How useful is McNeill's thesis about world history in understanding events through ca.

How useful is McNeill's thesis about world history in understanding events through ca. 100 CE? Is the interaction among societies the best way to conceptualize what is happening or should some other historical process be emphasized? Be sure that your paper addresses his current thinking (i.e. his 1995 thinking, per his thesis) on how world history should be understood. Also factor in Armesto's discussion of the importance of networks in facilitating civilizations' development through "the Axial Age" -- were similar conditions observable in other periods of history (and other places)? Please consider the scope of history up to ca. 100 CE (AD). Your examples should take into account more than two regions of the world, making comparisons where appropriate. Your essay should be organized by a single, coherent, thesis and argument. 1) The essay should be fifteen hundred words (excluding endnotes and bibliography; typed. 2) Notes should be formatted in Chicago Manual of Style format for endnotes/footnotes. (Please use your book A Pocket Guide to Writing in History by Mary Rampola for useful guides to proper citation formatting, how to make a thesis, how to use evidence and incorporate sources, and other effective writing practices for history papers.) 3) You must provide appropriate historical context for your examples. You to make correct use of historical detail presented in those lectures and in the text-book. If you cite a lecture, please note the recording and time (e.g. Introduction to Historiography, 00:45). Be sure to cite McNeill's article when discussing it. 4) Your examples must illustrate your thesis (argument, the point you are trying to make). 5) You should cite sections of Armesto and McNeill that you use. Failure to use relevant sections of Armesto or McNeill will count against your "historical contextualization" score.