hDiscuss the ways that the 17th century Dutch Republic differed from its neighbors, telling how these differences contributed to the country's success.
The Dutch republic provides a unique example of government in its time. Most governments around the 17th century were monarchies. Their unique system was a provincial government with 7 provinces instead of one ruler. This prevented any one man from being too powerful. Each of the representatives of the provinces could only act on behalf of his province. The Dutch republic found itself to be more successful than most of its contemporaries because of its wealthy middle class, form of government, and its tolerance of many foreign ways.
The power and wealth of the Dutch Republic gathered in the middle class, and the merchants, differing from most governments, where the power is in the hands of the king, the nobles, or some sort of parliament. The Dutch currency, the florin, was the European form of currency because of the Dutch's vast wealth. The Dutch's vast wealth caused it to be a supreme naval power, with over 10,000 ships in its control. Other attributes of the Dutch wealth are their vast knowledge of agriculture, and high class paintings.
The form of government employed by the Dutch during this time frame was built to have a fair government, and to prevent a tyrant from ruling, and destroying the republic. The Dutch republic was divided up into 7 territories known as provinces, lead by a stadholder. There was no rank above it. There was a house known as the House of Orange, but they could only act on behalf of the people. In wartime, the stadholder was the most powerful person in the republic, but peacetime, a burgher took control of all of the economic portions of the government. There was one attempt in 1795 to break up the republic, but it was quickly pounced on, and the government remained the same.
The Protestant reformation brought many troubles to the Dutch Republic. Joseph Arminius taught his own doctrine, which edited the belief of predestination, believed by the Dutch Calvinists. This challenge was quickly over when the Dutch Republic granted religious freedom, and did not take it back. Most of Europe was enveloped in religious wars. Soon after religious freedom was granted, many Protestants from other countries migrated towards the Dutch Republic in hopes of a better life. The culture of the Dutch was enriched by all of these minorities entering the borders, and the economy was stronger than ever.
The Dutch were largely successful where other countries were not. They had a provincial government, avoiding tyrants. The wealth was in the hands of the many, rather than the few. They were not plagued by religious wars, like almost every other European country, and granted religious freedom, giving a bigger working class to its economy.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Make up Assignment
In your opinion, was Oliver Cromwell the right person to take over England after the death of Charles I?
Oliver Cromwell took over control in England with the death of Charles I. The English government was changed over the years of his reign more than ever. He changed it from a monarchy, to a republic, and then what can be considered another monarchy. Although Oliver Cromwell entered his reign with good intentions, he was too indecisive, and power hungry to be an effective ruler of England.
Before Cromwell took over in England, England was ruled by an absolute monarch, Charles I. Charles disbanded parliament, and took England into civil war, against the parliament. Both sides lost considerable amounts of money, and men. Charles was finally defeated, and was forced to surrender. He was put on trial after the first civil war, and executed, believing until the end that he was the king by God's will. Cromwell took over afterward and made England a republic.
Upon returning to England, Cromwell did not do things differently than Charles. He dissolved the newly established parliament that put Charles to death. He said that HE was the true parliament, and that they were not any kind of parliament. He established a new parliament supposed to do the job that Cromwell wanted, but he felt that it did not do its job, so he dissolved it the same year he created it.
He established a protectorate, which gave the power to the few high ranking officials. It was a handful of men hand picked by Cromwell, lord Protector. He ran things just like a monarchy. The Protectors made decisions, the people were upset about it. Cromwell was offered the crown, but refused. He was a king, without the title. Finally, the people were so upset, they had Cromwell tried, and executed.
Cromwell was not the right person for the job. He dissolved his own parliaments, and brought England back to where it was after he changed it for the better. He was too indecisive, he never could really decide what it was that he wanted for England. He kept changing it, then changing it back. He installed three different types of parliament, executed a king, and crossed the line with the entire country of England.
Oliver Cromwell took over control in England with the death of Charles I. The English government was changed over the years of his reign more than ever. He changed it from a monarchy, to a republic, and then what can be considered another monarchy. Although Oliver Cromwell entered his reign with good intentions, he was too indecisive, and power hungry to be an effective ruler of England.
Before Cromwell took over in England, England was ruled by an absolute monarch, Charles I. Charles disbanded parliament, and took England into civil war, against the parliament. Both sides lost considerable amounts of money, and men. Charles was finally defeated, and was forced to surrender. He was put on trial after the first civil war, and executed, believing until the end that he was the king by God's will. Cromwell took over afterward and made England a republic.
Upon returning to England, Cromwell did not do things differently than Charles. He dissolved the newly established parliament that put Charles to death. He said that HE was the true parliament, and that they were not any kind of parliament. He established a new parliament supposed to do the job that Cromwell wanted, but he felt that it did not do its job, so he dissolved it the same year he created it.
He established a protectorate, which gave the power to the few high ranking officials. It was a handful of men hand picked by Cromwell, lord Protector. He ran things just like a monarchy. The Protectors made decisions, the people were upset about it. Cromwell was offered the crown, but refused. He was a king, without the title. Finally, the people were so upset, they had Cromwell tried, and executed.
Cromwell was not the right person for the job. He dissolved his own parliaments, and brought England back to where it was after he changed it for the better. He was too indecisive, he never could really decide what it was that he wanted for England. He kept changing it, then changing it back. He installed three different types of parliament, executed a king, and crossed the line with the entire country of England.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
Free Response Practice Essay
Explain how the trials and tribulations of Galileo pointed towards the future of Europe, while at the same time, demonstrated the realities of his own time.
