Unit 1
------

Document 1:
Matthew is recounting, 80 years after the fact, in the classical age,
Jesus's lesson against the overaccumulation of wealth. This seems to
warn against mercantile activity.

Document 2:
The Qur'an, including parts of the bible, encourages merchants but
qualifies it with "honest, truthful."
At the time silk road was developing (??)

Document 3:
Christian British Merchant.
Treats being a merchant as a valuable occupation.
Doesn't contradict "rich man cannot enter heaven."
    Sold all possessions and gave to poor---
    means that he wants to look good in eyes of god.
    Believes that making money for the lord is godly.
At the time, Britons were exploring mkts.
Reginald, contemporary likely wanted to portray in good light to (king? church?)

Document 4:
Muslim scholar degrades merchant class.
Audience unclear ( Universal History = People at large? ).
Probably writing on behalf of ruler/king, so portraying elite well.
Probably also wants to increase own stature.
But does not say cannot exist because the unvirtuous working class
    works on behalf of the elite

Document 5:
Seljuqs took over from Abbasids which were weakening.
Silk clothing requires trade.
Many luxury goods provided for ruler with attendants.
Manuscript = inform people of power/wealth of ruler.
Indirectly portrays Muslim (regional) traders in a good light
because they brought all this wealth at good deals.

Thesis:
Muslims promoted bartering and the gain of individual money because
caliphs and their servants wanted to obtain wealth for the advancement
of their people, unlike Christians who don't trust merchants readily,
and require work beyond their basic responsibilities (charity, poverty).

Possible Groups:
Christian/Muslim.
Merchants are good inherently.
Merchants are bad inherently.
Merchants are good only if they serve god.
Elite
Religious/Lower Class

Unit 2
------

Document 1:
Marco Polo is describing trade goods which are transported to these
cities or manufactured there. Mongol Silk Road allowed travel of these
goods easily as well as travel of the info (Historical Context).
Talking well about Chinese area to wider (Oceania, ME) audience that 
being under Mongol rule is good (already controlled but less central)
Religious tolerance is high.

Document 2:
Christian church currently controls the majority of Europe.
Mongols control rest of world. Mongols tolerate Christians well w/o
religious intent of their own.
Mongols made Silk road more safe and became wealthy based on it.

Document 3:
Brutal warriors well-feared, the Mongols demanded tributes of thinkers.
Brought together many people because they didn't have internal agrarian
culture (nomad warriors).
Probably attempting to portray Mongols in a negative light because
Russians were very anti-Mongol.

Document 4:
Religious tolerances happened around the world. This document, though,
probably wants to present Khanate well (calls Khan World Conqueror and
is in position of power).
Silver balish = development of education and institution.

Document 5:
Power against city walls demonstrated here.
A single ruling organization means that Khanate was far above common
folk in terms of weaponry => strong merchant unity.

Thesis:
The Mongols united many thinkers of the classical world to develop
sciences and arts; they reduced trade barriers significantly which
built up the merchant class, luxury goods, and production centres.
However, unlike other large empires (like Abbassid), the Mongols were
very religiously tolerant, which propagated to more secular traditions
in China region.

Groups:
Silk road safety => wealth develpoment.
Unite thinkers, etc.
Secular tradition/religious tolerance.