# data[].attributes.body
Group B

Ellie, Ella, Mia, Emma

We believe the fall of Qin was inevitable due to his imposed order during his reign. His choices isolated the largest portions of his population that were important to his rule and support. He angered the lords, the rich, and the land owners by imposing taxes and removing their noble appointments. He angered the scholars by burning of books and ideas that weren't of 'practical' subjects, even going as far as to execute roughly 460 of them. He then angered the largest population of all, the peasants, by forced-labor gangs that undoubtedly caused street violence. By the end, no one was left who would fall outside of these groups, and no one within these groups would support him.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that both state power and trade networks played a role in Ancient East Asia, but I think that trade networks had significantly more impact. Imported goods allowed each group/nation to evolve faster and further than ever before. The Qin Unification was important of course, but they were just rules that could be changed over time. If you were to import good such as weapons or tools, you could advance your society in ways not possible in the past.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that in Ancient East Asia that trade networks like the silk roads and the Indian ocean routes mattered more. They mattered more because it created connection with other countries. Even if the countries or empires had a state power, they would still flourish in trade with other nations. Trading to other nations allows the flow of knowledge, cultures, religions, and other things. State power can take away those things like Qin did. In all trade routes mattered more.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that trade was valued more because it was the trade of not only goods but ideas

# data[].attributes.body
Which mattered more between Qin unification and trade networks like the Silk Road and Indian Ocean. In my opinion, I would say that the trade networks mattered more in Ancient East Asia. The trade networks mattered more not only for trading other goods but also the blending of cultures. This in turn not only provided other nations goods but other amenities as well. Such as, the blending of cultures. Which includes but is not limited to religions, languages, foods, laws, philosophies, and more. In addition to that, the trade networks brought on so much more and benefitted the regions and civilizations in numerous ways.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on everything we've learned today, and what I learned from reading my category question, I can say that trade is most likely the most important thing. The Silk road helped connect a lot of the countries in Asia, not just India and parts of Egypt but China. In our sources it talks about how China was connect to the outside world for the first time with these routes and then talks about how religion openly traveled with these trails.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that trade networks are the most important. This is because trade networks provide goods and services to the people more often than state powers. Not all state powers are self-serving, but the needs of the people are sometimes considered an optional goal. While a trades entire goal is for both people to get what they need, often times avoiding a 'zero sum' outcome. Trades help the lower class to obtain food, goods, knowledge and the ability to travel. State powers can enforce rules that can protect their people, but it can also be unhelpful and only enforced because of military power.

# data[].attributes.headline
Legalist Policies: Confucianism v. Daoism

# data[].attributes.subject
Legalist Policies: Confucianism v. Daoism

# data[].attributes.body
Names: Evan VanReese, Elliot Funk, James Dunnigan, Emily Haug

Document A is Confucian because it values the many over the one and capital punishment is a part of the criminal justice structure. Consequently, in alignment with legalism principles.

Document D is also Confucian due to its valuing of the larger society and executions as a component of its conjecture.

Document B is Daoist because it denies rivalry and promotes abstinence in regard to individual actions.

Document C is an example of Daoism because it is a critique of over-governance and emphasizes natural order.

# data[].attributes.body
The Silk Road facilitated the spread of trade and promoted cultural diffusion from many variables. The Silk Road facilitated trading commodities used for practical means, but also facilitated the trade of luxurious goods. Luxury goods may not have been needed for the life of a civilization itself, but they reminded the people of the joys of living. This promoted cultural diffusion through different civilizations by sharing these different expressions of the joys of life. The Silk Roads were convenient for trade; established routes, of course, were preferable over people taking their chances in the wilderness. From document 1, we can visually see new items being introduced into new areas; from document 2, we learn how people of different religions traveled the routes of the Silk Road. We also learn that silk is more commonly given than received, showing that China certainly had a significant "cultural output."

Credits: Logan, Mika, Ray, Sophia.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that trade was of more importance to Ancient East Asia because of the amount of materials and resources being traded amongst regions, like China and India, to produce new or improve already-made items.

# data[].attributes.body
Trade networks of greater importance than state power because of longevity. State power was often volatile when extended beyond a singular familial dynasty. Succession was detrimental to many of the early civilizations. Contrarily, trade networks, aside from their globalizing benefits (transfer of goods, intellect, etc.), is not confined to state power and exists even in the absence of solidified state power. This attribute makes trade networks more important because they are more universally applicable. Whether or not state power led to greater temporary prosperity is insignificant in comparison with perpetual trade potential.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe trade networks mattered more than state power. trade networks allowed for alliances to be formed from continued trade. Trade would allow for civilizations to make up for the power that a strong state would give them and allow for more power through trade by acquiring cultures, religions and coveted items. These are commodities that cannot be obtained through state power, and state power can fail through the fall of the state, while trade will remain no matter the circumstances.

# data[].attributes.body
I would say that trade networks mattered the most in Ancient East Asia because it helped connect different countries by trading goods and sometimes established different religions.

# data[].attributes.body
I think trade networks were more important than trade networks because it expanded the abilities of the state and was not reliant on the size of the state. Firstly, the diversification of a state's resources due to trade networks allowed it more power. For example, the spread of gun powder gave states better weapons and, as a result, more power. Secondly, trade still occurred regardless of a state's size. Conclusively, trade networks impact a state, not the other way around. Thus, it was made more important.