The trials of Galileo took place during a time of turmoil between the Church and the secular world. Italy was experiencing a Renaissance and people were now more focused on secular things rather than religious, secular meaning worldly, and non-religious. Galileo was one of the prime free-thinkers, and regarded by some as the father of modern science. His discoveries lead to the scientific revolution. The Church was against most of his discoveries, as they contradicted many of the Churches most hallowed traditions. Galileo's trials were a symbol of the times Europe was experiencing, where modern science was beginning to form, and the original Church had its control start to slip from its grasp.
Galileo's trial took place in the middle of the Reformation. In the Reformation, people were starting to question the beliefs of the Church instead of just follow its laws without question. Before the Renaissance, faith was the only thing that most people had, but with the Renaissance, people's sole purpose was not longer just to get into heaven. People became more secular. The Church also was losing some it its longest traditions because of modern science. Galileo backed up the ideas of Copernicus, that the Sun was the center of the universe. The Church damned these ideas, saying that Christian belief states that the Earth is the center. However, no where in Scripture does it say that the Earth is the center.
Europe was torn between moving with the times, and keeping with its Church tradition during the time of Galileo. Many were focused on art, and inventions, while the clergy still kept its hold on things. It used to be that the clergy had the run of the law, now it was the secular world. Modern science was beginning to take its form. The Church was highly against the scientists because they were under the impression that there is no place in the world for science and religion to coexist peacefully. Scientists were often put on trial, just like Galileo, for their ideas that the Church found a "problem" with.
Galileo's trials moved Europe towards the future. Modern science began with Galileo. Some call him the father of modern science. Galileo discovered Jupiter with his new invention, the telescope. Modern science has discovered 4 planets since Galileo built his first telescope. Modern science has improved on his telescope more than Galileo could have ever imagined. He was one of the first people to practice physics. He expanded of the Heliocentric idea of Copernicus, and backed it up with enough facts that it has been proven to be correct. Most of the ideas Galileo discovered, and theorized are taught in schools today. Since Galileo's trial, the Church and science have not tried to coexist, some believe they can, but after his trial, most believed they cannot. As a result, he was excommunicated. If it was not for Galileo, we would not have modern science at all, and would still be living in a world dominated by the Church's teachings
Galileo is most likely the most important figure concerning modern science, and the battle between The Church and science. Galileo has since been acquitted, and had his full honor restored by the Church. Pope John Paul II remarked he wished that the Church had handled his trial much better. Galileo's ideas were in a sense, Europe moving forward, and the Church's argument against him, trying to cling on to the old ways, even though they were dying and on life support as it was.
The trials of Galileo took place during a time of turmoil between the Church and the secular world. Italy was experiencing a Renaissance and people were now more focused on secular things rather than religious, secular meaning worldly, and non-religious. Galileo was one of the prime free-thinkers, and regarded by some as the father of modern science. His discoveries lead to the scientific revolution. The Church was against most of his discoveries, as they contradicted many of the Churches most hallowed traditions. Galileo's trials were a symbol of the times Europe was experiencing, where modern science was beginning to form, and the original Church had its control start to slip from its grasp.
Galileo's trial took place in the middle of the Reformation. In the Reformation, people were starting to question the beliefs of the Church instead of just follow its laws without question. Before the Renaissance, faith was the only thing that most people had, but with the Renaissance, people's sole purpose was not longer just to get into heaven. People became more secular. The Church also was losing some it its longest traditions because of modern science. Galileo backed up the ideas of Copernicus, that the Sun was the center of the universe. The Church damned these ideas, saying that Christian belief states that the Earth is the center. However, no where in Scripture does it say that the Earth is the center.
Europe was torn between moving with the times, and keeping with its Church tradition during the time of Galileo. Many were focused on art, and inventions, while the clergy still kept its hold on things. It used to be that the clergy had the run of the law, now it was the secular world. Modern science was beginning to take its form. The Church was highly against the scientists because they were under the impression that there is no place in the world for science and religion to coexist peacefully. Scientists were often put on trial, just like Galileo, for their ideas that the Church found a "problem" with.
