Bush, Blair and Iraq :: War on Terrorism

On April 9, 2003 United States tanks stormed through Baghdad, Iraq. U.S. march, then, toppled a giant statue of Iraki dictator Saddam Hussein in central Baghdad, which sent the Iraqi citizens into jubilee (Rampton 1). The Iraq War, or governments coined Operation Iraqi Freedom, had finally arrived after declaring war on March 19, 2003. The U.S.-British coalition to invade Iraq and dethrone Husseins dictatorship has been both a beneficial and detrimental political move. A war that originated because of Husseins reluctance to weapons inspections now has become a messy situation where U.S.-British troops are dying more after major(ip) combat has ceased. President George W. Bush declared this war on terror and, as a result, invaded Iraq on the grounds that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which threatened American and world security. Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed with Bush that the world would be safer when Iraq disarmed its WMDs and pledged British troops fully to the American war effort against terrorism. oer one year after invading Iraq, Hussein is captured, no weapons of mass destruction have been found, disturbing photos of abuse of Iraqi detainees, Dr. Kellys mysterious death, and other nations providing troops are withdrawing?what arises out of all this is a question Was Iraq worth it? Bush and Blair will both argue that even with all the setbacks, Iraqi citizens are part off now than under the Hussein regime, especially with the forthcoming of democracy. Critics dispute Iraq was invaded for financial reasons. Nevertheless, both Bush and Blair have seen their approval rating dip as the war continues, and it may ultimately hurt their reelection chances and prove that Iraq was too costly. Propaganda is a crucial element of a proficient government. However, it must be noned that propaganda is not a tool used for good, rather it is a weapon used to inflict biased views. Hence, propaganda is implemented to all facets of a citizen?s lif e.Ultimately, the goal of propaganda is to sidestep behavior and behavioral patterns external rather than internal public opinion is seek. Voting, buying products, selecting entertainment, joining organizations, displaying symbols, fighting for a cause, donating to an organization, and other forms of action responses are sought from the audiences who are addressed by the persuader and propagandist. (Jossett, 45)To become an ?ideal? citizen, one must do all the aforementioned to provide for one?

Themes in Othello :: essays research papers

Themes in Shakespeares OthelloThroughout Shakespeares play, Othello, there are more musical compositions interwoven to describe the authors perspective of the true nature of a mans soul. Three themes critical to the play are doubtfulness versus trust, monstrous imagery and the fallible love of man. One central theme of the play is the major contrast of doubt versus trust. For whatever reason, Othellos trust of Desdemona is too sluttish to resist Iagos accusations. As happens in many of Shakespeares works, miscommunication and mistrust lead to "prepostrous conclusions" (1. 3. 323). Othellos heart tells him that Desdemona loves him however the critical Iago can dismantle Othellos trust in his wife by planting seeds doubt through what appears to be rational proof. Having built Othellos curiosity about Cassios supposed thoughts Iago manipulates Othello into seeing a situation between Desdemona and Cassio that does not exist. Be front Othello suspects that Iago is aware of mo re details than he is telling, he begins questioning Iago. "Why of thy thought?"(3. 3. 108), "What dost thou think?" (3. 3. 116). The superficially answered questions cause Othello to make demands for further clarification "If thou dost love me, show me thy thought" (3. 3. 127-28), "give thy worst of thoughts the worst of words" (3. 3. 145-46), then "By heaven, Ill know thy thoughts" (3. 3. 175). callable to Othellos equating of Iagos thoughts with factual knowledge, he is eager to mistrust Cassio and does not fully scrutinize the evidence. It is because he trusts Iago that he trusts the false facts and doubts the virtue of his wife, Desdemona. In addition to inferring Desdemonas unfaithfulness to Othello, Iago alludes to Desdemonas duplicitous deception of her father, Brabantio -- she was able to "seel her fathers eyes up close as oak"-when he reminds Othello that "She did deceive her father, marrying you" (3. 3. 224, 220). A s Othello makes his final desperate attempt at trust by saying, "I do not think but Desdemonas honest," Iago again exploits the line between cerebration (or having trust) that Othellos wife is faithful and knowing (through evidence) whether it is actually true (3. 3. 241). Othello fails to see that honor cannot be subject to empirical proof. Shakespeares exploration of the concept of jealousy leads to the theme of the human minds predisposition to favor the "monstrous." Monsters of the human psyche are self-generating, even without the prodding of an evil manipulator such as Iago.

Accounting Systems Essay -- Business Management

Accounting SystemsIn accounting agreements, certain controls are needed to keep in line that employees are doing their jobs properly and ensure that the system runs properly. These checks are in the best interest of the organization. These controls come in the form of internal and external controls for the system. The internal controls are the checks that are placed in the system by the companys own management and directors. Today more and more companies are moving from the manual accounting systems to electronic computerized accounting information systems. The advantages of a computerized system are increases in the speed and accuracy of processing accounting information. However, as systems become computerized, the internal controls for that system has to be adapted accordingly. This is because computerized systems bring with them certain alone(predicate) capers that support only be removed or minimized by adapting the present controls and adding new controls.In a manual syst em there is a paper trail for the internal auditor to follow. All records and transactions are kept on paper and so an auditor has clear and documented consequence of what has transpired. Computerized systems rarely give way a clear paper trail to follow. Since computers do all of the sorting of the information the company rarely sorts the source documents. Also the computer does most of the calculations and processing so there would not be the amount of documentation that there would be in a manual system. Another problem of computer systems is the fact that there can be difficulty in determining who entered the data. In a manual system the identity of the person go into the data can be identified possibly by the persons handwriting. This cannot be done in a computerized system. ... ... disaster. This includes transaction logs of complete system dumps which result make periodic backups of all the transactions that occur within the system.Computerized account ing systems bring with then a set of new and unique problems. The internal controls that have been put into place for a manual system to help the internal auditor cannot fully prevent or minimize the possibility of errors or charade that come with the computerized systems. Therefore the old controls must be modified for the new system and new controls must be put in. Only then can the internal auditor ensure that the number of errors that occur within the system be minimized or even eliminated.BibliographyBasset P.H. (1993) Computerized accounts, NCC Blackwell. Grudinsku G., Burch J., (1998), Information Systems Theory and Practice, illusion Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Reader Response to Memoirs of a Geisha Essay -- Memoirs of a Geisha Es

Reader Response to Memoirs of a Geisha                Memoirs of a Geisha is Arthur Goldens debut novel, indite exquisitely with great detail. It was initially written as a novel that would depict the son borne of a geisha and a Japanese businessman, but erst he had learned the true nature of a geisha, he changed his topic. Golden discovered the intrigue of the geisha - the attributes that draw in the geishas customers, that make them an irreplaceable let out of Japanese history, that make them human as well as the ideal of what a woman should be. When these features were displayed through Sayuris voice, the novel became an emotionally enrapturing story, which drew in the contributor and captivated the heart. I, personally, was affected deeply by this novel. I have always been drawn in by Japanese culture, even as a child. When I learned of the geisha for the first time, I thought I even wanted to be one someday. While reading this novel, any fantasies I whitethorn have had of what a geisha was were completely reshaped. This novel convinced me that the geisha truly were artists - they were trained and hired as musicians, dancers, conversationalists, jokesters, and drinking buddies, so to speak. The geisha mix both the demure and the vulgar aspects of the human spirit, and created instead a playful and desirable companion for the stressed and lonely businessmen.              When I learned of the mizuage, the supposed Japanese term for the occasion upon which a young geishas virginity is auctioned off to the highest bidder, I was absolutely shocked. Here was a culture that had prided... ...d my eyes to new styles of writing. While the writing was simple, it cross the same barriers that were emotionally crossed throughout the novel.              Initially I did not think it possible, but after read ing the novel I found it to be true - it is possible for people to truly understand one another(prenominal) despite any boundaries. Whether they be due to gender, age, culture, politics, or any other reason, these boundaries brook be overcome by simply learning about one another, about everyones own personal histories, and trying to understand them as people instead than objects. Memoirs of a Geisha defied many boundaries and was able to create an intimate - and greatly appreciated - relationship between the reader and a fictional geisha from, essentially, another world. It was truly an incredible novel.

Families NOT the Source of All Evil :: Are Families Dangerous

Families NOT the Source of All EvilAccording to Barbara Ehrenreich in Are Families Dangerous?, families are the most dangerous place to be, be arrive at of several reasons. First, for women the most unsafe place to be is inside her own home. This is because the people who recognize you the most are the ones who abuse and murder their loved ones. According to Charles Fourier, the family is the barrier to human progress, which leads me to believe that Ehrenreich is trying to portray the family as a downside to our society kind of of a positive aspect of our lives. Subsequently, there is no such thing as the functional family, each and every family needs counseling and policies to provide guidance. Families cause damage to children because of a constant attack on ones self esteem. Most importantly, according to Ehrenreich families are the source of violence within our world, she believes if we would dissipate our families our world would be a much improved living environment.The art icle I discussed was, Are families dangerous?, by Barbara Ehrenreich. This article gave copious reasons for what the family does to destroy ones self esteem or even ones physical well existence. Ehrenreich stated numerous facts that supported her view upon the American family. She used two human sources, one being Charles Fourier (French Philosopher) and a British anthropologist by the name of Edmund Leach. Both of these men agreed that the family was the source of all evil within our society. She also used specific homage cases that indicated domesticated violence within the home. Each of these cases are widely known to Americans, due to the media coverage on each case. Allowing her to illustrate the numerous occasions domestic violence has occurred within in society. When my group discussed the facts that she brought forward within the article we each came to the conclusion that families are NOT the source of all evil in this world. Although, she cited an abundance of sources, we all believe families are what makes a child a proper and well-caring human being.

