Yuan dynasty

The Yuan dynasty the Great Yuan, was the empire or ruling dynasty of China established by Kublai Khan, leader of the Mongolian Borjigin clan. It preceded the Ming dynasty. Although the Mongols had ruled territories including modern-day North China for decades, it was not until 1271 that Kublai Khan proclaimed the dynasty in the traditional Chinese style, the conquest was not complete until 1279 when the Southern Song dynasty was defeated in the Battle of Yamen, his realm was, by this point, isolated from the other Mongol khanates and controlled most of modern-day China and its surrounding areas, including modern Mongolia. It was the first non-Han Chinese dynasty to rule all of China and lasted until 1368 when the Ming dynasty defeated the Yuan forces. Following that, the rebuked Genghisid rulers retreated to their Mongolian homeland and continued to rule as the Northern Yuan dynasty; some of the Mongolian Emperors of the Yuan mastered the Chinese language, while others only used their native language and the'Phags-pa script.

The Yuan dynasty was the khanate ruled by the successors of Möngke Khan after the division of the Mongol Empire. In official Chinese histories, the Yuan dynasty bore the Mandate of Heaven; the dynasty was established by Kublai Khan, yet he placed his grandfather Genghis Khan on the imperial records as the official founder of the dynasty as Taizu. In the Proclamation of the Dynastic Name, Kublai announced the name of the new dynasty as Great Yuan and claimed the succession of former Chinese dynasties from the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors to the Tang dynasty. In addition to Emperor of China, Kublai Khan claimed the title of Great Khan, supreme over the other successor khanates: the Chagatai, the Golden Horde, the Ilkhanate; as such, the Yuan was sometimes referred to as the Empire of the Great Khan. However, while the claim of supremacy by the Yuan emperors was at times recognized by the western khans, their subservience was nominal and each continued its own separate development. In 1271, Kublai Khan imposed the name Great Yuan.

"Dà Yuán" is from the clause "大哉乾元" in the Commentaries on the Classic of Changes section regarding the first hexagram Qián. The counterpart in the Mongolian language was Dai Ön Ulus rendered as Ikh Yuan Üls or Yekhe Yuan Ulus. In Mongolian, Dai Ön was used in conjunction with the "Yeke Mongghul Ulus", resulting in ᠳᠠᠢᠦᠨᠶᠡᠬᠡᠮᠣᠩᠭᠣᠯᠦᠯᠦᠰ, meaning "Great Yuan Great Mongol State"; the Yuan dynasty is known by westerners as the "Mongol dynasty" or "Mongol Dynasty of China", similar to the names "Manchu dynasty" or "Manchu Dynasty of China" which were used by westerners for the Qing dynasty. Furthermore, the Yuan is sometimes known as the "Empire of the Great Khan" or "Khanate of the Great Khan", which appeared on some Yuan maps, since Yuan emperors held the nominal title of Great Khan. Both terms can refer to the khanate within the Mongol Empire directly ruled by Great Khans before the actual establishment of the Yuan dynasty by Kublai Khan in 1271. Genghis Khan united the Mongol tribes of the steppes and became Great Khan in 1206.

He and his successors expanded the Mongol empire across Asia. Under the reign of Genghis' third son, Ögedei Khan, the Mongols destroyed the weakened Jin dynasty in 1234, conquering most of northern China. Ögedei offered his nephew Kublai a position in Hebei. Kublai was unable to read Chinese but had several Han teachers attached to him since his early years by his mother Sorghaghtani, he sought the counsel of Chinese Confucian advisers. Möngke Khan succeeded Ögedei's son, Güyük, as Great Khan in 1251, he granted his brother Kublai control over Mongol held territories in China. Kublai built schools for Confucian scholars, issued paper money, revived Chinese rituals, endorsed policies that stimulated agricultural and commercial growth, he adopted as his capital city Kaiping in Inner Mongolia renamed Shangdu. Many Han Chinese and Khitan defected to the Mongols to fight against the Jin. Two Han Chinese leaders, Shi Tianze, Liu Heima, the Khitan Xiao Zhala defected and commanded the 3 Tumens in the Mongol army.

Liu Heima and Shi Tianze served Ogödei Khan. Liu Heima and Shi Tianxiang led armies against Western Xia for the Mongols. There were 4 Han Tumens and 3 Khitan Tumens, with each Tumen consisting of 10,000 troops; the three Khitan Generals Shimobeidier and Zhongxi, the son of Xiaozhacizhizi commanded the three Khitan Tumens and the four Han Generals Zhang Rou, Yan Shi, Shi Tianze, Liu Heima commanded the four Han tumens under Ogödei Khan. Möngke Khan commenced a military campaign against the Chinese Song dynasty in southern China; the Mongol force that invaded southern China was far greater than the force they sent to invade the Middle East in 1256. He died in 1259 without a successor. Kublai returned from fighting the Song in 1260 when he learned that his brother, Ariq Böke, was challenging his claim to the throne. Kublai convened a kurultai in Kaiping. A rival kurultai in Mongolia proclaimed Ariq Böke Great Khan. Kublai depended on the cooperation of his Chinese subjects to ensure that his army received ample resources.