Galileo's trials moved Europe towards the future. Modern science began with Galileo. Some call him the father of modern science. Galileo discovered Jupiter with his new invention, the telescope. Modern science has discovered 4 planets since Galileo built his first telescope. Modern science has improved on his telescope more than Galileo could have ever imagined. He was one of the first people to practice physics. He expanded of the Heliocentric idea of Copernicus, and backed it up with enough facts that it has been proven to be correct. Most of the ideas Galileo discovered, and theorized are taught in schools today. Since Galileo's trial, the Church and science have not tried to coexist, some believe they can, but after his trial, most believed they cannot. As a result, he was excommunicated. If it was not for Galileo, we would not have modern science at all, and would still be living in a world dominated by the Church's teachings
Galileo is most likely the most important figure concerning modern science, and the battle between The Church and science. Galileo has since been acquitted, and had his full honor restored by the Church. Pope John Paul II remarked he wished that the Church had handled his trial much better. Galileo's ideas were in a sense, Europe moving forward, and the Church's argument against him, trying to cling on to the old ways, even though they were dying and on life support as it was.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
DBQ Format Quiz 11/16
1. The scoring range of DBQs is 0-9
2. If there is no thesis, the highest score is a 4
3. If there are 12 documents, the bare minimum citations is 8
4. Bias is personal opinion on a certain issue
5. Groupings are similar documents together
6. ("Document 5")
2. If there is no thesis, the highest score is a 4
3. If there are 12 documents, the bare minimum citations is 8
4. Bias is personal opinion on a certain issue
5. Groupings are similar documents together
6. ("Document 5")
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Some of the Vocab
Roman Catholic Church- The Christian Church opposite to the Eastern Orthodox Church. Has about 1/6 of the population of the world. Largest religion today. The pope is their spiritual leader. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_catholic_church
Eastern Orthodox Church- Separated from the Roman Catholic Church as a result of the great Schism. The pope excommunicated the bishop of Constantinople, but the bishop retaliated by excommunicating the pope, and the surrounding area separated from the Church. Also known as the Greek Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
Crusades- attempts by France, England, and the Holy Roman Empire to retake the Holy Land. There were 9 Crusades, however they were unsuccessful. If there was any success, it was short lived. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades
Black Plague- One of the worst pandemics in European history, peaking around 1350. Wiped out about half of Europe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Death
Gunpowder- Invented by the Chinese, but only used in festivities until they were conquered, and the conquerors found a way to harness its power. The canon was first recorded in Europe in 1248. 1267 describes the first firecrackers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder
Medici- Powerful Renaissance family in Florence. Family of great leaders such as Giovanni de Medici, Cosimo de Medici, and Lorenzo the Magnificent. The Medici family collapsed with the formation of the United Kingdom of Italy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medici
Niccolo Machiavelli- Author of the Renaissance. Famous for writing the Prince. He wrote it saying that morality should not be the basis of a rulers reign. He had hoped that the book would be a reference for Italian rulers, so that they would return to the ways of Lorenzo the Magnificent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%C3%B2_Machiavelli
Christian Humanists- The belief that the Renaissance way of life is able to live collectively with the Catholic faith. Christian Humanists believed in both ways of life, uncommon at the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_humanist
New Universities- Universities renamed, or founded in the UK. Since 1928, they have been referred to as red brick universities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_universities
Friday, October 29, 2010
The Prince
- Oliveratto da Ferma would most likely have success out of the three men today. However, his success would be at the criminal aspects of the world today. He gained his power during his life by the means of crime, and most likely would run the local mafia. Oliveratto da Ferma would have success leading the mafia because he was a skilled leader in battle when it came to taking, and laying siege to cities. The only weakness that can be seen in Oliveratto is the fact that he is too trusting. After he claimed a city for Boregio, he attended a meeting. At the meeting, he trusted Boregio would hear his points. Boregio had him strangled to death after the meeting, and was succeeded by his son after his death. Oliveratto da Ferma would place too much trust in his subordinates in the mafia, but It is not far fetched to believe that he would realize if one of his underlings would be trying to have him overthrown.
Cesare Boregio would not be very successful in todays world running a business because he consolidated his power through means of favor, gifts, and his inheritence. Boregio was known for using fear to instill loyalty in his subjects. After one of his leaders, da Ferma, had conquered a city, Boregio had him executed.
Remirro de Orca could have found some success in today's world, but his success would have been short lived. He was appointed his office by his uncle, Pope Alexander the Fourth. Remirro Da Orca restored peace very quickly in his rule, but was notoriously cruel to his subjects.
- The Prince has many allies in his claim to power. Allies of the prince include: nobles, generosity, other nations who back him, victory, the people, public opinion, amount of territory controlled, money, etc. Every ally is extremely important, but one of these supersedes the others by far. The greatest ally of any prince is victory on the field of battle. Victory on the battlefield allows the Prince to expand his territory, add subjects to his rule, increase a positive opinion of him if he is merciful, and add money to his treasure. Victory on the battlefield has granted public favor of the leaders and made powers out of leaders such as Caesar and Alexander the Great. Alexander conquered the entire Persian empire, ruled by Darius, in about 15 years. He won strictly because of key, decisive victories at Isis, and Gaugamela. Gaugamela was the final crushing blow to the Persians, their king had fled the field, left the army to be slaughtered, his treasure to the Macedonians, and his personal guard to die. Darius was assassinated before he could ever regain his honor. Alexander conquered, and had victory at every place he encountered that was not already his own. Julius Caesar gained his respect by defeating the Gauls in battle, and conquering all of their territory for Rome. After Caesar returned to Rome as a politician, others turned against him. Caesar, without victory was arrogant, victory gave him that. His own friends assassinated him. Leaders need victory to succeed, but they need to maintain their victories to keep order.
- Machiavelli states over and over that generosity is not always a good thing. Generosity has its ups and downs when you are a prince in power. Generosity is good when you are trying to vie for the crown, and gather a prince's supporters for his claim to the throne. Generosity can be a bad thing if the said Prince is in power, and trying to establish his power. Generosity is good for the nobles to gain favor when you are getting support for a claim to the throne, but generosity to the nobles is bad when you have that power because it takes one smart, vocal person to point is out, gather followers who say that the prince does all of the favors for his friends, or the nobility. The educated of the group would say that this prince was a puppet, and these angry people would rebel, and start a revolution to overthrow this prince if the favors for the nobility were so great that they could not go unnoticed. Generosity is very good to the Prince's enemies, or those who do not like him because it can gain their favor, and help this prince's image in the mind of the people. They would know that this prince respects his enemies. Generosity is frowned upon if this prince is being generous to those who also have claim to the throne that this prince is looking to claim for himself. However, as soon as this prince has the throne, they can show compassion to those who he competed against for the crown. Generosity is good overall to powerful figures when a prince is looking for power, but it is good to be generous to common people as soon as the prince has this power. Never get too optimistic though, princes must be cunning, and if they sense a hint of treachery, be ready to strike. Be generous, and ruthless at the same time. See everything as political. Never confuse morals with politics. Be generous and sly at the same time. Take a pragmatic approach to things.