Families NOT the Source of All Evil :: Are Families Dangerous

Families NOT the Source of All EvilAccording to Barbara Ehrenreich in Are Families grievous?, families atomic number 18 the most dangerous place to be, because of several reasons. First, for women the most unsafe place to be is inside her own home. This is because the people who love you the most are the ones who abuse and murder their loved ones. According to Charles Fourier, the family is the barrier to human progress, which leads me to believe that Ehrenreich is trying to portray the family as a downside to our society instead of a corroboratory aspect of our lives. Subsequently, there is no such thing as the functional family, each and every family needs counseling and policies to provide guidance. Families cause damage to children because of a constant attack on ones self esteem. Most importantly, according to Ehrenreich families are the source of violence inside our world, she believes if we would disband our families our world would be a much improved living environment.Th e article I discussed was, Are families dangerous?, by Barbara Ehrenreich. This article gave copious reasons for what the family does to destroy ones self esteem or even ones physical well being. Ehrenreich stated numerous facts that supported her view upon the American family. She used two human sources, one being Charles Fourier (French Philosopher) and a British anthropologist by the name of Edmund Leach. Both of these men agreed that the family was the source of any evil within our society. She also used specific court cases that indicated domestic violence within the home. Each of these cases are widely known to Americans, due to the media coverage on each case. Allowing her to illustrate the numerous occasions domestic violence has occurred within in society. When my group discussed the facts that she brought forward within the article we each came to the conclusion that families are NOT the source of all evil in this world. Although, she cited an abundance of sources, we all believe families are what makes a child a proper and well-caring human being.

Abraham Van Helsing Essay

Innocence, chastity, purity, and married life are just a a few(prenominal) things that made up the image of the nineteenth century twee woman. During this clipping, it was greatly looked down upon if a woman chose to stay single, as she would be pitied and dubbed a working girl. Lucy Westenra is angiotensin-converting enzyme of the main characters in the novel, genus Dracula by Bram Stoker. Lucy is a beautiful young lady whose honor and virtuous being draws three suitors to her.Although, this portrayed innocence is not the only thing that is drawing these men towards her. Lucy has a sexual appeal to her personality, much different than her best friend Mina Murray and the typical puritanical woman. This sense of sexual desire will eventually lead her right into the insecure and evilness arms of Count Dracula. The Count only has the ability to antiaircraft gun willing victims, which is why the sexually driven Victorian woman, Lucy Westenra is the first character to become vic timized by Draculas deadly spell.Count Dracula was an evil, lustful vampire who wanted nothing only when power and control. He lived in an Eastern European country called, Transylvania. The Count preyed on any case-by-case who would make him feel in control and powerful of the situation. This is why Lucy Westenra was targeted and made Draculas first victim. The first peculiar account Lucy and Mina fetch was when they see a Russian ship wrecked safe the shore and hear that the there was no life aboard and the captain had died holding a crucifix in his hands. Soon after the account, Lucy started mysteriously sleep walking many night in a row into the grave yard near her home. One night, Mina had awoken the Rowatt 3find Lucy missing and not in her bed, she then install her outside with a creature with beaming red eye hunched over her. Mina tried to continue her friend but by the time she got over there, the creature was gone. In the morning Mina had found strange dots on Lucys ne ck and after struggling for weeks Lucy became deathly sick and started to change before everyones eyes.Unknowingly, she was transforming into a super natural and dangerous form of herself while dead and lying in a cold grave. Indeed, it is not only Lucy and Mina who are dramatically transformed in the draining, but Dracula himself, whose transformations are much more varied and complex than those of his victims. (Pg. 238, Viragh) Count Dracula had stripped this woman of her innocence and virtue by changing her to an evil vampire just like him. Dracula now had control over Lucy but only because she was willing to let him control her.In the nineteenth century, tramp away from who a woman is supposed to be according to the Roman Catholic Church is heresy. A woman was never to be with more than one man, but was to be married and completely faithful to her partner. This century was ruled by the belief that an individuals sex and sexuality form the close to basic core of their identity, potentiality, social/political standing, and freedom (Pg. 1, Ridgway) Lucy Westenra had a completely different mindset as she expressed in a letter to her lovemaking friend Mina. Why cant they let a girl marry three men, or as many as want her, and save all this trouble? (Pg. 66, Stoker) After Lucy states these words in her letter, she immediately admits to her thoughts and actions being heresy. Just because she confessed Rowatt 4to this sin against the church and her beliefs does not simply alleviate Lucys sexual desire. This difference between Lucy and other nineteenth century virtuous women was not just a phase of rebellion, it was psychological. Lucy is fully aware that she is desired by many men and she lets that get into her head, essentially she is feeding off the attention. This vulnerability and openness is why Lucy Westenra is Count Draculas first and easiest target. The first time the Count starts to get into Lucys head is after her and Mina see the wrecked boat upon sh ore, containing the containers of dirt. These were Draculas sleeping quarters. This fact was not know by the women at the time, but soon after this event is when Lucy starts to sleep walk.This sleep walking is not a coincidence but is psychologically affiliated to her sinful desires of lustfulness. Count Dracula only has the power the attack willing victims, which could only mean Lucy knew in her subconscious what she was doing by going out to the burying ground at nights. This spell Dracula puts on Lucy is the same spell he put on the three women who now life in Dracula fastness with him. These women were just as innocent and virtuous as Lucy was and are now sex crazed and evil just as the Count is. This spell was a way to beneathmine women so that Dracula would feel powerful and controlling over them.In essence, Lucy Westenra was a seemingly virtuous nineteenth century Victorian woman who actually had underlying sexual desires. These desires made Lucy vulnerable to Count Dracu la, who was consumed with gaining control over his victims. Because of her lustful manor, Lucy was drawn to the attack of Dracula and fell under his deep spell. From then on there was no turning back.Works CitedStoker, Bram. Dracula. 1897. New York Oxford University Press, 1990.Viragh, Attila. Can The Vampire Speak? Dracula As Discourse On Cultural Extinction. English Literature In Transition, 1880-1920 56.2 (2013) 231-245. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 25 Sept. 2013.Ridgway, Stephan. Victorian Sexuality in Sexuality and Modernity originally written as a lecture for Sociology at Sydney University, 1996. Isis Creations. Web. 12 Nov. 2010.

Clockwork Orange Essay

The decision to pick between good and worthless is iodin simple natural selection that separates a human from be a machine. Being unable to take from the two is homogeneous little chellovecks made out of tin and with a quail inside and and so a winding handle on the outside ( bourgeois, 203). There comes a point in a mans emotional state where he stops creation a machine and becomes something else entirely. In the watchword A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, the twenty-first chapter was excluded from the earlier publications, only when then added to the latter(prenominal) ones although the ending of chapter twenty provides beneficial lessons, the twenty-first chapter of A Clockwork Orange is a superior conclusion to the bosh as it shows character development and extend toes the clean-livings of the story.This story follows a fifteen-year-old boy named Alex, an immature adolescent who disregards the law and engages in rape and ultraviolence. Soon Alex is apprehende d and sentenced to prison where he is a victim of a condition experiment known as the Ludovico treatment in order to rid him of all of his evil desires. The treatment ends up being a victor as Alex is no longer able to participate in violence or rape at his own will. As the story continues, the government cures Alex of the condition chthonic the agreement that he sides with the government. At the end of chapter twenty, Alex departs from the audience realizing I was cured all rightly (Burgess 192). Although the end of this chapter is not nearly as satisfying and omnipotent as the ending of chapter twenty-one, it still provides an important lesson that readers should recognize.We as readers learn about the inherent evil of the government as we watch the Ludovico treatments success in controlling Alexs violence. There is importance in informing readers of immoral actions involving the government and challenging them to question what is ethical or not. He Burgess has presented us wi th a stark pictorial matter of evil, and perhaps of a great evil in attempting to counteract it. He has warned us of a slippery slope (Newman 68). In the book, the Ludovico experiment is intenseand disturbing even for readers who have been exposed to Alexs extreme actions. Even though Alex is presented to us as a clear image of evil, Burgesss readers can still recognize something that is not just immature. Burgess is successful in showing his readers that sometimes something that is supposed to be primary can be corrupt. He shows us that a government that has the appearance of being good does not mean that it is good.Though this ending is powerful, it does not in all satisfy or give both development to its readers. Burgess offers us no real answers, however. At the end of the 20th chapter, it is clear that Alex intends to resume his smell of ultraviolence. Seemingly little thought is given to those he has killed, or those he is likely to kill (Newman 68). The ending of chapter twenty shows its readers that Alex is aware that he is in occurrence cured and will continue to act the same as he once did at the introduction of the story. Earlier in the story, Alex kills two women before being sentenced to prison. Since these deaths were very brutal, readers expect remorse from Alex especially when he is unconditioned from the reclamation treatment. Because Alex is released from the torture of the Ludovico technique, we predict he will regret the actions that caused the torment. When Alex does not show any actions towards his past transgressions, we envision him to kill again.As a result, this conclusion gives the readers no sort of progress throughout the events before. Since Alex was forced into changing his immoral actions, he neer made any improvement in his own power. Even though readers can recognize that the treatment is immoral, they can still see that Alex is not qualification any progress. He was forced into a direction to be a test subject of some thing that had the appearance of being good. Although he is now three historic period older from when he was first sentenced, Alex ends where he once started, a child. In order for him to grow as a person, he first must form that his actions are wrong. In the added twenty-first chapter, Alex encounters one of his old droogs and becomes aware of his transgressions and reanalyzes where his priorities are. As a result, the conclusion of the story surrounds Alexs character and the maturity he begins to embrace. merely now as I end this story, brothers, I am not young, not no longer, oh no. Alex like groweth up, oh yes (Burgess 204).As Alex starts to distinguish his developing maturity, he finds himself evaluatingwhat adulthood requires. In chapter 21, Burgess presents a mellowing, increasingly reflective, eighteen-year-old Alex who is coming to see that this previous violent behavior was childishly perverse. He thinks of marriage, stability, and the son he one day hopes to have. He c ontemplates explaining to his son all his past crimes as an admonition (Hong 34). As Alex begins to become bored with the violence and rape he had previously committed, he reaches a place in his life where he has never been to before. Before the Ludovico treatment, Alex was a criminal and a child who needed to be cured from the unsoundness that grew within him. Even though Alex rejoices saying he was cured, he was not cured from his real problem his evil ways. In order for him to be sincerely cured of his old desires, he needs to choose for himself to turn from what he once was. Through his experience with the Ludovico technique, Alex reaches the realization that part of growing up is routine from what has prevented his progression. Free to will and free to choose again, even if he wills to sin, Alex is capable of salvation. In the view of Burgess, all individuals, even these as violent as Alex, could cleanse and acquire the moral growth. The moral maturity comes with age (Hong 3 4).Though Alex did not show any signs of remorse or regret, he showed the desire to improve to a higher level of maturity. Something that he was unable to do at the end of chapter twenty, Alex is no longer immune to salvation. Regardless of the intensity and degree of the crimes Alex has committed, he has a chance to repent and break free from what has been chaining him down his whole life. This provides improvement in Burgesss main character, as Alex can finally choose for himself what he must accomplish in order to mature as a man. Character development is clearly necessary for Burgess as he expresses, There is, in fact not much point in writing a novel unless you can show the possibility or moral transformation, or an increase in wisdom, operating in your chief character or characters (Burgess 168). Through the ending of chapter twenty-one, Alex displays progression in his character. If the novel ends at chapter twenty, Alex is right where he began.Once Alex has decided to choose rightness and maturity, the story finally reaches what the readers have been striving to see. As Alex finally looks to turn to the next chapter in his life, the book comes to a point where hopeis finally achieved. When man has reached a hopeless impasse in his savage quest for improvement, he must make the valid moral choice. The individual is a creature of growth and capable of sweetness, as F. Alexander puts in his typescript, so he could be liberated or saved (Hong 34). Liberation comes from someone who chooses to become saved from the thing that once was holding that person down. As he made this choice he grow as a character. If Alex were to not make this choice, the main theme would not be as impactful since he did not choose goodness. Alex once displayed his view on goodness in the novel stating, They dont go into what is the cause of goodness, so why of the other shop? If lewdies are good thats because they like it, and I wouldnt interfere with their pleasures, and so of the other shop.And I was patronizing the other shop (Burgess 46). Alex shows us evil, just like goodness, is a choice when he refers it as the other shop. Again later in prison, the chaplain tells Alex, goodness comes from within. Goodness is something chosen (Burgess 93). This statement has no meaning to Alex unless he himself chooses goodness. Although Alex chose the Ludovico treatment, he did not choose goodness. The conditioning forced Alex into goodness quite than him choosing it for himself. The chaplain then goes on further to say, when a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man (Burgess 93). Burgess desires to indicate that it is not what a man chooses it is the idea that he is able to choose. A man who is incapable of a moral choice can never attain redemption, but a man who admits his wrongdoings can choose to repent and reach salvation.Throughout the story, free will is displayed as the decision to choose something rather than being another subject or machine of the gover nment. Although Alex ultimately seems as if he will begin to choose goodness, Burgess urgencys to make sure that goodness is something that must be chosen, rather than forced. In A Clockwork Orange Resucked, Burgess shows his readers that good and evil must both be equally offered. by definition, a human being is endowed with free will. He can use this to choose between good and evil. If he can only perform evil, then he is a clockwork orange meaning that he has the appearance of an organism lovely with colour and juice but is in fact only a clockwork toy to be wound up by God or the Devil (ACO Resucked 168). As Alex was once a toy wound up by theappearance of pure goodness, readers soon find that evil was what turned the lever. At the beginning of the story, it appears that Alex is already a clockwork orange as he seems as though he can only perform evil acts with his henchman.As the end draws near, we find that Alex always had the choice of goodness, but never chose it until he had nothing but the choice of goodness. Burgess again expresses, It is inhuman to be totally good as it is to be totally evil. The important thing is moral choice. Evil has to make up along with good, in order that moral choice may operate. Life is sustained by the grinding opposition of moral entities (ACO Resucked168). Without evil as a valid choice, the choice to be good becomes nothing more than an empty action. In the novel, Alex too refers to himself as one of those malenky machines at the end of chapter twenty-one, saying being young is like being one of those machines. He goes on and says that they cannot control where they are going and crash into things along the way. Alex comes to the realization that he does not want to be a toy anymore. Without the twenty-first chapter, Alex would still be a clockwork orange, leaving him as just another machine.Not only does the twenty-first chapter accomplish the morals of both maturity and goodness, it also resonates for readers as a symbolism for free will. The twenty-first chapter is necessary for Alexs character development as well, and achieves greater emotional value for its readers. According to Burgess, the choice of either goodness or evil is something that everyone should be entitled to. Regardless of what someone chooses, goodness or evil should be chosen in order to remain a human. For a human who does not have a choice, grrr grrr grrr and off it itties, like walking, O my brothers (Burgess 203).whole kit and boodle CitedBurgess, Anthony. A Clockwork Orange. Ed. Andrew Biswell. Res. ed. New York W. W. Norton & Company, 2012. Print. Burgess, Anthony. A Clockwork Orange Resucked. A Clockwork Orange Authoritative Text Backgrounds And Contexts Criticism. Ed. Mark Rawlinson. Norton Critical. New York W. W. Norton & Company, 2011. 166-70. Print. Hong, Liu. The Perplexing Choice In Existence quandary An Existential Interpretation Of Burgesss A Clockwork Orange. Studies In Literature & Language 1.8 (2010) 29-38. Communication & Mass Media Complete. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. Newman, Bobby. A CLOCKWORK ORANGEBurgess and behavioural Interventions. Behavior and Social Issues 1.2 (1991) 61-69. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.

