Oh, you want a full review of everything you need to know about Unit 3 of AP World History? You know I got you, boo. Now, we're in the time period 1450 to 1750, and it's all about land-based empires, their expansion, their administration, and their belief systems. So if you're ready to get them brain cows milked, let's get to it.
Okay, first let's define our terms. What is a land-based empire? Well, it's an empire whose power comes from the extent of its territorial holdings. So it's an empire that's land-based.
That's about the easiest thing you're going to have to learn in this unit, so let's take the win where we can. And the big idea to get here is that in the time period 1450 to 1750, land-based empires were exp- expanding, getting bigger, getting tight in their sweatpants after a big meal, you get it. And in order to compare how this expansion occurred, I need to introduce you to four of them, and these are the four you ha- have to know.
First is the Ottoman Empire. And hey, here's a little AP World exam hack. If there ever comes a time when you have no idea what an answer is or what to write for an LEQ or whatever, just go with the Ottoman Empire.
They're massively important during this unit. They're just going to keep showing up throughout the course. Okay, that tip is free, so put it in your pocket and do what you will with it.
But before we get cozy with the Ottomans, I should mention that this video is part of a larger resource called the AP World History Heimler Review Guide. And if you're feeling saucy, you should check it out in the link below. It's got whole unit review videos like this one that are not here on YouTube.
It's got note guides to follow along, practice questions, practice... practice exams, and answer keys for all of them. It is the fastest way to study for your class and your exam in May, so have a look. And now back to the Ottomans. This empire was founded in the 14th century, and it was a wee little thing, but spoiler alert they expanded real fast.
And there were a lot of reasons they were able to do that, but chief among them was the adoption of gunpowder weapons. Recall that this magnificent powder had been invented in China, but it had spread via trading routes to many parts of Afro-Eurasia. So with these giant boomsticks, the Ottomans ended up controlling much of southwestern Europe and Anatolia by the beginning of the 15th century. Later, the Islamic Ottomans scored a massive win by conquering Constantinople in 1453 and renaming it to Istanbul. And they did it, of course, with gunpowder weapons.
But you know, the Ottomans sacked plenty of other cities with their giant cannons, so what made this one so special? Well, Constantinople was the beating heart of the remainder of the once great Roman Empire, and once it fell to the Ottomans, the door was opened to continue their expansion into Eastern Europe. And once they moseyed into Eastern Europe, the Ottomans encountered another resource to bulk up their military, namely Christians. You see, as the Ottomans conquered state after state in the Balkans, they had a policy of enslaving many of the Christians that they found there.
And once those Christians were in their custody, they converted them to Islam and turned the best of the best into an elite fighting force known as the Janissaries. And so add the Janissaries to the rest of the Ottoman army, and they had all they needed to expand their empire like mad until by 1750 it looked like this. Okay, now the second empire you need to know is the Safavid Empire in the Middle East.
It was founded at the beginning of the 16th century and, just like the Ottomans, began as a wee little thing. But they didn't stay wee for long because under the leadership of Shah Ismail, the Safavids raided and conquered neighboring territories and began to expand rapidly. And how did they do it?
No, it's gunpowder. Don't be crazy. So because this empire lacked any natural defensive barriers like mountains, a later ruler named Shah Abbas got to work building up the Safavid military, which included the adoption of gunpowder weapons. And just like in the Ottoman Empire, Safavid cavalry were not interested in learning to shoot guns from horses, and so Shah Abbas established an enslaved army, which were, again, like the Ottomans, Christians from conquered regions, in this case, the Caucasus region. They were highly trained and became full-time soldiers in the service of the Shah and were no small contributor to the Safavid's ability to expand.
So there's a lot of... similarities between these two Muslim empires. Humble beginnings, rapid expansion with gunpowder, elite enslaved military forces, and they were both Muslim. But, big but, massive but, there is one very significant difference between these two empires that's going to cause a lot of problems.
Yes, they were both Muslim, but they were not the same kind of Muslim. The Ottomans were Sunni Muslims, while the Safavids were Shia Muslims. And the short version of the difference between them is this. Sunnis believed that the rightful successor of Muhammad could be anyone spiritually fit for the office, while the Shia believed that only blood relatives of Muhammad were his his legitimate successors.