- The Beatitudes state that those who are patients will be rewarded, but Machiavelli has a more pessimistic viewpoint of things related to being meek etc. The beatitudes give hope to the people who are not born into extremely rich families, who have dreams of making the big time. Machiavelli focus' too much on social orders, saying that the poor should remain poor, and that the rich must remain rich. The beatitudes encourage us, while the Prince, written by Machiavelli discourages those who read it and are not the richest person. Machiavelli can be seen to have the desire to return to the feudal system, where there are few rich nobles who run everything, and the common people work the land as serfs, with no real hope of moving up. Machiavelli says to disregard morals, and devote all of a prince's actions to personal gain, or gain for his or her country. The Beatitudes are meant to be used as guidelines to enforce morals. Machiavelli was not very sympathetic for those who are trying to advance in social class, or those who do not have powerful connections. Machiavelli is false to say that it is not likely for a stroke of luck to happen to a person with a shaky background. A prime, modern example of a such stroke of luck is Michael Oher, offensive tackle for the Baltimore Ravens. The Beatitudes are hope for those who have none, and are more prominent for the common person to follow, while Machiavelli is not providing such hope to those. He give hope to the rich.
- Machiavelli says you must be sly at all times, the Beatitudes say be patient. Machiavelli provides a realistic approach to things, while the Beatitudes give people false hopes that cannot be achieved. A prince should not give his subjects a false hope after all, so he must be generous, but honest at the same time. If the people have false hopes, they start to act like they know how to run things better than those who already are in charge. If the people start to question the authority of a Prince, then that Prince's power will be threatened. If so, the prince has two option, neither of which are good: he would forfeit his power, or he would put down the revolt. Both of these options are bound to hurt this prince's public opinion. Public opinion is everything when it comes to gaining control of the throne. Also it is everything when a prince have the throne, because other leaders should respect him as a leader, otherwise they will challenge this prince's authority and go to war. The Beatitudes are not good as a code of law. They may challenge the authority of this prince if most of the people believe in them. The worst thing that a prince could face is a possible rebellion. If the beatitudes were to be followed, those in power would be extremely threatened, and could lose said power. Granted, there has to be some hope for the people who have none, but princes must be careful not to give them the false hopes that the Beatitudes give to these desperate people.
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [OFFICE Aet. 25-43--1494-1512]. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [Chapter VII]. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [Chapter VIII]. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [Chapter IX]. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [Chapter XVII]. Retrieved from
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The prince [Chapter XXI]. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/machiavelli-prince.html
The bible. (n.d.). [Exodus 20]. Retrieved from http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2020&version=NIV
Monday, October 18, 2010
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Was Henry VIII justified in divorcing Catherine?
The king of England, Henry VIII was desperate for a legitimate male heir to his throne. His first wife Catherine of Argon was not helping this cause, with two children surviving birth, and the male child dying less than sixty days afterwards. Henry was certain that Catherine was not a suitable partner because she was unable to have children. He courted a younger woman, Anne Boleyn. In king Henry's mind, he thought that Anne was better for himself, but he was not justified by the pope. To meet his desire, he broke from the Church. Henry believed himself supreme in England, but in terms of spiritual matters, there is absolutely no power higher than the Church, and the pope.
The English Parliament saw to it that Henry was made head of the new formed Anglican Church, giving him complete power. He found a passage saying that royal rights surpass the Church in terms of major decisions, this only bolstered his ego. He declared he shares all of the royalties that the clergy had before the division. This act also declared that any legitimate successor of Henry would have the same authority. As soon as the divorce was complete, princess Mary was also declared a bastard, and Catherine was sent away.
The rightful ruler of England also had the power to change matters related to the Church as long as the Act of Supremacy was in effect. After Catherine died, Mary was welcomed back into the Tudor family. The Act was justified with the belief that it was best for the nation of England as a whole. Last, it allowed the king or queen of England to have foreign wars, or claim land in the name of God.
At the time Henry wanted the divorce, Italy was invaded by Catherine's cousin, which meant that her cousin would not let the pope annul the marriage. Charles V, ruler of the Holy Roman Empire, was completely against reformation and was urging people to resist. After some of these altercations, Charles V's Holy Roman Empire found itself fighting religious wars against French Protestants.
Henry was not justified in his divorce, but he believed he was. Catherine was actually supposed to be the wife of Henry's brother Arthur, until Arthur's death. This loomed high on Henry's head because of a verse in the Bible, which said that any man who takes his brother's wife will not have any children. Henry believed he should divorce Catherine because 5 of their 6 children were dead before age 1. However, Henry was not justified because he is still married to her, and is a devout Catholic.
The English Parliament saw to it that Henry was made head of the new formed Anglican Church, giving him complete power. He found a passage saying that royal rights surpass the Church in terms of major decisions, this only bolstered his ego. He declared he shares all of the royalties that the clergy had before the division. This act also declared that any legitimate successor of Henry would have the same authority. As soon as the divorce was complete, princess Mary was also declared a bastard, and Catherine was sent away.
The rightful ruler of England also had the power to change matters related to the Church as long as the Act of Supremacy was in effect. After Catherine died, Mary was welcomed back into the Tudor family. The Act was justified with the belief that it was best for the nation of England as a whole. Last, it allowed the king or queen of England to have foreign wars, or claim land in the name of God.