The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02

Alexandru Ioan Cuza National College Specialization Philology Bilingual side Discipline face The triumphant restrain of henry the octonary Coordinating Professors Mariana Gaiu Sorina Soaica scholar Irina Stan 2011 Contents Introduction2 1. Social dorsumground of the mount up3 2. total heat 89 2. 1 enthalpy eighters character10 2. 2 Cardinal Wolsey11 2. 3 atomic number 1 eight-spot & Christianity12 a)Popular religious idealism12 b)Christian secular military manism and the influence of Greek skill14 2. 4 Henrician Reformation16 a) hydrogen 8s first divorce16 )Supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana18 c)The dissolution of the religious houses20 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of total heat eight-spot22 2. 6 An extension of side hegemony23 a)The Union of Eng prop up and Wales23 b)Tudor Irish insurance24 c)The need to control Scotland25 Conclusions28 Bibliography29 Introduction The age of the Tudors has left its impact on Anglo-American minds as a watershed in British hi story. saintly tradition, native patriotism, and post imperial gloom prevail united to swell our appreciation of the period as a true golden age.Names alone aspirate a phoenix-glow henry VIII, Elizabeth I, and Mary Stuart among the soereigns of England and Scotland Wolsey, William Cecil, and Leicester among the politicians Marlowe, Shakespeare, Hilliard, and Byrd among the creative artists. The splendors of the Court of heat content VIII, the fortitude of Sir Thomas more, the ma great power of the position Bible, Prayer Book, and Anglican church building, the development of Parliament, the defeat of the Armada, the Shakespearian moment, and the legacy of Tudor domestic architecture there are the undoubted climaxes of a simplified orthodoxy in which genius, romance, and tragedy are superabundant.Reality is inevitably more(prenominal) complex, slight glamorous, and more bear oning than myth. The most potent forces in spite of appearance Tudor England were often social, ec onomic, and demographic ones. Thus if the period became a golden age, it was primarily because the considerable process in population that occurred between 1500 and the death of Elizabeth I did not so dangerously exceed the capacity of available resources, situati tho food supplies, as to precipitate a Mal indeedian crisis. Famine and disease unquestionably disrupted and disturbed the Tudor economy, just they did not raze it to its baseations, as in the fourteenth ascorbic acid. more(prenominal) positively, the increased work force and demand that sprang from rising population stimulated economic growth and the commercialization of agriculture, encouraged trade and urban renewal, inspired a housing revolution, enhanced the mundanity of side manners, in particular in London, and (more arguably) bolstered new and exciting attitudes among Tudor Englishmen, notably individualistic ones derived from Reformation ideals and Calvinist theology. In stray to present a wee-wee pictur e of 16th cytosine England, we considered depicting heat content VIII reign in a period of instability from the point of view of religion and bow limits.The moguls egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to brood everywhere suspected wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able and distinctly secondrate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from heat content VIIs treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory on Arthurs death, Henry had been constructn no functions beyond the title of Prince of Walesa signal of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, Henry VIII had resolved to rule, even where, as in the case of the Church, it would obtain been enough merely to reign.He would put monarchic theory into practice would give the words Rex Imperator a meaning neer dreamt of even by the emperors of Rome, if he possibly could. Henry was eager, too, to conquer- to emulat e the glorious victories of the macabre Prince and Henry V, to quest subsequently the Golden Fleece that was the cut Cr give birth. Repeatedly the efforts of Henrys more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kings militaristic dreams, and by costly Continental ventures that wasted men, money, and equipment.Evaluation is always a matter of emphasis, but on the twin issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be said for the view that Henry VIIIs policy was consistent throughout his reign that Henry was himself directing that policy and that his ministers and officials were allowed freedom of action only within accepted limits, and when the king was too busy to take a individualized interest in state affairs. 1. Social background of the ageThe matter is debatable, but there is much to be said for the view that England was economically healthier, more expensive, and more rose-colored to a lower place the Tudors than at som e(prenominal) time since the Roman occupation of Britain. Certainly, the contrast with the 15th century was dramatic. In the hundred or so eld before Henry VII became king of England in 1485, England had been under populated, underdeveloped, and in struggled-looking compared with other Western countries, notably France. Her convalescence after the ravages of the Black Death had been slow slower than in France, Germany, Switzerland, and some Italian cities.The process of economic recuperation in pre-industrial societies was basically one of recovery of population, and figures will be useful. On the eve of the Black Death (1348), the population of England and Wales was between 4 and 5 millions by 1377, successive plaques bad reduced it to 2. 5 millions. further the figure for England (without Wales) was still no higher(prenominal)(prenominal) than 2. 26 millions in 1525, and it is transparently clear that the striking feature of England demographic history between the Black Dea th and the reign of Henry VIII is the stagnancy of population which persisted until the 1520s.However, the growth of population rapidly accelerated after 1525 Between 1525 and 1541 the population of England grew extremely fast, an lofty burst of expansion after long inertia. This rate of growth slackened off somewhat after 1541, but the Tudor population act to increase steadily and inexorably, with a temporary reversal only in the late 1550s, to reach 4. 10 millions in 1601. In addition, the population of Wales grew from somewhat 210,000 in 1500 to 380,000 by 1603.While England reaped the fruits of the recovery of population in the sixteenth century, however, serious difficultys of adjustment were encountered. The impact of a sudden crescendo in demand, and pressure on available resources of food and clothing, within a society that was still overwhelmingly agrarian, was to be as painful as it was, ultimately, beneficial. The morale of countless ordinary Englishman was to be wr ecked irrevocably, and ruthlessly, by problems that were too massive to be ameliorated either by governments or by traditional, ecclesiastical philanthropy.Inflation, speculation in land, enclosures, unemployment, vagrancy, poverty, and urban squalor were the most pernicious evils of Tudor England, and these were the wider symptoms of population growth and agricultural commercialization. In the fifteenth century farm rents had been discounted, because tenants were so elusive lords had abandoned direct exploitation of their demesnes, which were leased to tenants on favourable terms. Rents had been low, too, on peasants customary holdings drudge assists had been commuted, and servile villeinage had virtually disappeared from the face of the English landscape by 1485.At the same time, money wages had risen to theorize the contraction of the wage-labour force after 1348, and food expenditures had deteriorationen in reply to reduced market demand. But rising demand after 1500 burst the blither of artificial prosperity innate(p) of stagnant population. Land hunger led to soaring rents. Tenants of farms and copyholders were evicted by business-minded landlords. Several adjacent farms would be conjoined, and amalgamated for profit, by away investors at the expense of sitting tenants. Marginal land would be converted to pasture for more profitable sheep-rearing.Commons were enclosed, and waste land reclaimed, by landlords or squatters, with consequence extinction of everyday grazing rights. The literary opinion that the active Tudor land market nurtured a new entrepreneurial class of greedy capitalists contrition the faces of the poor is an exaggeration. Yet it is fair to say that not all landowners, claimants, and squatters were entirely scrupulous in their attitude certainly a vigorous market arose among dealers in defective titles to land, with resulting harassment of many legitimate occupiers. The greatest distress sprang, nevertheless, from inflation and unemployment.High agricultural prices gave farmers strong incentives to produce crops for exchange in the dearest markets in near towns, rather than for the satisfaction of rural subsistence. Rising population, especially urban population, put intense strain on the markets themselves demand for food often outstripped supply, notably in old age of poor harvests due to epidemics or bad weather. In cash terms, agricultural prices began to rise faster than industrial prices from the beginning of the reign of Henry the VIII, a rise which accelerated as the sixteenth century progressed.Yet in real terms, the price rise was even more volatile than it appeared to be, since population growth ensured that labour was plentiful and cheap, and wages low. The size of the work-force in Tudor England increasingly exceeded available employment opportunities clean wages and living standards declined accordingly. Men (and women) were prepared to do a days work for little more than board wages abl e-bodied persons, many of whom were peasants displaced by rising rents or the enclosure of commons, drifted in waves to the towns in quest of work.The best price index hitherto constructed covers the period 1264-1954, and its base period is most usefully 1451-75 the end of the fifteenth-century era of stable prices. From the index, we may construe the fortunes of the wage-earning consumers of Tudor England, because the calculations are based on the fluctuating costs of composite units of the inhering foodstuffs and manufactured goods, such as textiles, that made up an average family shopping basket in southern England at different times.Two indexes are, in fact, available first the annual price index of the composite basket of consumables second the index of the basket verbalized as the equivalent of the annual wage rates of building craftsmen in southern England. No one supposes that building workers were characteristic of the English labour force in the sixteenth century, or at any other time. But the indexes serve as a rough force to the appalling reality of the rising household expenses of the majority of Englishmen in the Tudor period. t is clear that in the century after Henry VIIIs entrance, the average prices of essential consumables rose by some 488 per cent. The price index stood at the 100 or so level until 1513, when it rose to 120. A dawdling rise to 169 had occurred by 1530, and a further crescendo to 231 was attained by 1547, the year of Henry VIIIs death. In 1555 the index reached 270 two years later on, it hit a staggering peak of 409, though this was partly due to the de moveed effects of the currency debasements practiced by Henry VIII and Edward VI.On the put down of Elizabeth I, in I5 58, the index had recovered to a median of 230. It climbed once again thereafter, though more steadily 300 in 1570, 342 in 1580, and 396 in 1590. But the later ISQOS witnessed riddanceally meagre harvests, together with regional epidemics and fam ine the index read 515 in 1595, 685 in 1598, and only coterietled back to 459 in 1600. The index expressed as the equivalent of the building craftsmans wages gives an equally sober impression of the vicissitudes of Tudor domestic flavor.An abrupt decline in the defileing power of wages occurred between 1510 and 1530, the commodity equivalent falling by some 40 per cent