flow of the Silk Road, heavily damaged the Persian influence to the point that when Timur died the Silk Road was left in the hands of local traders who tried their best but failed. After Timur death the once control over the silk road broke and “China itself, under the Ming dynasty that followed the Mongols, once more withdrew behind its defensive ramparts, now more definitely than ever before […]” (Franck 262). The second isolation of the Chinese is a factor that many scholars agree upon when they discuss the destruction of the Silk Road. They feel this event was the defining moment in the destruction of the Silk Road. The road as they say was at the end of its life, and the Chinese only made sure that the Silk Road could ever be rebuilt.
As I look back through history no scholar really says “this single event ended the Silk Road”. Like my dad always says “you should eat the elephant little bits at a time”. The elephant in this case being the road only collapse because of multiple events. All these events could be considered large events in the history of the world. When the events not only affect the Silk Road but the other countries and the world, then these events can be considered worldly. These worldly events may be the reason behind the decline, but some scholars have brought up new ideas that suggest the destruction lies elsewhere besides religion and the fall of the Mongol Empire.
The Silk Road as I have said above was huge, expanding across many countries and connecting them all through trade. Large events like religious expansion may have started the crusade of unfortunate events but where there other smaller events that played a role in the Silk Roads destruction? Deserts as I said above played a role in the destruction of the Silk Road. These deserts provided geographical barriers when traveling. Maintaining the desert camps would prove difficult in times of disagreement between countries. If you think about it everyone has to go through these camps to continue on to China or where ever they are going. If supplies cannot be shipped to these desert checkpoints then the checkpoints cannot be maintained thus making survival hard for those lacking water. If pieces of a puzzle are missing how can it ever be completed. Because major checkpoint along the way were destroyed the Silk Road could not function at full capacity, thus it slowly deteriorated. This trail of events contributing to the destruction is what I mean by small events. As opposed to large events which are felt worldwide and also affect the Silk Road these small events only affect the Silk Road. Deserts could be considered a result of religious disagreement depending on which text you read, but the scholar who believe in this matter only see religion playing a minor role and the increase of deserts had already started before hand.
When it comes to game systems the newer models are the most popular. Everyone forgets momentarily about the old model as they rush around trying to get their hands on this new idea. Silk trade around the 14th century also experienced a similar drop of interest in the silk coming out of China. The Chinese rivalry was none other than the Persians, who had lost profit in the spice trade now turned to silk (E.T. 164). The westerns had better terms with the Persians after religion had settled down and slowly trade was directed away from the Silk Road. “Iran was the most likely source of silk, since the small amount of silk exported by China was monopolized by the Portuguese for the Japanese market. Demand for silk fabric was high in Europe at this time” (Steinmann 68). Trading in general affected the world but the trade of silk in this case only affected a small number of countries. If you looked at a map China is the East and trades with eastern countries and Persia is further west trading with western and central countries. If the Chinese are not trading with the westerns what need is there for a silk road traveling in-between the two countries? Better yet what reason is there to march through deserts when you can sail to your destination?
Sea travel during that time was becoming safer and faster. Marco Polo was ruling the seas and probably influencing many Middle Eastern and Asian countries. “But despite the efforts to divert the trade to a route across the black sea, throughout the fourteenth […] century, the bulk of the silk trade continued to be carried long along the overland routes”( Steinmann 70). If this trend continues, I could predict sea trade overcoming land trade.
Only what is writing down can we assume happened in history. “Evidence to study the Silk Road comes in many and diverse forms. Some read the Chinese documents from Dunhuang, some the Arab geographers, some (but not many) the Khotanese Saka texts […]” (Allsen 731). This statement really made me think how reliable my information is. Most of the assumptions by scholars are based on the evidence provided in books. Depending on which books you read your information may differ substantially. Meaning this could be the cause into why there is no solid agreement between scholars. Religion and Mongols have been believed to be the destructors of the Silk Road. Newer possibilities are arising because of concepts scholars thought to minor too be considered. These new ideas conflict but support the previous ideas that religion and Mongols were the only factors. They support that the event did happen in history but claim those events were nothing more than worldly events. Debate still rages amongst scholars and from my research I have found no answer that I think really provided enough evidence or rather what I feel led to the destruction of the Silk Road.
Notice
All Jstor.org sources are have been cut down due to the great lenght of original URL
Phase Three by Drew Peterson Section 13 GenEd 110
Works Cited
Khazanov, Anatoly. "Muhammad and Jenghiz Khan Compared: The Religious Factor in World
Empire Building." Comparative Studies in Society and History 35.3(1993) 230-237. <www.jstor.org>.