He bolstered his popularity among his subjects by modeling his government on the bureaucracy of traditional Chinese dy

Trent, Germany

Trent is a municipality in the Vorpommern-Rügen district, in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany. Trent lies in the northwest of Muttland on the German Baltic Sea island of Rügen, about 17 kilometres northwest of the town of Bergen auf Rügen; the municipality is bounded in the north by the lagoons of the Wieker Bodden and Breetzer Bodden and in the east by the Neuendorfer Wiek bay. A small part of the parish borders on the village of Freesen on the Udarser Wiek. Trent lies on the old historic trade route, the Herring Road, that ran from Stralsund to the peninsula of Halbinsel Wittow; the following villages belong to Trent: Fischersiedlung, Ganschvitz, Holstenhagen, Libnitz, Tribkevitz, Vaschvitz and Zubzow. Media related to Trent at Wikimedia Commons Official website of Trent on Rügen Island

Unifying Hinduism

Unifying Hinduism: Philosophy and Identity in Indian Intellectual History is a book Andrew J. Nicholson on Indian philosophy, describing the philosophical unification of Hinduism, which it places in the Middle Ages; the book was published in the US in 2010 in hardcover, with a paperback edition appearing in 2014. An Indian hardcover edition was published by Permanent Black in 2011; the book won the 2011 award for Best First Book in the History of Religions from the American Academy of Religion, has been reviewed in numerous professional journals. Unifying Hinduism contains 10 chapters. Much of the book focuses on the thought of Vijnanabhiksu; the book's central concern is to show that Vijnanabhiksu provided a philosophical synthesis of diverse schools of Indian philosophy, thereby providing a philosophical unification of Hinduism long before the British colonial conquest and rule of India. This refutes claims. After an introductory first chapter, the next five chapters focus on Vijñānabhikṣu's philosophical syntheses.

Chapter 2, entitled "An Alternate History of Vedanta", sets the stage by tracing the history of Bhedābheda Vedānta, a comparatively neglected tradition that teaches the "difference and nondifference" of Brahman and the individual self. Vijnanabhikshu's version of this "Difference and Non-Difference" Vedanta is described in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 offers a historical overview of two important non-Vedanta Indian philosophies, the schools of Sāṃkhya and Yoga, focusing on their views of God, documenting that contrary to widespread views of Sāṃkhya as atheistic, most first millennium Sāṃkhya authors were theists. Chapter 5, "Reading Against the Grain of the Samkhyasutras", focuses on a controversial assertion by Vijñānabhikṣu that some Sāṃkhyasūtra verses that explicitly argue against God's existence do not intend to deny God's existence, but represent a “temporary concession” or “bold assertion”. Chapter 6, "Yoga and Liberation", discusses Vijñānabhikṣu's commentary on Patañjali's Yogasūtras, arguing that Vijñānabhikṣu's commentaries on Vedānta, Sāṃkhya, Yoga represent a unified whole.

Chapter 7, "Vedanta and Samkhya in the Orientalist Imagination", discusses how Vijñānabhikṣu was diversely viewed by nineteenth-century European scholars, who in some sense can be understood as "intellectual inheritors of Vijñānabhikṣu’s thought". The next two chapters return to South Asian thought, with Chapter 8 focuses on Indian philosophical doxographies and Chapter 9, "Affirmers and Deniers in Indian History", providing a history and preferred translation of the two terms āstika and nāstika, which are more translated as "orthodox" and "heterodox"; the concluding tenth chapter, "Hindu Unity and the Non-Hindu Other", discusses the timing of the unification of Hindu philosophical schools, suggesting that the stimulus was the presence of Islam. Unifying Hinduism won the 2011 award for Best First Book in the History of Religions from the American Academy of Religion. Reviews have appeared in the Journal of the American Academy of Religion,Religious Studies Review,Sophia,Journal of the American Oriental Society,Journal of Asian Studies,Journal of Hindu Studies,South Asian History and Culture,Literature and Theology,Choice, Metapsychology.

Unifying Hinduism has been discussed in the book Indra's Net. In the Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Christopher Key Chapple wrote that the author "has created a tour-de-force that puts India’s premodern thinkers in conversation with its postmodern intellectuals". In particular, Nicholson has created a masterful analysis of how premodern India conceptualized and reflected upon the issues of unity and plurality. Medieval Hindu thinkers set forth a philosophical position that seeks to articulate a coherent worldview without sacrificing the complexity of India’s divergent views and deities. Nicholson demonstrates that this endeavor was not an artificial product of modernist, revisionist hybridity as asserted by Orientalists but an authentic autochthonous response to an intricate theological context had a reflexive self-awareness and a level of sophistication commensurate and even more inclusively complex than those found in the western Christian and Islamic theological traditions.

In the Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Michael S. Allen wrote that the book won Best First Book "for good reason: lucid and accessible... Nicholson’s book offers an excellent model for South Asianists seeking to engage with the wider field of religious studies", while the book "can be recommended to nonspecialists with interests in religious identity, boundary formation, comparative theology". To Allen, "Nicholson has convincingly shown that a process of unification began well before the British colonial period, extending back several centuries at the least". However, "there is reason to suspect that the beginnings of the process he describes predate the twelfth century.... would in turn call into question the degree to which Islam influenced the process."In Religious Studies Review, Jeffrey D. Long wrote that the book "sets the record straight" regarding the historical emergence Hinduism, "promises to change the scholarly conversation on Hindu identity". Long describes the book as "marvelously clear, meticulously researched, argued", pointing out that the book problematizes or demolishes a number of other oft-repeated truisms of Indian intellectual history, such as that Samkhya was always atheistic, that Advaita is the earliest and truest to the original sources of the systems of Vedanta, that Vijnanabhiksu... was an unrepresen