At the time Henry wanted the divorce, Italy was invaded by Catherine's cousin, which meant that her cousin would not let the pope annul the marriage. Charles V, ruler of the Holy Roman Empire, was completely against reformation and was urging people to resist. After some of these altercations, Charles V's Holy Roman Empire found itself fighting religious wars against French Protestants.
Henry was not justified in his divorce, but he believed he was. Catherine was actually supposed to be the wife of Henry's brother Arthur, until Arthur's death. This loomed high on Henry's head because of a verse in the Bible, which said that any man who takes his brother's wife will not have any children. Henry believed he should divorce Catherine because 5 of their 6 children were dead before age 1. However, Henry was not justified because he is still married to her, and is a devout Catholic.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Biographies
Thomas Wolsey
Thomas was born in 1471 and died in 1530. He was a cardinal for the Church and later a counselor of Henry VIII. His position gave him a lot of power and influence. He had Hampton Court Palace built which still stands today as great example of English architecture. He tried out his gift for foreign policies For France. He initiated the treaty of London in order to fulfill the dream of peace in Europe. It was soon abandoned but it did stop another crusade.
Anne Boleyn
Anne was born in 1501 and died in 1536. She was the second of Henry VIII’s wives. She was later executed because she couldn’t produce Henry the heir that he wanted. Anne at first refused to marry Henry because he was already married to Catherine of Aragon. Henry Asked pope Clement VII to give him a divorce but he refused. Henry broke away from the church and started his own church, the Church of England, in which he was the head. He divorced Catherine and made Anne his queen in 1533. Anne gave birth to Elizabeth I and was soon after executed for high treason.
Catherine of Aragon was born in 1485. She was engaged to Arthur, Prince of Wales. However Arthur died young, so she was married to soon to be king of England Henry VIII. In 1510, she gave birth to a stillborn daughter. Following that, she gave birth to a son who died weeks later. The unfortunate events continued as 2 more stillborn sons were born. Finally she delivered a healthy daughter who became Mary I, queen of England. Although after that, another stillborn daughter was born. Later, the king caught sight of Anne Boleyn. The marriage was exiled, and she was sent in exile. She passed away in 1536. Rumor has it that is was cancer that killed her.
Thomas was born in 1471 and died in 1530. He was a cardinal for the Church and later a counselor of Henry VIII. His position gave him a lot of power and influence. He had Hampton Court Palace built which still stands today as great example of English architecture. He tried out his gift for foreign policies For France. He initiated the treaty of London in order to fulfill the dream of peace in Europe. It was soon abandoned but it did stop another crusade.
Anne Boleyn
Anne was born in 1501 and died in 1536. She was the second of Henry VIII’s wives. She was later executed because she couldn’t produce Henry the heir that he wanted. Anne at first refused to marry Henry because he was already married to Catherine of Aragon. Henry Asked pope Clement VII to give him a divorce but he refused. Henry broke away from the church and started his own church, the Church of England, in which he was the head. He divorced Catherine and made Anne his queen in 1533. Anne gave birth to Elizabeth I and was soon after executed for high treason.
Catherine of Aragon was born in 1485. She was engaged to Arthur, Prince of Wales. However Arthur died young, so she was married to soon to be king of England Henry VIII. In 1510, she gave birth to a stillborn daughter. Following that, she gave birth to a son who died weeks later. The unfortunate events continued as 2 more stillborn sons were born. Finally she delivered a healthy daughter who became Mary I, queen of England. Although after that, another stillborn daughter was born. Later, the king caught sight of Anne Boleyn. The marriage was exiled, and she was sent in exile. She passed away in 1536. Rumor has it that is was cancer that killed her.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Part 3 - 2, Henry VII
Henry the VII am I
I am renown for my victory at Bosworth Field
Where Richard the III fell
My soldiers fought bravely and did not yield.
I made a secret alliance with a family known as the Stanleys
They made up a significant part of the army of Richard the III
They switched to my side in the middle of the battle
Richard was severely hurt
The tide of the entire battle had turned
since stanley went to my sde
I mounted my horse and ralley my troops
I went ahead to ride
Suddenly, I see a cloud of dust hurling towards me
Richard the III king of England, has lead a charge
My men quickly rallied to me
and blocked the attack from me, holding like a barge.
Everyone rallied to me
from common soldier to my most trusted men
However King Richard had a weakness
He only charged with 800 men.
There is no doubt in the world that Richard fought very brave
He fought the way he was taught
He had a purpose and was possesed
Finally he was caught.
He was knocked from his horse
so he fought on foot
No doubt Richard showed courage
Then he was knocked off his foot
Almost every single soldier offered king Richard their horse so he could flee
He told tham all nay
He stayed with them until the end
Until on the ground as dead he lay
I am renown for my victory at Bosworth Field
Where Richard the III fell
My soldiers fought bravely and did not yield.
I made a secret alliance with a family known as the Stanleys
They made up a significant part of the army of Richard the III
They switched to my side in the middle of the battle
Richard was severely hurt
The tide of the entire battle had turned
since stanley went to my sde
I mounted my horse and ralley my troops
I went ahead to ride
Suddenly, I see a cloud of dust hurling towards me
Richard the III king of England, has lead a charge
My men quickly rallied to me
and blocked the attack from me, holding like a barge.
Everyone rallied to me
from common soldier to my most trusted men
However King Richard had a weakness
He only charged with 800 men.
There is no doubt in the world that Richard fought very brave
He fought the way he was taught
He had a purpose and was possesed
Finally he was caught.
He was knocked from his horse
so he fought on foot
No doubt Richard showed courage
Then he was knocked off his foot
Almost every single soldier offered king Richard their horse so he could flee
He told tham all nay
He stayed with them until the end
Until on the ground as dead he lay
Part 3-1 Richard
Richard the III am I
I died at the battle of Bosworth field.