And to put an even finer point on it, each branch believed that they were the true representations of Islam, and the other was not. So again, that's going to cause some problems, and we'll get to that later. But for now, let me introduce you to the third empire you need to know, namely the Mughal Empire in South and Central Asia, which was established in the first half of the 16th century.
Now, if you remember back to the last time period, you might be thinking, isn't that where the Delhi Sultanate was located? It's like I'm in your head, right? And that is correct. But in 1526, a guy by the name of Babur rose to leadership in Central Asia and soon led campaigns against the Delhi Sultanate and wiped it off the map. And that began the period of Mughal rule in South Asia.
And just like the other empires, the Mughal Empire expanded rapidly through a growing military that used what? Gunpowder weapons. And then years later, under the leadership of Babur's grandson, Akbar, the empire was expanded even further until it looked like this.
Now the Mughals were Muslim, and if you remember, so was the Delhi Sultanate. And the rulers of the Delhi Sultanate didn't have much luck spreading Islam throughout India, because most of the population refused to turn away from Hinduism. And that was, uh, tense for a very long time. But under Akbar, things did get a little better.
Yes, Muslims still rule. ruled over a majority of Hindu people, but Akbar was unusual for his time in that he was tolerant of all kinds of belief systems in his empire. And so, because of this tolerance and Akbar's masterful administration of the empire, the Mughals became the most prosperous empire of the 16th century.
And then finally, let me introduce you to the last empire you need to know, namely the Qing Dynasty, otherwise known as the Manchu Empire. Now remember that in the last period, the Mongols went ahead and took over all of China's crown. and establish the Wan Dynasty.
But after that fell, we get the rise of the Ming Dynasty, and the most important thing to know about them is that they were ethnically Han, which is to say Chinese. And that was a big deal because they got those pesky foreign Mongols out, and then they created a new dynasty with their own people. Like, no more outsiders are going to rule us.
Ah, crap, here come the Manchu. Which is to say, outsiders who are going to set up a new dynasty. So in the first half of the 17th century, the Ming Dynasty was getting weak, and so the Manchu people of the north came in and set up the Qing Dynasty. And from that point, the Qing Dynasty beefed up its military and led conquests of expansion using what?
I know you know. That's right, gunpowder weapons. Okay, now let's compare these four empires by way of summary.
All of them were land-based, all of them expanded rapidly during this period, all of them used gunpowder to achieve that expansion. Both the Qing and the Mughal were ethnically different from their subjects, and while both the Safavids and the Ottomans were Muslim, one was Shia while the other was Sunni. Now, if you're paying attention, it should be obvious that if all these empires were expanding like mad and waving guns in everybody's faces, then it was inevitable that they would clash with one another, and you know, they did. And there are lots of examples.
examples I can give you, but you only need to know one, so let's consider the Safavid-Mughal conflict. Now, this was a series of wars fought over territory in what is today Afghanistan. And before the war started, the Mughals controlled this territory, but while they were off fighting elsewhere, the Safavids were like, yeah, we'll take that.
And so the Mughals doubled back to drive the Safavids from their territory, but ultimately they were unable to do it. And what made this conflict even more bitter was the religious element. Remember that the Safavids were Shia Muslims and the Mughals were Sunni.
And so each empire, believing that they themselves were the true representatives of Islam, fought to establish full dominance over this region. region. Even so, after the series of wars ended, there was really no clear victory.
Okay, now the next big idea we need to come to terms with is exactly how rulers administered those giant honking land-based empires. I mean, territorial expansion and blowing people up is great and all, but if you don't know how to run your empire, it's going to fall apart quick, fast, and in a hurry. So really what we're trying to understand is how rulers legitimized and consolidated their power. And hey, I'm not just throwing around five dollar words for funsies. You will absolutely see these terms on your exam.
So. But what do they mean? Well, when we talk about how rulers legitimized power, we're talking about the methods a ruler uses to establish their authority.
And when we talk about how rulers consolidated their power, we're talking about the methods they used to transfer power from other groups to themselves. So there are essentially four major ways that rulers of land-based empires legitimized and consolidated their power. First was through the formation of large bureaucracies.