in twenty years. The index fell again in the 1550s, but recovered in the next decade to a position equivalent to two-thirds of its value in 1510. It then remained more or less stable until the 1590s, when it collapsed to 39 in 1595, and to a catastrophic nadir of 29 in 1597. On the queens death in 1603 it had recovered to a figure of 45which meant that real wages had dropped by 57 per cent since 1500. These various data establish the most fundamental truth about the age of the Tudors.When the percentage change of English population in the sixteenth century is plotted against that of the index of purchasing power of a building craftsmans wages over the same period, it is immediately plain that the two lines of development and commensure (see graph). Living standards declined as the population rose recovery began as population growth abated and collapsed between 1556 and I560. Standards then steadily dropped again, until previous proportions were overthrown by the localized famines of 1585-8 and 1595-8though the cumulative increase in the size of the wage-labour force since 1570 must also have had distorting effects.In other words, population trends, rather than government policies, capitalist entrepreneurs, European imports of American silver, the more rapid circulation of money, or even currency debasements, were the key factor in determining the fortunes of the British Isles in the sixteenth century. English government expenditure on warfare, heavy borrowing, and debasements unquestionably exacerbated inflation and unemployment. But the basic facts of Tudor life were conjugate to population growth. In view of this fundamental truth, the greatest triumph of Tudor England was its ability to feed itself.A major national subsistence crisis was avoided. Malthus, who wrote his historic Essay on the Principle of Population in 1798, listed positive and preventive checks as the traditional means by which population was unploughed in balance with available resources of food. imperative ones involved heavy mortality and abrupt reversal of population growth. Fertility in England indeed declined in the later 1550s, and again between 1566 and 1571. A higher proportion of the population than hitherto did not marry in the reign of Elizabeth I.Poor harvests resulted in localized starvation, and higher mortality, in 1481-3, 151921, 1527-8, 1544-5, 1549-51, 1555-8, 1585-8, and 1595-8. Yet devastating as these years of dearth were for the affected localities, especially for the towns of the 1590s, the positive check of mass mortality on a national scale was absent from Tudor England, w ith the possible exception of the crisis of 15558. On top of its other difficulties, Marys government after 1555 faced the most serious mortality crisis since the fourteenth century the population of England right away dropped by about 200,000.Even so, it is not proved that this was a national crisis in terms of its geographical range, and population growth was only temporarily interrupted. In fact, the chronology, intensity, and geographical extent of famine in the sixteenth century were such as to suggest that starvation crises in England were abating, rather than worsening, over time. Bubonic plagues were likewise imprisoned to the insanitary towns after the middle 1 of the century, and took fewer victims in proportion to the expansion of population.The inescapable conclusion is that, despite the vicissitudes of the price index the harsh consequences for individuals of changed patterns of agriculture, and the proliferation of vagabondage, an optimistic view of the age of the Tu dors has sufficiently firm foundations. The sixteenth century witnessed the birth of Britains preindustrial political economyan evolving accommodation between population and resources, political economy and politics, ambition and rationality. England abandoned the disaster-oriented framework of the Middle Ages for the new dawn of low-pressure equilibrium.Progress had its price, unalterably paid by the weak, invariably banked by the strong. Yet the tyranny of the price index was not ubiquitous. Wage rates for agricultural workers fell by less than for building workers, and some privileged groups of wage-earners such as the Mendip miners may have enjoyed a niggling rise in real income. Landowners, commercialized farmers, and property investors were the most obvious beneficiaries of a system that guaranteed fixed expenses and enhanced selling pricesit was in the Tudor period that the grandeur, gentry, and mercantile classes alike came to appreciate fully the enduring qualities of lan d.But many wage-labouring families were not wholly dependent upon their wages for subsistence. Multiple occupations, domestic self-employment, and cottage industries flourished, especially in the countryside town-dwellers grew vegetables, kept animals, and brewed beer, except in the confines of London. Wage-labourers employed by great households received meat and drink in addition to cash income, although this customary practice was on the wane by the 1590s.Finally, it is not clear that vagabondage or urban population exterior London expanded at a rate faster than was commensurate with the prevailing rise of national population. It used to be argued that the English urban population climbed from 6. 2. per cent of the national organic in 1 520 to 8. 4 per cent by the end of the century. However, Londons spectacular growth alone explains this apparent over-population the leading provincial towns, Norwich, Bristol, Coventry, and York, grew around or remained stable in absolute terms and must thus have been inhabited by a reduced share of population in proportional terms. . Henry VIII Henry VIIs death in 1509 was greeted with feasting, dancing, universal rejoicingfor no one who survived until 1547 could have thought, with hindsight, that it was the entry of Henry VIII that inspired the nations confidence. Henry VIII succeeded, at barely eighteen years of age, because his elder brother, Arthur, had died in 1502. Under pressure from his councillors, fundamentally his fathers executors, Henry began his triumphant reign by marrying his late brothers widow, Catherine of Aragona union that was to have momentous, not to say revolutionary, consequences.He continued by executing Empson and Dudley, who were now thrown to the wolves in ritual expiation of their former employers financial prudence. Needless to say, these executions were a calculated ploy to alter the new regime to profit from the stability won by Henry VII without incurring any of its attendant stigmasno one complained that Henry VIIIs government omitted to cancel the last batch of outstanding bonds until well into the 1520s.Yet Henry VIII had started as he meant to go on something of the kings natural cruelty, and inherent assumption that clean breaks with the past could solve deeprooted problems, was already evident. 2. 1 Henry VIIIs character Henry VIIIs character was certainly fascinating, nemesisening, and intensely morbid, as Holbeins great portrait illustrates to perfection.The kings egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to brood over suspected wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able but distinctly secondrate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VIIs treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory on Arthurs death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of Walesa signal of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, Henry VIII had resolved to rule, even where, as in the case of the Church, it would have been enough merely to reign.He would put monarchic theory into practice would give the words Rex Imperator a meaning never dreamt of even by the emperors of Rome, if he possibly could. Henry was eager, too, to conquer- to emulate the glorious victories of the Black Prince and Henry V, to quest after the Golden Fleece that was the french Crown. Repeatedly the efforts of Henrys more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kings militaristic dreams, and by costly Continental ventures that wasted men, money, and equipment.Evaluation is always a matter of emphasis, but on the twin issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be said for the view that Henry VIIIs policy was consistent throughout his reign that Henry was himself directing that policy and that his ministers and officials were allowed freedom of action only within accepted limits, and when the kin g was too busy to take a personal interest in state affairs. 2. 2 Cardinal Wolsey Cardinal Wolsey was Henry VIIIs first minister, and the fourteen years of that proud but efficient ascendency (15 15-29) saw the king in a comparatively restrained mood.Henry, unlike his father, found writing both(prenominal) tedious and painful he preferred hunting, dancing, dallying, and p perplexacting the lute. In his more civilized moments, Henry studied theology and astronomy he would wake up Sir Thomas more in the middle of the night in order that they might gaze at the stars from the roof of a lofty palace. He wrote songs, and the words of one form an epitome of Henrys youthful sentiments. Pastime with good company I love and shall until I die. Grudge who lust, but none deny So God be pleased, thus live will I For my pastance,Hunt, sing and dance My heart is set All goodly sport For my comfort Who shall me let? Yet Henry himself set the tempo his pastimes were only pursued while he was sa tisfied with Wolsey. Appointed Lord Chancellor and Chief Councillor on Christmas eve 1515, Wolsey used the Council and one Chamber as instruments of ministerial power in much the way that Henry VII had used them as vehicles of royal powerthough Wolsey happily pursued uniform and equitable ideals of justice in Star Chamber in place of Henry VIIs selective justice linked to fiscal advantage.But Wolseys greatest asset was the unique position he obtained with regard to the English Church. Between them, Henry and Wolsey bludgeoned the pope into granting Wolsey the rank of legate a latere for life, which meant that he became the superior ecclesiastical authority in England, and could convoke legatine synods.Using these powers, Wolsey contrived to subject the entire English Church and clergy to a massive dose of Tudor government and taxation, and it looks as if an uneasy modus vivendi prevailed behind the scenes in which Henry agreed that the English Church was, for the moment, best contr olled by a churchman who was a royal servant, and the clergy accepted that it was come apart to be obedient to an ecclesiastical rather than a secular tyrantfor it is unquestionably true that Wolsey protected the Church from the worst excesses of lay opinion while in office. . 