Ch. 3's Big Question: Do you think that these second-wave empires hold "lessons" for the present, or are contemporary circumstances sufficiently unique as to render the distant past irrelevant?

The second-wave empires have some lessons hold for the present, which is military strategy, brutal leaders don't last long anymore. Also, it occurred in the continent of Eurasia, "empire loomed large in Persian, Mediterranean, and Chinese history, but it played a rather less prominent role in Indian history" (Strayer, 131). This includes the place of First Civilizations in Indus River valley, which embodied in "exquisitely planned cities, such as Harappa but with little evidence of any central political authority" (Strayer, 131). This is the reason why second-wave empires are always not lasting long anymore because Indus Valley had been destroyed and invaded earlier that Aryans played a role to create its new civilization in 1500 B.C.E.

The second-wave empires also used as peasants' and slaves' need either social mobility or a say in policy to overcome the perceived social injustice.

In the subject of second-wave empires, there have several questions for its research interpretation: "Did the Aryans invade suddenly, or did they migrate slowly into the Indus River valley? Were they already there as a part of the Indus Valley populations? Was the civilization largely the work of Aryans, or did it evolve gradually from Indus Valley culture?" (Strayer, 132). Those questions are made from scholars to reach an agreement, based on the conflict between Indus Valley civilizations and Aryans. Those questions are helpful for me to reference what I read about as I am learning about the vital role of the second-wave empires.