And in case you forgot, a bureaucracy includes the thousands of government officials that ensure laws are kept throughout the empire. So, you know, if the emperor got the runs after eating some old nacho meat and decided that- nachos are now illegal in my empire, well, how is he going to ensure that nobody in his giant honking empire is eating nachos? He's not going to be knocking on everyone's door just to make sure, so that's what the bureaucracy is for.
Thousands and tens of thousands of the emperor's officials spread out to make sure that Randy isn't crushing a plate of nachos. Hey, is that cheese on your chin? Alright, kill him.
Anyway, for rulers who wanted to maintain control of their empires, bureaucracies were the way to go. For example, the Ottomans used the Devshirme system to staff their bureaucracy with highly trained individuals. This went hand in hand with their whole invade the Balkans and enslave Christians thing because many of those Christians converted to Islam.
were sent to Istanbul for education and training. And afterward, the top performers were appointed to elite positions in the Ottoman bureaucracy, and because of their extensive education and training, not only were they wise administrators, but they were also loyal to the Sultan. Okay, now the second way rulers administered their empires was through the development of military Now, I mentioned the Janissaries and the Ottoman Empire earlier, and that's a good example.
And then the third way rulers administered their empires is actually a collection of three related items, religious ideas, art, and monumental architecture. And I'll give you examples of each from various empires across the world, starting in Europe. And during this period, European monarchs began to gain more and more power, and one way they did it was through the religious belief known as the Divine Right of Kings.
Essentially this just means that monarchs perpetuated the idea that they were God's representative on Earth. Like, if I'm the king, it's because Jesus himself put me here. So y'all Fall in line. In the Christian populations, this had a powerful way of legitimizing the authority of their ruler. Now, in terms of using art, let's visit the Qing Dynasty, and let me introduce you to Emperor Kangxi.
Now, remember that the Qing were Manchu, not Han, like the rest of the Chinese people over which they ruled. So, how does an emperor legit- legitimize power over people who think he's an outsider. Well, Kangxi went ahead and hung imperial portraits of himself all around the city. And if you look closely, you can see that he's surrounded by books, which suggests Confucian wisdom. Or to put it another way, these portraits were Kangxi's PR campaign to convince the Han population that he was...
in fact a legitimate Chinese ruler in the line of ancient Chinese dynasties. Okay, now in terms of using monumental architecture, let's head over to the Americas and check in with the Inca. Here you see the Sun Temple of Cusco, and in its prime the walls were covered with gold sheets and the courtyards were filled with golden statues. Now within this temple, high religious festivals were held, and since Inca rulers were associated with the gods, magnificent buildings like this had a way of legitimizing power. And then one way architecture was used to consolidate power was apparent in the Palace of Versailles, built by Louis XIV in France.
And yeah, this huge structure had a way of communicating who was in charge of the government. namely this guy, but Louis also used it to transfer power to himself. He did it by requiring the French nobility to live in the palace for at least part of the year where he could keep an eye on them and where they competed for his attention.
And since prior to this it was the nobility who held most of the power in France, their new living arrangement had a way of transferring power under Louis. Okay, now the fourth way rulers administered their empires was through innovations in tax collection systems. Now, in case you've never ruled an empire yourself, you might not know that empires don't pay for themselves.
So, rulers during this period figured out new ways to extract revenue from their people to pay for their upkeep, and I'll give you three examples. First is the Zamindar system employed by the Mughal Empire. Now, Zamindars were elite landowners who were granted authority to tax peasants living on their land on behalf of the empire. Eventually, the Zamindars grew corrupt and started skimming money off the top to enrich themselves, but nevertheless this was a significant way the Mughals maintained control over their empire and consolidated power under themselves. Second is the Ottoman tax farming system.
Now the Ottomans decided that increasing the size of the bureaucracy just to collect taxes was not for them. So they established the tax farming system, which essentially meant that the right to tax subjects of the empire was awarded to the highest bidder. Whoever won the bidding had the right to collect taxes from a particular group of people, and they charged more than was required and thus enriched themselves. Dirty, but effective. And then third, Aztec rulers used tribute lists to generate revenue for their empire.