I fought brave and heroic until the end,
My enemy would not yield.
This was to be the crucial battle
against Henry the VII
Henry had very little experience in battle, or as a leader
which could have lead him striaght to heaven.
There are gaps in both of our lines
There are many shouts and cries
so no gaps are exploited
as our soldires die.
I rally our soldiers behind my banner
I surround myself with my most loyal knights
I ralley with a booming speech
They are now ready for the fight.
Henry the VII rides away from his main body
I ralley my troops and say,
There is their leader, ride out men
Carpe Dium, sieze the day
I rode out with about 800 of my knights
Straight out towards their king
His men fought to protect him
They formed up in a ring.
I personally leaded the charge
I myself personally had one of Henry's top men killed
I fought until the end
And then my horse from under me was killed.
On the field I came,
across an advisor of my late brother
I knocked his horse from under him
But he lived because Henry's men defended each other
There was no doubt I fought possessed
Most of my soldiers offered me a horse to flee
I turned them down, and stayed to fight
Until i was struck down so brutally.
I died at the battle of Bosworth field.
I fought brave and heroic until the end,
My enemy would not yield.
This was to be the crucial battle
against Henry the VII
Henry had very little experience in battle, or as a leader
which could have lead him striaght to heaven.
There are gaps in both of our lines
There are many shouts and cries
so no gaps are exploited
as our soldires die.
I rally our soldiers behind my banner
I surround myself with my most loyal knights
I ralley with a booming speech
They are now ready for the fight.
Henry the VII rides away from his main body
I ralley my troops and say,
There is their leader, ride out men
Carpe Dium, sieze the day
I rode out with about 800 of my knights
Straight out towards their king
His men fought to protect him
They formed up in a ring.
I personally leaded the charge
I myself personally had one of Henry's top men killed
I fought until the end
And then my horse from under me was killed.
On the field I came,
across an advisor of my late brother
I knocked his horse from under him
But he lived because Henry's men defended each other
There was no doubt I fought possessed
Most of my soldiers offered me a horse to flee
I turned them down, and stayed to fight
Until i was struck down so brutally.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Part 2, how Shakespeare portrayed Richard III, Ricaridan vs. Langcastrian, and Traditionalists and Revisionists
In William Shakespeare's Richard III, Richard is portrayed as a sneaky, underhanded con man who is only interested in personal gain. Shakespeare had his own reasons for this portrayal. During his life, Elizabeth I was queen. She was a descendant of the Tudor dynasty, and the granddaughter of the man who defeated Richard at the Battle of Bosworth Field. This would not have sat well with the crown if one of their main enemies was depicted as a good king, or even a good man in general. Another factor of why he is depicted in that way is the fact that most of the histories available at the time were from the point of view of the Tudors, who saw Richard as their main enemy.
Traditional sources are those believed by the people, for example Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard would be traditional. Revisionist sources are from historians, or primary sources from people who were actually there. An example would be an account from King Henry VII of the Battle of Bosworth Field.
The Ricardian Society is a group with the goal to clear Richard III's name. They believe he was a good king. The Lancastrians want us to believe that Richard was a bad king with only a goal for personal gain. Lancastrians believe that they disposed of the main "bad guy. "
The passage from Vergil Polydore is Lancastrian because it is not sympathetic to Richard III. It points out all of his faults, and places the blame on his shoulders the disappearance of his nephews, although that can never be proven. Finally it points out he has William lord Hastings executed.
Horace Walpoles passage is Ricardian. The first sentence even says his reign was misinterpreted. It sites sources that say Richard was not deformed. It asks why historians of the time would have us believe Richard was a monster.
Traditional sources are those believed by the people, for example Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard would be traditional. Revisionist sources are from historians, or primary sources from people who were actually there. An example would be an account from King Henry VII of the Battle of Bosworth Field.
The Ricardian Society is a group with the goal to clear Richard III's name. They believe he was a good king. The Lancastrians want us to believe that Richard was a bad king with only a goal for personal gain. Lancastrians believe that they disposed of the main "bad guy. "
The passage from Vergil Polydore is Lancastrian because it is not sympathetic to Richard III. It points out all of his faults, and places the blame on his shoulders the disappearance of his nephews, although that can never be proven. Finally it points out he has William lord Hastings executed.
Horace Walpoles passage is Ricardian. The first sentence even says his reign was misinterpreted. It sites sources that say Richard was not deformed. It asks why historians of the time would have us believe Richard was a monster.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Summary of Royalty during the War of the Roses
King Henry V ruled for 9 years. During his reign he won the Battle of Agincourt against the French. He died young at the age of 35. King Henry VI was crowned king as an infant of France, and England. He suffered a mental illness, and control was forfiet to Richard of York. His rule was restored until 1471 when he was murdered. King Edward IV was king when Henry VI was unable to rule. He retook the throne later, but the year he died, his sons were murdered in the tower of London. King Edward V was crowned king in 1483 when his father was killed. Along with his brother, Edward was murdered in the tower of London later that year. Richard III was the younger brother of Edward IV. Richard locked the other heirs in the Tower of London where they were killed that year. Richard was kille by King Henry VII at the Battle of Bosworth Field. King Henry VII was crowned after he killed Richard III at Bosworth Field. Henry was the first Tudor ruler. He died of natural causes in 1509.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Effects on the Black Death, 9/20
The Black Death turned European life upside down, affecting every everything possible, except for the royal bloodline. The Ordinace of Labors states that was working in a profession they had not experience with because those who were trained in such profession were already dead for the plague. Everyone was equal in the fact that the plague spared no one. Everyone was affected. Villages were segregated, and families were divided.