This may not be the best source out there, but it supports the idea that the Mongol Empire affected decline in the Silk Road. This source explains that both the Mongols and Silk Road were declining in power, plus the Mongol relationship with the Chinese was not very good. This Relation forced the Chinese to hide behind their walls, which affected trade with the rest of the world. While this source does not provide much information on the topic, it confirms that the Mongol Theory is shared by more than one person. Anatoly previous works deal nothing with the Silk Road, and considering that this article only mentions the Silk Road I would not base any vital theories off it. As this article is based on religion I would say that this source isn’t the most reliable. It seems that she just mentioned the Silk Road but never really said directly that the Mongol downfall affected the Silk Road. In Conclusion this source provided me evidence that more than one person share the same views concerning the Mongol and their relationship with China
Steinmann K., Linda. "Shah 'Abbas and the Royal Silk Trade 1599-1629." Bulletin (British
Society for Middle Eastern Studies) 14.1(1987) 68-74. <http://www.jstor.org>.
This source will help me answer my questions because it talks about the slow emergence of water transportation and how it affected the countries around it and not to mention the Silk Road. This source talks about how sea trade was becoming cheaper and less dangerous. This is important because reference books have pointed out that sea trade was a leading factor in the destruction of the Silk Road. As this view is shared by other scholars I believe that sea affected the Silk Road. The strengths in this piece are that the source deals a lot with the transport of silk, around the world. This piece is all about the trade of silk and its advances through history. This article was published in a journal that promotes the study about the Middle East. Because trade affects everyone I can’t see any bias thoughts in this work. Over all this was a good source that talked about sea trade, but it was limited on focusing on sea trade and how it affected the Silk Road directly. I could see treads that could have affected the Silk Road over time but the Article does not elaborate on how see trade affected the Silk Road.
Hedin, Sven. The Silk Road. 1st ed. New York: E.P. Dutton & Company,Inc., 1938.
This source helps answer my question because it gives multiple facts that could have led to the decline in the Silk Road. This source tells me that there was a time during the Han dynasty when China was in a period of division and depression. The author says that the “silk road was unaffected” by the depression taking place in China (227). Sven also talks about that while traveling to China you had to pass through many fearful barren deserts (227). These outposts which were just outside the desert soon where left because of the change in the river flow (227). This book talks a lot about the Silk Road but not much about why it was in decline. This source also reads like a story but has a lot of facts. But the information in the book has to be really accurate because he traveled the Silk Road himself and looked through any ancient texts about the Silk Road. This author wrote many article published in geographic journals, and further more they all deal with subjects concerning the Middle East or Asia. Because the author is merely explaining his journey I could say that there could be a certain type of bias taking place. Sven has said he looks at many ancient articles in China that are now in museums. Because the entire collection of article he found where Chinese, there is allows a possibility that the Chinese made themselves the good guys. But considering how he traveled the whole Silk Road I Think that untrue claims would have been proven wrong by other Countries, which may be favor their country. In the end when it comes to history in countries I probably wouldn’t trust the word of just one country. But in this case I feel that author was pretty well rounded in his facts.
Franck, Irene, and David Brownstone. The Silk Road: A History. 1st ed. New York, England:
Facts On File Publication, 1986.
This book is my best source by far. This book focuses entirely on the Silk Road. The book explains how the Silk Road was created and how it progressed over time. It also mentions all the different stances shared by Scholars. But this book clearly states the breakup was due to the Mongol control and turmoil throughout central Asia, which led to the destruction of major check point throughout the Silk Road. As I said before this book was my best source so it has many strengths that help my debate. As this book provides the history of the Silk Road I can’t really see any limitations in using it as a source. The co authors together have written more than fifty reference books from what I can tell, and all deal with important event in history. In this book the authors provided the history of the Silk Road through the eyes of the Persians, Mongols, and Chinese. As the history in this book doesn’t focus on a certain country I believe that this is not biased in any way.
E.T. Rev. of The Silk Road, by Sven Hedin. The Geographical Journal 93.2(1939): 164-165.
<http://www.jstor.org>.
Allsen, Thomas V. Rev. of The Camel's Load in Life and Death: Iconography and Ideology of
Chinese Pottery Figures from Han to Tang and Their Relevance to Trade along the Silk
Routes, Elfriede Regina Knauer. The Journal of Asian Studies 59.3(2000): 730-732. <http://www.jstor.org>.