Whenever the Aztecs conquered a place, they gave tribute lists filled with the goods that that place was responsible for sending to the imperial seat in tribute. This practice ensured a steady flow of a wide variety of goods to the empire. empire, and communicated who was in charge to those conquered regions.
And finally, the last topic we need to consider is how belief systems both stayed the same and changed during this period. So let's start with Christianity in Europe. By our period, the heart of the Roman Catholic Church in Europe was located in Rome, and it had represented the dominant belief system in Western Europe since the first century.
But despite its enormous power, by our period, the Church had become plagued with corruption. People were buying their way into positions of ecclesiastical power, which was a practice known as simony. And most important for what we're talking about here, the Church began financing its massive building projects. through the sale of indulgences. Essentially, that just means that people were told that they could pay money to get their sins forgiven.
And to be honest, it was pretty effective. Popes had money for days. And now let me introduce you to a Catholic monk named Martin Luther. This guy was seriously troubled by all these practices because they weren't in the Bible.
And even more troubling, he thought that the Catholic Church had misinterpreted scriptural teachings about salvation. So, you know. Not a small thing. So in 1517, Luther made a list of his complaints, known as the 95 Theses, and nailed it to the door of a church in Wittenberg. Now the church, to put it mildly, were not fans of this move.
So they denounced Luther as a heretic and excommunicated him from the church. But thanks to the recent invention of the printing press, Luther kept writing and his ideas spread far and wide throughout Europe. And as more and more people were convinced that Luther was right, a massive split in the church occurred, and this is what we call the Protestant Reformation. So that is a big change in Christianity in Europe.
But you didn't think that the Roman Catholic Church just slinked away and disappeared, did you? Don't be crazy. No, the Catholic Church continued as a dominant expression of Christianity in Europe.
However, to be fair, they did initiate a reformation of their own. In a series of meetings called the Council of Trent, Catholics cleaned up a lot of the corruption that Protestants were complaining about. But they also went ahead and reaffirmed that their doctrine of salvation was just fine, thank you very much, and that represented not only continuity in the faith but also a permanent split between the two branches of the faith. Regardless, both reformations led to significant growth of Christianity in Europe. Okay, second, let's consider Islam, and here we need to examine how political rivalries intensified the Sunni-Shia split.
Now, I already mentioned that Shafi'i Shah Ismail declared the Safavid Empire would adhere to Shia Islam and that put them at odds with other Sunni Muslim empires in this area. But I probably undersold just what a big deal that was. In fact, many people argue that Ismail's decision was among the most significant events in Islamic history. And that's because his decision aggravated and intensified the split between these two branches. And when Ismail made his declaration, he carried it out with ferocity.
Like Sunni Muslims in the empire who resisted were often slaughtered in public. And to take it even further, a division of the Safavid military was developed whose sole responsibility was to ensure that everyone in the Safavid Empire was safe. of a dynasty ritually and regularly cursed the first three caliphs who succeeded Muhammad.
Now, you remember earlier when I said that the beef between these two branches of Islam had a lot to do with who the legitimate successor of Muhammad was? Well, it was those first three that were patently not blood relatives of the Prophet, and so this regular ritual cursing of them was like spitting in the face of Sunni Muslims everywhere. So yeah, the split between the Shia and Sunnis definitely intensified because of political rivalries among Islamic empires. And third, let's consider the development of Sikhism in South Asia. Now, we've been talking an awful lot about the fracturing of belief systems, but here's Here's an example of the blending of religions which resulted in something new.
Essentially Sikhism was a syncretic blend of both Hindu and Islamic doctrines, and that shouldn't surprise you given how long those two systems coexisted in South Asia. Anyway, Sikhism demonstrated continuity with both belief systems by retaining several important doctrines like the belief in one god and the cycle of reincarnation and death. However, it marked a change as well since Sikhism discarded the gender hierarchies of Islam and the caste system in Hinduism. Okay, click here to grab my AP World Heimler Review Guide which has everything you need to get an A in your class and a 5 on your exam in May. And if you need more details about the video, click here.
If you want more detailed help on any of the topics covered, then you can click here to watch my individual topic videos. I'll catch you on the flip-flop. Heimler out.