Coming from Jean Froissart; on the Jagueariem political and social problems arose. Political leaders were no longer safe from the problems of the people, and there were many peasant revolts. There were gathering, with missing counsel members more often than not. Kinghts entered the rooms of women with families, violated the women, than slaughtered everyone.
Unfortunately, there cannot be a problem in Europe without some group, or party blaming the Jewish people. In this situation entire neighborhood of Jews were arrested, and tortured until a "confession" was reached. After the confessions were reached, the Jews were either burned, or butchered. There was one community however, Strasburg, that tried to save the Jews, but a mob overthrew them, and there was no such group.
Coming from Jean Froissart; on the Jagueariem political and social problems arose. Political leaders were no longer safe from the problems of the people, and there were many peasant revolts. There were gathering, with missing counsel members more often than not. Kinghts entered the rooms of women with families, violated the women, than slaughtered everyone.
Unfortunately, there cannot be a problem in Europe without some group, or party blaming the Jewish people. In this situation entire neighborhood of Jews were arrested, and tortured until a "confession" was reached. After the confessions were reached, the Jews were either burned, or butchered. There was one community however, Strasburg, that tried to save the Jews, but a mob overthrew them, and there was no such group.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
English and Scottish Views of Wallace and Bruce, 9/10
The English view Wallace and Bruce in a manner in which they are portryed as murderers with no care for human life at all. In terms of English history, he lead an army of Scots to Falkirk just so they could get Butchered by the English army, even though Edward I was a butcher with his own army. The English source book fails to acknowledge the fact that Wallace was betrayed by his own kind, not capture single handed by the English. Bottom line, the English HATED him. When Wallace died, it was recorded as the end of a man without morals. There is no acknowledgement of his public and painful execution, or that his body was divided and sent to different parts of Scottland. Bruce was treated no different. The second war for Scottish independece is blamed solely on him, even though the English provoked it. The Scots on the other hand, view him as a hero who lead them to great victories, and a symbol for Scottish patriotism. They believe him as their Caesar, or a general compared to that of Robert E. Lee. Wallace thought that the English's opinion of him was in reality, the personality of the English.
The Scots think of themselves during this time as patriots, fighting a tyrany. When they invaded Ireland, they arrived with the intention to be liberators, but it turned into an occupation, and Irish opinion got worse. Eventually, the Scots abandoned their campagn. Bruce to the Scots was their great king, and a public hero overall.
The Scots think of themselves during this time as patriots, fighting a tyrany. When they invaded Ireland, they arrived with the intention to be liberators, but it turned into an occupation, and Irish opinion got worse. Eventually, the Scots abandoned their campagn. Bruce to the Scots was their great king, and a public hero overall.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
9/7 Questions
1. What does the reign of Henry II suggest about the future of English foreign relations?
It is shown that England can be seen as a growing empire, and will treat foreign countries with hostility.
2. Does the common conception of Richard as 'good' and John as 'bad' hold up to reality?
Yes the reputation does see John as bad and Richard as good. Richard died in service of England, while John lost much of what England had
3. How did the Magna Carta change the relationship of the Monarch and his subjects?
The magna carta was an attempt made by England to bargain with the rebels. It only fueled the fires that burned in the rebels.
It is shown that England can be seen as a growing empire, and will treat foreign countries with hostility.
2. Does the common conception of Richard as 'good' and John as 'bad' hold up to reality?
Yes the reputation does see John as bad and Richard as good. Richard died in service of England, while John lost much of what England had
3. How did the Magna Carta change the relationship of the Monarch and his subjects?
The magna carta was an attempt made by England to bargain with the rebels. It only fueled the fires that burned in the rebels.
Monday, September 6, 2010
First Assignment (Thucydides)
Alex Schroeder
9/5/10
AP European History
My Parents’ Wedding, Thucydides style
There is official documentation of a marriage that took place December 3rd, 1992 between Laurie Kvech and Michael Schroeder. The marriage license was validated before the event commenced. Let it be on record that Laurie and Michael followed every tradition no matter how weird. They did not see each other the day before the wedding, the only opportunity was when Michael dropped off his daughter at Laurie’s house, but the potential “disaster” was averted. While Michael’s daughter Jessie was at Laurie’s house, they did whatever the average five year old would do at the time. Meanwhile, Michael took his son Erik up to the ballpark to hit some baseballs. Erik was, and still is very serious about his baseball. He played baseball up until he graduated from Harford Community College, and is now currently on his work’s softball team. He was very eager to teach his younger brother Alex how to play baseball. His first words when his younger brother was born were, “I can’t wait to teach him how to play baseball!”
The wedding was conducted on a Friday night by Father Joe at St. Agnes Catholic Church. Michael and Laurie wrote their own vows, and the ceremony was conducted as planned. They wrote their own vows, so there were certain things that had to be placed in the vows because the wedding was presided by the Catholic Church. After the wedding mass concluded, the reception began.
Michael’s brother Greg played at the reception, along with his close friend Dennis. It is widely known that Michael’s side of the family is musically talented. Mike’s father, brothers, nephews and sons each know how to play at least one instrument. One of the songs that they played was “Wonderful Tonight” by Eric Clapton. It was the crowd favorite.
Next, the couple went on the honeymoon. They honeymoon was a month long cruse and trip to Mexico. They spent that time having fun on their first vacation as a married couple, going to the beach, and doing things people do on cruses. After the month was up, time to go back to reality.