3 Henry VIII & Christianity The trouble was that, with stability restored, and the Tudor dynasty apparently secure, England had started to become vulnerable to a mounting anaesthetize of forces, many of which were old ones suppressed beneath the surface for years, and others which sprang from the new European mood of disentangle and selfcriticism. Anti was the most volcanic of the smoldering emotions that pervaded the English laity an ancient disease, it had been endemic in British society since Constantines conversion to Christianity.By the sixteenth century, English anti-clericalism centered on three major areas of lay resentment first, resistance to such ecclesiastical abuses as clerical fiscalism, abs enteeism, pluralism, maladministration, and concubinage secondly, the excessive numbers of clergy, as it appeared to the laitymonks, friars, and secular priests seemed to outnumber the laity, and form a caste of unproductive consumers, which was untrue but reflected lay xenophobia and thirdly, opposition to the jurisdiction of the bishops and Church courts, especially in cases of heresy.It was pointed out by prominent writers, notably the encipher and learned Christopher St. German (1460-1541), that the Churchs procedure in cases of suspected heresy permitted secret accusations, hearsay evidence, and denied accused persons the benefit of purgation by fellow helpers or trial by jury, which was a Roman procedure contrary to the principles of native English common police forcea clerical plot to strip down Englishmen of their natural, effective rights. Such ideas were manifestly explosive for they incited intellectual affray between clergy and common lawyers. a) Popular religious i dealismPopular religious idealism was another major problem faced by the English ecclesiastical authorities. Late medieval religion was sacramental, institutional and ritualistic for ordinary people it seemed excessively dominated by documentary Church ritual and obligation, as opposed to subjective religious experience based on Bible reading at home. The educated classes, who were the nobility clergy, and generative merchants, knew that traditional Catholic piety and meditation did not lack for subjectivity and individual introspection, but few non-literate persons had the mental discipline needed to meditate with any degree of fulfillment.For ordinary people, personal religion had to be founded on texts of Scripture and Bible stories (preferably illustrated ones), but vernacular Bibles were illegal in Englandthe Church authorities believed that the accessibility of an English Bible, even an authorized version, would ferment heresy by permitting Englishmen to form their own opin ions. Sir Thomas More, who was Wolseys successor as Lord Chancellor, was the premier lay opponent of the commissioning of an English Bible, and ally of the bishops.He declared, in his notorious proclamation of 22 June 1530, that it is not indispensable the said Scripture to be in the English tongue and in the hands of the common people, but that the distribution of the said Scripture, and the permitting or denying thereof, dependant only upon the discretion of the superiors, as they shall think it convenient. More pursued a policy of strict censorship no books in English printed outside the realm on any subject whatsoever were to be imported he forbade the printing of Scriptural or religious books inEngland, too, unless approved in advance by a bishop. It was a case of one law for the rich and educated, who could read the Scriptures in Latin texts and commentaries, and another for the poor, who depended on oral instruction from semi-literate artisans and travelling preachers. But More and the bishops were swimming against the tide. The invention of printing had revolutionized the transmittal of new ideas across Western Europe, including Protestant ideas. Heretical books and Bibles poured from the presses of English exiles abroad, notably that of William Tyndale at Antwerp.The demand for vernacular Scriptures was persistent, insistent, and widespread even Henry VIII was teach enough to wish to assent to it, and publication an English Bible in Miles Coverdales translation was first achieved in 1536, a year after Mores death. b) Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning Of the forces springing from the new European mood of reform and self-criticism, Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning came first.The humanists, of whom the greatest was Erasmus of Rotterdam (1467-1536), rejected scholasticism and elaborate ritualism in privilege of wit and simple biblical piety, or philosophia Christi, which was founded on primary textual schola rship, and in particular study of the Greek New Testament. Erasmus read voraciously, wrote prodigiously, and travelled extensively he made three visits to England, and it was in Cambridge in 1511-14 that he worked upon the Greek text of his own edition of the New Testament, and revised his Latin version that improved significantly on the standard Vulgate text.But the renaissance of Greek learning owed as much to a native Englishman, John Colet, the gloomy dean of St. Pauls and founder of its school. Colet, who was also young Thomas Mores spiritual director, had been to Italy, where he had encountered the Neo-Platonist doctrine of Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola. He had mastered Greek grammar and literature, which he then helped to foster at Oxford and at his school, and the fruits of his philosophical and literary knowledge were applied to Bible studyespecially to the works of St. Paul. The result was a method of Scriptural exegesis that broke new ground.Colet emphasized th e unity of divine truth, a literal approach to texts, concern for historical context, and belief in a personal and redemptive Christ. These were exciting ideas, and they inspired both Erasmus and the younger generation of English humanists. The clarion call of humanist reform was sounded in 1503, when Erasmus published A Handbook of a Christian Knight, a compendium, or guide, for spiritual life. (Parvulorum Institutio, 1512-13) This book encapsulated the humanism, evangelism, and laicism that its author had imbibed from Colet, and made Europe uncomfortably conscious that the existing priorities of the Church would not do.Erasmus added reforming impetus to traditional lay piety, and his pungent criticisms of the scholastic theologians, of empty ritual, ecclesiastical abuses, and even the mores of the Papacy, were as stimulating as they were embarrassing. For Erasmus, whose unadulterated jeering was Praise of Folly (1514), highlighted his reforming posture by means of his immortal wit, combining the serious, the humorous, and the artistic in peerless texture, and delighting everyone except the senior Church authorities.Wit is an essential literary commodity, and Erasmus drew on his as from a bottomless pursewhich was just as well, for it was his sole pecuniary authorisement. His effervescent humor flowed quite naturally. working of piety, that might otherwise have been mere pebbles thrown into the European pond, thus generated ripples that increasingly had the force of tidal waves. The best English exponent of humanist satire in the wake of Praise of Folly was Thomas More, whose Utopia, first published at Louvain in 1516, described imaginary and idealized society of pagans living on a conflicting island in accordance with principles of natural virtue.By implicitly comparing the benign social customs and enlightened religious attitudes of the ignorant Utopians with the inferior standards, in practice, of (allegedly) Christian Europeans, More produced a st rident indictment of the latter, based purely on deafening silencea splendid, if perplexing, achievement of the sort More perennially favored. But to the distress of Erasmus, More abandoned reform for repression and extermination of heresy during his thousand days as Lord Chancellor, and has gone down to history , nevertheless in the writings of his a apologists as persecutor rather than a prophet.However, his terrible end in 1535 as a victim of Henry VIIIs vengeance, and his willingness to suffer torment for the truth he had discovered in the (then controversial) dogma of apostolic primacy, perpetually guarantee that his steadfastness was not a untruth when the axe fell, Utopias author earned his place among the few who have enlarged the hori2ons of the human spirit. In fairness to More, the Brave New World of Utopia had been crudely shattered by Luthers debut upon the European stage in1517. For the Christian Humanists, to their sorrow, had unintentionally, but irreversibly, pr epared the way for the spread of Protestantism.In England, the impact of Lutheranism far exceeded the relatively small number of converts, and the rise of the new learning, as it was called, became the most potent of the- forces released in the 1520s and 1530s. Luthers ideas and numerous books rapidly penetrated the universities, especially Cambridge, the City of London, the Inns of Court, and even reached Henry VIII s Household through the intervention of Anne Boleyn and her circle. At Cambridge, the young scholars influenced included Thomas Cranmer and Matthew Parker, both of whom later became Archbishops of Canterbury.Wolsey naturally made resolute efforts as legate to stamp out the spread of Protestantism, but without obvious success. His critics blamed his reluctance to combust men for heresy as the cause of his failurefor Wolsey would burn books and imprison men, but shared the humane horror of Erasmus at the thought of himself committing bodies to the flames. However the tru e reason for Luthers appeal was that he had given logical doctrinal expression to the religious subjectivity of individuals, and to their distrust of Rome and papal monarchy.In addition his view of the ministry mirrored the instincts of the anticlerical laity, and his answer to concubinage was the global solution of clerical brotherhood. 2. 4 Henrician Reformation a) Henry VIIIs first divorce Into this religious maelstrom dropped Henry VIIIs first divorce. Although Catherine of Aragon had borne five children, only the Princess Mary (b. 1516) had survived, and the king demanded the trade protection of a male heir to protect the fortunes of the Tudor dynasty.It was clear by 1527 that Catherine was past the age of childbearing meanwhile Henry coveted Anne Boleyn, who would not harmonize without the assurance of marriage. Yet royal annulments were not infrequent, and all might have been resolved without drama, or even unremarked, had not Henry VIII himself been a proficient, if mend acious, theologian. The master(prenominal) obstacle was that Henry, who feared international humiliation, insisted that his divorce should be granted by a competent authority in England-this way he could de rive his wife of her legal rights, and bully his Episcopal judges.But his marriage had been founded on Pope Julius IIs dispensation, necessarily obtained by Henry VIII to enable the young Henry VIII to marry his brothers widow in the first place, and hence the matter pertained to Rome. In order to have his case decided without reference to Rome, in face of the Papacys unwillingness to concede the matter, Henry had to prove against the reigning pope, Clement VII that his predecessors dispensation was invalid then the marriage would automatically terminate, on the grounds that it had never legally existed.Henry would be a bachelor again. However, this strategy took the king away from matrimonial law into the quite remote and hypersensitive realm of papal power. If Julius IIs disp ensation was invalid, it must be because the successors of St. Peter had no power to devise such instruments, and the popes were thus no better than other human legislators who had exceeded their authority. Henry was a good enough theologian and canon lawyer to know that there was a minority opinion in Western Christendom to precisely this effect.He was enough of an egotist, too, to fall captive to his own powers of persuasionsoon he believed that papal primacy was unquestionably a sham, a ploy of human invention to deprive kings and emperors of their legitimate inheritances. Henry looked back to the golden days of the British imperial past, to the time of the Emperor Constantine and of King Lucius I. In fact, Lucius I had never existed- he was a myth, a figment of pre-Conquest imagination.But Henrys British sources showed that this Lucius was a great ruler, the first Christian king of Britain, who had endowed the British Church with all its liberties and possessions, and then writt en to Pope Eleutherius asking him to transmit the Roman laws. However, the popes reply explained that Lucius did not need any Roman law, because he already had the lex Britunniue (whatever that was) under which he ruled both regnum and sacerdotium For you be Gods vicar in your kingdom, as the psalmist says, Give the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness to the kings son (Ps. xxii 1) . . . A king hath his name of ruling, and not of having a realm. You shall be a king, while you rule well but if you do otherwise, the name of a king shall not remain with you . . . God grant you so to rule the realm of Britain, that you may reign with him forever, whose vicar you be in the realm. Vicarius Dei-vicar of Christ. Henrys divorce had led him, incredibly, to believe in his royal supremacy over the English Church. b) Supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana With the advent of the divorce crisis, Henry took personal charge of his policy and government.He ousted Wolsey, who was hopelessl y compromised in the new scheme of things, since his legatine power came directly from Rome. He named Sir Thomas More to the chancellorship, but this move backfired owing to Mores scrupulous reluctance to involve himself in Henrys proceedings. He summoned Parliament, which for the first time in English history worked with the king as an omnicompetent legislative assembly, if hesitatingly so. Henry and Parliament finally threw off Englands allegiance to Rome in an unsurpassed burst of revolutionary statute-making the work of Annates (1532. , the Act of Appeals (1533), the Act of Supremacy (1534), the First Act of Succession (1534) the Treasons Act (1534), and the Act against the Popes Authority (1536). The Act of Appeals proclaimed Henry VIIIs new imperial status-all English jurisdiction, both secular and religious, now sprang from the king-and abolished the popes right to decide English ecclesiastical cases. The Act of Supremacy declared that the king of England was supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana, or Church of Englandnot the pope. The Act of Succession was the first of a series of Tudor instruments used to settle the order of succession to the hrone, a measure which even Thomas More agreed was in itself unremarkable, save that this statute was prefaced by a preamble denouncing papal jurisdiction as a usurpation of Henrys imperial power. More, together with Bishop Fisher of Rochester, and the London Carthusians, the most rigorous and honorable custodians of papal primacy and the legitimacy of the Aragonese marriage, were assay for denying Henrys supremacy under the terms of the Treasons Act. These terms inter alia made it high treason maliciously to de rive either king or queen of the dignity, title, or name of their royal estatesthat is to deny Henrys royal supremacy.The victims of the act, who were in reality martyrs to Henrys vindictive egoism, were cruelly penalise in the summer of 1535. A year later the Reformation legislation was completed by t he Act against the Popes Authority, which removed the last vestiges of papal power in England, including the popes pastoral right as a teacher to decide disputed points of Scripture. Henry VIII now controlled the English Church as its supreme head in both temporal and doctrinal matters his ecclesiastical status was that of a lay metropolitan archbishop who denied the validity of external, papal authority within his territories.He was not a riest, and had no sacerdotal or sacramental functionsthe king had tried briefly to claim these but had been rebuffed by an disgust episcopate. Yet Henry was not a Protestant, either. Until his death in 1547, Henry VIII believed in Catholicism without the popea curious but typically Henrician application of logic to the facts of socalled British history as exemplified by King Lucius I. As a lay archbishop, Henry could make ecclesiastical laws and get doctrines almost as he pleasedprovided he did not overthrow the articles of faith.In fact, this g ave him a wider latitude than might be thought, because the bishops could not agree what the articles of faith were, beyond the fundamentals of Gods existence, Christs divinity, the Trinity, and some of the sacraments. The Greek scholarship of the Christian Humanists had weakened the structure of traditional, medieval Christian doctrine by questioning texts and rejecting scholasticism a mood of uncertainty prevailed. Before 1529, then, Henry had ruled his clergy through Wolsey after 1534 he did so personally, and through his new old-timer minister, Thomas Cromwell, whom Henry soon appointed his (lay) vicegerent in spirituals.A former aide of Wolsey, Cromwell had risen to executive power as a client of the Boleyn interest, and had taken assertion of the machinery of government, especially the management of Parliament, in January 1532. By combining the offices of Lord Privy Seal and vicegerent, Cromwell succeeded Wolsey as the architect of Tudor policy under Henry, until his own fal l in july 1540but with one striking difference. As vicegerent he was entirely subordinate to Henry Wolsey, as legate, had been subordinate only as an Englishman.Yet the accomplishment of Henrys dream to give the words Rex Imperator literal meaning raises a key historical question. Exactly why did the English bishops and abbots, the aristocracy of the spirit who held a weight of votes in the House of Lords, permit the Henrician Reformation to occur? The answer is partly that Henry coerced his clerical opponents into submission by threats and punitive taxation but some bishops actually supported the king, albeit sadly, and a vital truth lies behind this capitulation.Those clerics who were politically alert saw that it was preferable to be controlled by the Tudor monarchs personally, with whom they could mickle and haggle, than to be offered as a sacrifice instead to the anticlerical laity in the House of Commons, which was the true alternative to compliance. For as early as 1532, it was on the separate that the Tudor supremacy would be a parliamentary supremacy, not a purely royal one, and only the despotic kings dislike of articulation assemblies ensured that Parliaments contribution was cut back to the mechanical, though still revolutionary, task of enacting the requisite legislation.It was plain to all but the most ultramontane papalists on the Episcopal bench that a parliamentary supremacy would have exposed the clergy directly to the pentup emotional fury and hatred of the anticlerical laity and common lawyers. The laity, furthermore, were fortified for the attack by the humanists debunking of ritualism and superstition. In short, royal supremacy was the better of two evils the clergy would not have to counter the approaching anticlerical backlash without the necessary filter of royal mediation. c) The dissolution of the religious housesHenry VIIIs supremacy did save the bishops from the worst excesses of lay anticlericalism, and the kings doctrinal cons ervatism prevented an fusillade of Protestantism during his reign. However, nothing could save the monasteries. Apart from anticlericalism, three quite invincible forces merged after 1535 to dictate the dissolution of the religious houses. First, the monastic communities almost parent institutions outside England and Walesthis was juridically unacceptable after the Acts of Appeals and Supremacy. Secondly, Henry VIII was bankrupt. He needed to annex the monastic estates in order to restore the Crowns finances.Thirdly, Henry had to buy the allegiance of the political nation away from Rome and in support of his Reformation by massive injections of new patronagehe must palliate the lay nobility and gentry with a share of the spoils. Thus Thomas Cromwells first task as vicegerent was to conduct an ecclesiastical census under Henrys commission, the first major tax record since Domesday Book, to evaluate the condition and wealth of the English Church. Cromwells questionnaire was a model of precision. Was divine service observed? Who were the benefactors? What lands did the houses possess? What rents? and so on. The survey was completed in six months, and Cromwells genius for administration was shown by the fact that Valor Ecclesiasticus, as it is known, served both as a record of the value of the monastic assets, and as a report on individual clerical incomes for taxation purposes. The lesser monasteries were dissolved in 1536 the great houses followed two years later. The process was interrupted by a formidable northern rebellion, the Pilgrimage of Grace, which was brutally crushed by use of soldierly law, exemplary public hangings, and a wholesale breaking of Henrys promises to the pilgrims.But the work of plunder was quickly completed. A total of 56o monastic institutions had been suppressed by November 1539, and lands valued at ? 132,000 per annum immediately accrued to the Court of Augmentations of the Kings Revenue, the new department of state set up by Cro mwell to cope with the take of resources. Henrys coffers next received ? I5,000 or so from the sale of gold and silver plate, lead, and other precious items finally, the monasteries had possessed the right of presentation to about two-fifths of the parochial benefices in England and Wales, and these rights were also added to the Crowns patronage.The long-term effects of the dissolution have often been debated by historians, and may conveniently be split into those which were planned, and those not. Within the former category, Henry VIII eliminated the last fortresses of potential resistance to his royal supremacy. He founded six new dioceses upon the remains of former monastic buildings and endowmentsPeterborough, Gloucester, Oxford, Chester, Bristol, and Westminster, the last-named creation abandoned in 1550. The king then reorganized the ex-monastic cathedrals as Cathedrals of the New Foundation, with revised staffs and statutes.Above all, though, the Crowns regular income was seemingly doubled-but for how long? The bitter chaff of the dissolution was that Henry VIIIs colossal military expenditure in the 1540s, together with the laitys demand for a share of the booty, politically irresistible as that was, would so drastically erode the financial gains as to cancel out the benefits of the entire process. Sales of the confiscated lands began even before the suppression of the greater houses was completed, and by 1547 almost two thirds of the former monastic property had been alienated.Further grants by Edward VI and Queen Mary brought this figure to over threequarters by 1558. The remaining lands were sold by Elizabeth I and the early Stuarts. It is true that the lands were not given away out of 1,593 grants in Henry VIIIs reign, only 69 were gifts or partly so the bulk of grants (95. 6 per cent) represented lands sold at prices based on fresh valuations. But the proceeds of gross sales were not invested quite the opposite under Henry VIII. In any case, land was the best investment.The impact of sales upon the non-parliamentary income of the Crown was thus obvious, and there is everything to be said for the view that it was Henry VIIIs constant dissipation of the monarchys resources that made it difficult for his successors to govern England. Of the unplanned effects of the dissolution, the wholesale end of fine Gothic buildings, melting down of medieval metalwork and jewellery, and sacking of libraries were the most extensive acts of licensed vandalism perpetrated in the whole of British history.The clergy naturally suffered an immediate decline in morale. The number of candidates for ordination dropped sharply there was little real conviction that Henry VIIIs Reformation had anything to do with spiritual life, or with God. The disappearance of the abbots from the House of Lords meant that the ecclesiastical vote had withered away to a minority, leaving the laity ascendant in both Houses. With the sale of ex-monastic lands usually went the rights of parochial presentation attached to them, so that local laity btained a considerable monopoly of ecclesiastical patronage, setting the pattern for the next three centuries. The nobility and gentry, especially moderatesized gentry families, were the ultimate beneficiaries of the Crowns land sales. The distribution of national wealth shifted between 1535 and 1558 overwhelmingly in favor of Crown and laity, as against the Church, and appreciably in favor of the nobility and gentry, as against the Crown. Very few new or substantially enlarged private estates were built up solely out of exmonastic lands by 1558.But if Norfolk is a typical county, the changing pattern of wealth distribution at Elizabeths accession was that 4. 8 per cent of the countys manors were possessed by the Crown, 6. 5 per cent were Episcopal or other ecclesiastical manors, II. 4 per cent were owned by East Anglican territorial magnates, and 75. 4 per cent had been acquired by the gentry. In 1535 , 2. 7 per cent of manors had been held by the Crown, 17. 2 per cent had been owned by the monasteries, 9. 