9/5/10
AP European History
My Parents’ Wedding, Thucydides style
There is official documentation of a marriage that took place December 3rd, 1992 between Laurie Kvech and Michael Schroeder. The marriage license was validated before the event commenced. Let it be on record that Laurie and Michael followed every tradition no matter how weird. They did not see each other the day before the wedding, the only opportunity was when Michael dropped off his daughter at Laurie’s house, but the potential “disaster” was averted. While Michael’s daughter Jessie was at Laurie’s house, they did whatever the average five year old would do at the time. Meanwhile, Michael took his son Erik up to the ballpark to hit some baseballs. Erik was, and still is very serious about his baseball. He played baseball up until he graduated from Harford Community College, and is now currently on his work’s softball team. He was very eager to teach his younger brother Alex how to play baseball. His first words when his younger brother was born were, “I can’t wait to teach him how to play baseball!”
The wedding was conducted on a Friday night by Father Joe at St. Agnes Catholic Church. Michael and Laurie wrote their own vows, and the ceremony was conducted as planned. They wrote their own vows, so there were certain things that had to be placed in the vows because the wedding was presided by the Catholic Church. After the wedding mass concluded, the reception began.
Michael’s brother Greg played at the reception, along with his close friend Dennis. It is widely known that Michael’s side of the family is musically talented. Mike’s father, brothers, nephews and sons each know how to play at least one instrument. One of the songs that they played was “Wonderful Tonight” by Eric Clapton. It was the crowd favorite.
Next, the couple went on the honeymoon. They honeymoon was a month long cruse and trip to Mexico. They spent that time having fun on their first vacation as a married couple, going to the beach, and doing things people do on cruses. After the month was up, time to go back to reality.
First Assignment (Herodotus)
Alex Schroeder
9/4/10
AP European History
My parents wedding, contrast of Herodotus style
On December 3rd, 1992, Laurie Kvech and Michael Schroeder got married. It was a Friday night, and it is said to have been a beautiful night. It is said that the couple followed tradition and did not see each other the usual twenty-four hours before the ceremony. Earlier that day, Ron and Charlotte Kvech saw Michael drop off his daughter at their house before the wedding. They reported that Laurie, and Michael’s daughter Jessie, spent some good quality time together, foreshadowing the future. Meanwhile, Michael Schroeder and his son Erik, continued their daily routine, and went up to the park to play some baseball, as it is rumored that Erik was very serious in his baseball game, and in the future would be very eager to teach his soon to be born younger brother, Alex, how to play.
The wedding began on schedule, it is said by most that it went without an interruption by those who were in attendance. Witnesses say that the couple decided to write their own vows. There were certain things that some say must have been said due to the fact that it was a Catholic wedding. Father Joe, the priest who presided over the wedding said that he had much faith that the marriage would last, and that faith was not misplaced. After the wedding the congregation headed to the reception.
Greg Schroeder, Michael’s younger brother, is said to have been a good drummer. He proved that at the reception when he and his friend Dennis preformed. The general public say that the best song they preformed was their rendition of “Wonderful Tonight” by Eric Clapton. Having musical talent is said to be common on Michael’s side of the family. His father played the banjo, he has a brother who plays base, two brothers that play the drums, and he plays guitar himself in his spare time, a rare occasion many say.
After the wedding ceremonies concluded it is rumored that the couple went on a Mexican cruse for their honeymoon. The honeymoon lasted for a little more than a month. However, after the honeymoon, they had to return to reality and go back to work, or in Michael’s case, school, he teaches fifth grade. Ever since then, there is a firsthand speculation that Laurie and Michael are still living happy as ever.
9/4/10
AP European History
My parents wedding, contrast of Herodotus style
On December 3rd, 1992, Laurie Kvech and Michael Schroeder got married. It was a Friday night, and it is said to have been a beautiful night. It is said that the couple followed tradition and did not see each other the usual twenty-four hours before the ceremony. Earlier that day, Ron and Charlotte Kvech saw Michael drop off his daughter at their house before the wedding. They reported that Laurie, and Michael’s daughter Jessie, spent some good quality time together, foreshadowing the future. Meanwhile, Michael Schroeder and his son Erik, continued their daily routine, and went up to the park to play some baseball, as it is rumored that Erik was very serious in his baseball game, and in the future would be very eager to teach his soon to be born younger brother, Alex, how to play.
The wedding began on schedule, it is said by most that it went without an interruption by those who were in attendance. Witnesses say that the couple decided to write their own vows. There were certain things that some say must have been said due to the fact that it was a Catholic wedding. Father Joe, the priest who presided over the wedding said that he had much faith that the marriage would last, and that faith was not misplaced. After the wedding the congregation headed to the reception.
Greg Schroeder, Michael’s younger brother, is said to have been a good drummer. He proved that at the reception when he and his friend Dennis preformed. The general public say that the best song they preformed was their rendition of “Wonderful Tonight” by Eric Clapton. Having musical talent is said to be common on Michael’s side of the family. His father played the banjo, he has a brother who plays base, two brothers that play the drums, and he plays guitar himself in his spare time, a rare occasion many say.
After the wedding ceremonies concluded it is rumored that the couple went on a Mexican cruse for their honeymoon. The honeymoon lasted for a little more than a month. However, after the honeymoon, they had to return to reality and go back to work, or in Michael’s case, school, he teaches fifth grade. Ever since then, there is a firsthand speculation that Laurie and Michael are still living happy as ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)