4 per cent were in the hands of magnates, and 64 per cent belonged to gentry families.Without Henry VIIIs preparatory break with Rome, there could not have been Protestant reform in Edward VIs reignthus evaluation can become a question of religious opinion, rather than historical judgment. However, it is voiceless not to regard Henry as a despoiler he was scarcely a creator. Thomas Cromwell did his utmost, often behind the kings back, to endow his contemporaries with Erasmian, and enlightened idealism the Elizabethan via media owed much to the eirenic side of Cromwells complex character.But Cromwells reward was the blockira principis mors est. He was cast past by his suspicious employer, and fell victim to the hatred of his enemies. And without Wolsey or Cromwell to restrain him, Henry could do still more harm. He resolved to embark on French and Scottish wars, triggering a s low-burning fuse that was extinguished only by the execution of Mary Stuart in February 1587. Yet if Henry off-key to war and conflicting policy in the final years of his reign, it was because he felt secure at last.Cromwell had provided the enforcement machinery necessary to protect the supreme head from spontaneous internal opposition Jane Seymour had brought forth the male heir to the Tudor throne Henry was excited about his marriage to Catherine Howard, and was happily cured of theology. 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of Henry VIII The matrimonial adventures of Henry are too familiar to recount again in detail, but an outline may conveniently be given. Anne Boleyn was already gravid when the king married her, and the future Elizabeth I was born on 7 September 1533.Henry was bitterly disappointed that she was not the expected son, blaming Anne and Godin that order. Anne had turned out to be a precocious flirt, who meddled fatally in politics she was ousted and executed in a c oup of May 1536. Henry immediately chose the homelike Jane Seymour, whose triumph in producing the baby Prince Edward was Pyrrhic, for she died of Tudor surgery twelve days later. Her successor was Anne of Cleves, whom Henry married in January 1540 to win European allies. But this lenify creature, which Henry rudely called the Flemish mare, did not suit divorce was thus easy, as the union was never consummated.Catherine Howard came next. A high-spirited mind, she had been a maiden of honour to Anne of Clevesentirely inappropriatelyand became Henrys fifth queen in July 1540 as the key to the coup that destroyed Cromwell. She was executed in February 1542 for adultery. Finally, Henry took the amiable Catherine Parr to wife in July 1543. Twice widowed, Catherine was a cultivated Erasmian, under whose benign influence the royal children lived under one roof, and were spared the more malign components of Henrys paternal indulgence. 2. 6 An extension of English hegemonyHenry VIIIs plans for war which were conceived after his marriage to Catherine Howard, and which hardened when he learned of her infidelity, resurrected youthful dreams of French conquests. Wolsey had monitored the kings futile early campaigns of 1 511-16, and brilliantly transformed Henrys military failures into the diplomatic prize of the treaty of London (1518). At the Field of Cloth of Gold in 1520, Henry had feted Francis I of France in a Renaissance extravaganza that was hailed as the eighth wonder of the world, for Francis was the king whom Henry loved to hate.More wasteful campaigns in 1522 and 1523 were curtailed by Englands financial exhaustionthen Henrys policy fell into labyrinthine confusion. England was at war with France then in alliance with France. In the end, Henry was perhaps grateful for the European peace which prevailed from 1529 to 1536, and even more relieved by the resumed rivalry that kept Habsburg and Valois mutually engaged until the reverberations of the Pilgrimage of Gr ace had died away. By 1541 Henry was moving towards a renewed amity with Spain against France, but he was prudent enough to hesitate.Tudor surety required that before England went to war with France, no doors should be open to the enemy within Britain itself. This meant an extension of English hegemony within the British IslesWales, Ireland, and Scotland. Accordingly Henry undertook, or continued, the wider task of English colonization that was ultimately completed by the Act of Union with Scotland (1707). a) The Union of England and Wales The Union of England and Wales had been presaged by Cromwells reforming ambition and was legally execute by Parliament in 1536 and 1543.The marcher lordships were shired, English laws and county administration were extended to Wales, and the shires and county boroughs were required to send twenty-four MPs to Parliament at Westminster. In addition, a refurbished Council of Wales, and new Courts of Great Sessions, were set up to administer the reg ions defenses and judicial system. Wales was made subject to the full operation of royal writs, and to English principles of land tenure. The Act of 1543 dictated that Welsh customs of tenure and inheritance were to be phased out and that English rules were to succeed them.Welsh customs persisted in remote areas until the seventeenth century and beyond, but English customs soon predominated. English language became the fashionable tongue, and Welsh native arts went into decline. Englishmen have regarded the Union as the dawn of a civilizing process that ended with the abolition of the Council of Wales in 1689 and of the Great Sessions in 1830. Welshmen, by contrast, view Henry VIIIs Acts as a crude annexation, which technically they werefor they were not in the nature of a treaty between negotiating parties as was the case with Scotland in 1707.In fact, Welsh civilization was already advanced in the sixteenth century, and flourished despite the Acts. Sir John Prise, ia relation of T homas Cromwell, defended Welsh history against the skepticism of Polydore Vergil Humphrey Llwyd of Denbigh supported him with geographical learningand there were others. John Owen of Plas Du, Llanarmon, and New College, Oxford, enjoyed a higher literary reputation abroad during his lifetime than did William Shakespeare, his contemporary. He wrote 1,500 Latin epigrams in the style of Martial.Welsh grammars were compiled to perpetuate the native tongueby Sion Dafydd Rhys (1592. ), who wrote in Latin in order to reach the widest European audience, and by john Davies of Mallwyd (1621), who publicly justified the utility of Welsh studies. b) Tudor Irish policy Tudor Irish policy had begun with Henry VIIs decision that all laws made in England were automatically to apply to Ireland, and that the Irish Parliament could only legislate with the king of Englands prior consent.English territorial influence, in reality, did not extend much beyond the Palethe area around Dublinand the Irish chie fs held the balance of power. Henry VIII ruled mainly through the chiefs before the Reformation, but was obliged to protect England in the 1530s from a possible papal counterattack launched from Ireland. Lord Leonard colorise was named deputy of Ireland by Cromwell, but his coercive actions proved counter-productive. He was replaced by Sir Anthony St. Leger, who made a fresh start. St.Leger reshaped the Irish policy of the Tudors, and his basic philosophy persisted until 1783. rather of consolidation and coercion, he proposed friend-ship and conciliation, but the essence of the plan was to create a subordinate national superstructure for Ireland by translating Henry VIIIs lordship into kingship. The kings of England were dominus Hiberniae, not rex. But St. Leger persuaded Henry to assume the Crownthat would overthrow papal claims to feudal overlordship, and subordinate the chiefs to royal authority. Henry assented, and was proclaimed king in June 1541.His understanding was probab ly that kingship would enhance his security within the British Isles. Moreover, if the idea was to form a framework for peaceful, constitutional relations between the Crown and the Irish nation, that was laudable and altruistic. Yet it was also visionary and impractical. The Irish revenues were insufficient to maintain royal statusa separate Council, Star Chamber, Chancery, and Parliament in Dublin, operating on an individual basis of, but subject to controls from, the English Parliament and Privy Council.Above all, kingship committed England to a possible full-scale conquest of Ireland in the future, should the chiefs rebel, or should the Irish Reformation, begun by Cromwell, fail. As it turned out, conciliation by benevolent kingship was probably worse than external consolidation and coercion, since Tudor attitudes to conquest in Ireland were based on experiences in the New World, something the disillusioned Edmund Spenser, who lived in Ireland, pointed out in Elizabeths reign. The harsh vicissitudes of Irish history, especially in the seventeenth century, were hardly attributable to Henry VIII and St.Leger. However, the new policy of the Tudors perpetuated the disadvantages both of subordination and of autonomy. In the wake of Irish pressure and the revolt of the American Colonies, the British Parliament abandoned its controls over Ireland in 1783. The Act of Union of 1801 reversed this change in favour of direct rule from Westminster, after which Irish history owed nothing to the Tudors. c) The need to control Scotland Yet the linchpin of Tudor security was the need to control Scotland.James IV (1488-1513) had renewed the Auld Alliance with France in 1492 and further provoked Henry VII by offering support for Perkin Warbeck. But the first of the Tudors declined to be distracted by Scottish sabre-rattling, and forged a treaty of Perpetual Peace with Scotland in 1501, followed a year later by the marriage of his daughter, Margaret, to King James. However, James tried to break the treaty shortly after Henry VIIIs accession Henry was on campaign in France, but sent the earl of Surrey northwards, and Surrey decimated the frugal at Flodden on 9 September 1513.The elite of Scotlandthe king, three bishops, eleven earls, fifteen lords, and some 10,000 menwere slain in an attack that was the delayed acme of medieval aggression begun by Edward I and III. The new Scottish king, James V, was an infant, and the English interest was symbolized for the next twenty years or so by the person of his mother, Henry VIIIs own sister. But Scottish brat after Flodden had, if anything, confirmed the nations ties with France, epitomized by the regency of john duke of Albany, who represented the French cause but nevertheless kept Scotland at peace with England for the moment.The French threat became overt when the mature James V visited France in 1536, and married in quick succession Madeleine, daughter of Francis I, and on her death Mary of Guise. In 1541 James agreed to meet Henry VIII at York, but committed the supreme offence of failing to turn up. By this time, Scotland was indeed a danger to Henry VIII, as its government was dominated by the French faction led by Cardinal Beaton, who symbolized both the Auld Alliance and the threat of papal counter-attack. In October 1542 the duke of Norfolk invaded Scotland, at first achieving little.It was the Scottish counterstroke that proved to be a worse disaster even than Flodden. On 25 November 1542, 3,000 English triumphed over 10,000 Scots at Solway Mossand the news of the disgrace killed James V within a month. Scotland was left hostage to the fortune of Mary Stuart, a baby born only six days before Jamess death. For England, it seemed to be the answer to a prayer. Henry VIII and Protector Somerset, who governed England during the early years of Edward VIs minority, none the less turned advantage into danger.Twin policies were espoused by which war with France was balanced by interve ntion in Scotland designed to secure Englands back door. In 1543 Henry used the prisoners taken at Solway Moss as the nucleus of an English party in Scotland he engineered Beatons overthrow, and forced on the Scots the treaty of Greenwich, which projected union of the Crowns in form of marriage between Prince Edward and Mary Stuart. At the end of the same year, Henry allied with Spain against France, planning a combined invasion for the following spring.But the invasion, predictably, was not concerted. Henry was deluded by his capture of Boulogne the emperor made a separate peace with France at Crepi, leaving Englands flank exposed. At astronomical cost the war continued

Ethnic Background Essay

My name is Stephanie Flowers and until this class assignment I never thoughtfully supposeed what my actual ethnic land was. After looking up the meaning of my last name I found it to be of Welsh origin. This means that I could possibility trace my family root back to Great Britain. After reading chapter one of Race and Ethnic Relations I discovered that being a part of a authentic ethnic background does not mean that you call for to be part of that race, but you drive to practice the common pagan traditions of that subculture. So based cancelled of my name some people might think that I was English.I grew up with a few menagehold traditions that I consider to be a part of my ethnic background. To begin with, I would consider my family to practice Irish traditions. We always have huge St. Patricks Day party at my home base that turns into an all-day drinking and eating celebration. I might not know all the reasons behind this celebration and what I consider a part of my family tradition, but it is chill out a part of my ethnic background in my opinion. Drinking is a big part of being Irish and in my family most celebrations do affect some type of alcohol.In Irish culture it is normal to introduce alcohol to children before the actual drinking age, I think this is good because we wrick up with this around us and never take consumption of alcohol to extremes because it such a part of everyday life. I am would also consider myself to be of German ethnicity. My family has a good luck tradition for New Years. We eat pork barrel roast and sauerkraut in hopes that the next year will be filled with lots of happiness and joy. I personally love this tradition and get upset when I some clips only get to eat this repast once a year.It is one of my top five meals to eat that my grandma cooks. Being from the United States of America I do think that I have picked up so many different traditions from all of the friends that I have had throughout my life. This is why I love living in this country I get to experience so many different cultures and ethnic backgrounds. My boyfriend is of the Catholic religion, his family maintains this culture by attending mass for Christmas, Easter, and whenever they feel the need intone their relationship with god.This is the way that they maintain their ethnic background. They are a common group of people who believe the idea that they all share the share cultural heritage. This stems from his Irish background where Catholicism is the main religion practiced in that country. So to me this is the way to stay in touch with being from Ireland even though they now live in America. My cousin Rachael is half Mexican. Her mom was an immigrant and came to this country to start a better life. I love getting to go to their house in Texas her mom makes the best Mexican dishes.What I have noticed from her Mexican culture and ethnicity is that food is a way of bringing the family together, it is a time of bonding in their household. I believe that by cooking traditional Mexican food it keeps her in touch with her roots and makes her feel better interrelateed to her homeland. After doing this assignment I am very interested in doing more research on my family roots and discovering more about who and where I came from. wish it says on the Ancestry. com commercial, you dont have to know what youre looking for you just have to start looking. So thats what I am release to start doing. Also, I would like to conduct interviews with the elderly people in my family and possibility start filling out my family tree, which would be an easy way to connect the dots of my family history. I will still continue to maintain my Irish and German background by drinking on St. Patricks Day and eating pork roast and sauerkraut. I am very proud to be an American and I wish I didnt take all of the rights that I have in this country for granite.

King Devanampiyatissa Essay

During the reign of king Asoka of india,Srilanka was ruled by king Tissa who was the second son of kung Muthaseeva. King Asoka and King Tissa were really close friends. Kung Tissa sent delegation to meet kingAsoka with several gifts. The leader of that group was Prince Maha Aritta who was the nephew of King Tissa. This delegation was ceremoniously received by Emperor Asoka. This delegation washed-out about 5 months in India. King Asoka sent back alarge collection of precious onaments required in a coronation as a gift. It consisted of swords and worthful ornaments. Also the following core was sent I have surrended myself to the triple gem. Oh my friend, you too submit yourself to the triple gem. The King was very much pleased with the message the envoys brought back. He held a second coronation with ornaments King Asoka had sent. Also the King waz given an honorary title Devanampiya that was used by Mourya rulers ti which Emperor Asoka belonged. From that daylight king Tissa was called Devanampiyatissa The most important outcone of the friendship of the two kingswas the introduction of Buddism to Srilanka. King Asoka sent several missions to preach buddism to this country. Mihindu Thera who was the son of kung Asoka brought Buddism to Srilanka after 3rd Dharma Sangayana Along with Mihindu Thera came lohan Thera named Ittiya, Uttiya, Sambala,Baddadala anf Sumana a young monk and Bhanduka on a pposon full moon day at Mihinthale. Mihindu Thera preached the Chulla Hattipadopama Suthraya to king and his group . Upon listening to the sermon the king and the populate readily embraced Buddism and surrendered to the triple gem.

12 Angry Men Essay †Pathos ethos and logos Essay

Pathos,ethos and boy in 12 angry menIntroduction Twelve Angry men is a movie of twelve jurors who atomic number 18 struck in one room trying to comprehend with one another whether a young boy is responsible for his fathers death. Emotions meet sex up when one of the jurors stands up for the curse word defending him that he was not guilty. This admit is full of Ethos, logos and pathos. This paper explains some of the places these rhetorical tools argon employed.Pathos, ethos and logos instances In the fritter away twelve Angry men, Juror number eight employs ethos when he was trying to convince juror number ten that the boys father could not nonplus heard the boy presuppose to the old man, I am going to kill you. He says, theres something else I would like to talk about for a minute. I think we have already proved that the old man could not have heard the crack say, I am gonna kill you, but supposing he was trying to convince them that when you say something, it doesnt mean that you are going to do exactly that. We shadower see a clear demonstration of pathos in the film where juror number ten says, he is just a common coarse slob, he does not even speak good English. Juror number elven replies to him, He does not speak English this is a clear irony in the arguments presented by juror number ten. Juror number ten also in another instances demonstrates pathos where he is trying to convine the jury that the slum dwellers are in general bad people when he exclaims, They get drunk oh, theyre real big drinkers, all of em you know that and bang soulfulnesss lyin in the gutter. Oh, nobodys blaming them for it. Thats the way they are By nature You know what I mean? VIOLENT by means of this, we cornerstone clearly seethe emotions that this juror had against the slum dwellers. Logos is extensively employed in the film, but profoundly I noticed it when juror number xi was convincing the other jurors that the old man could not have moved as swiftly as it w as tring to be portrayed because of the formerly suffered stroke. He says, Id like to find out if an old man who drags one foot when he walks, because he had a stroke last year, could get from his sleeping accommodation to his front door in fifteen seconds. This was a logical argument of how the old man could not have dragged himself so fast to see the lad run out of his home. He also convinces the jury of how the woman across the street could not be able to see the boy through the lease without her spectacles on.He explains, Its logical to assume that she wasnt wearing them when she was in bed. Tossing and turning, trying to fall asleep. Then the juror continues by saying, I striket know Im guessing Im also guessing that she probably didnt put her glasses on when she cancelled to look casually out of the window. And she, herself, testified the killing took place just as she looked out. The lights went off a split second later she couldnt have had season to put them on then. H eres another guess maybe she honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father I say she only saw a blur. All this was by the juror number eights logical reasoning. It is also clear in the film when he say, It is logical to assumeHe explains, Its logical to assume that she wasnt wearing them when she was in bed. Tossing and turning, trying to fall asleep. Then the juror continues by saying, I dont know Im guessing Im also guessing that she probably didnt put her glasses on when she turned to look casually out of the window. And she, herself, testified the killing took place just as she looked out. The lights went off a split second later she couldnt have had time to put them on then. Heres another guess maybe she honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father I say she only saw a blur. All this was by the juror number eights logical reasoning. It is also clear in the film when he say, It is logical to assumeHe also convinces the jury of how the woman across the street could not be able to see the boy through the train without her spectacles on. He explains, Its logical to assume that she wasnt wearing them when she was in bed. Tossing and turning, trying to fall asleep. Then the juror continues by saying, I dont know Im guessing Im also guessing that she probably didnt put her glasses on when she turned to look casually out of the window. And she, herself, testified the killing took place just as she looked out. The lights went off a split second later she couldnt have had time to put them on then. Heres another guess maybe she honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father I say she only saw a blur. All this was by the juror number eights logical reasoning. It is also clear in the film when he say, It is logical to assumeReferenceshttp//www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/quoteshttp//jiripik.me/2012/06/03/12-angry men teamwork team decision making effect of prejudices/Source document