Friday, December 17, 2010
Thesis Practice 1
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Dutch Republic Free Response Essay
Discuss the ways the 17th-century Dutch Republic differed from its neighbors, telling how these differences contributed to the country’s success.
The Dutch Republic was “an island of plenty in a sea of want.” It provided much for the merchant class, whose trade, banking, and storage surpassed most others in Europe. It differed from countries around it. The Dutch Republic was powerful in trade, banking, and the arts which set it apart from its neighbors, but France was a more successful country and neighbor to the Dutch than the Dutch Republic was during this time.
The Dutch Republic was a well establish and organized country that did very well for itself during the 17th century. Its merchant class contributed immensely to its success, whose hands power gathered in. The merchant class provided patronage for the arts, and artists typically created landscapes, seascapes, and still lifes. The Dutch looked down upon the French, naming their excess living “loose-living.” In the Dutch Republic, excess was considered sinful, so the people lived comfortably but not flagrantly. The Dutch East India Company traded with different countries and the Dutch began settling on the coast of South Africa. The Dutch gained many achievements; however, France was more powerful and had more control than the Dutch did.
During the 17th century, France was controlled by Henry IV, Louis XIII, and Louis XIV. The rule of Henry IV set up the path to France’s rise in Europe. The French set up ties with other countries, trading with both India and Madagascar. With domestic peace after the French nobility was weakened and Louis being able to be an absolute monarch, Louis XIV caused the borders of France to be expanded to include many other reigions. France was the dominant power in Europe during the reign of King Louis XIV. While the Palace of Versailles was said to be extravagant, many imitations were created all over Europe, which proves that it was in fact found to be impressive by many. The War of Devolution brought gains of land to France. Simon Vouet characterized the French Baroque, and French classical architecture was admired by many, even before the Palace of Versailles was built. France became the culture center of Europe during this time; therefore, in this aspect making it greater than the Dutch Republic. The French navy was greater than most, even England’s, being improved from 25 ships to almost 200. The size of the army itself was also increased considerably. France was very powerful during the 17th century.
During the reign of Louis XIV, France was the dominant power in Europe. Louis XIV was one of the most dominant figures in French history, and he was the most powerful monarch in the 17th century. France was more powerful than the Dutch Republic was. Louis XIII was able to put politics ahead of religion, make the middle class powerful, and limit the power that the Habsburgs had. With France’s absolute monarchy, it was able to be powerful and controlling to a popular degree. France was able to expand its control and holding to other countries, increasing its power. The Dutch Republic was a powerful country, but not to the extent that France was during this time.
Both the Dutch Republic and France expressed their achievement and ability to be powerful countries. They were strong, well organized, and used the resources available to them during this time. During the 17th century; however, France’s power reigned through and it was the most powerful country, especially during the reign of Louis XIV, which was the second half of the 17th century. The Dutch was more powerful than most of its neighbors, but it was not more powerful than France, its one neighbor that utilized its authority with a better ability.
Edited: Galileo Free Response Essay
"Why are the trials and tribulations of Galileo often considered both predicative of the future of Western Civilization as well as a perfect encapsulation of the context of his own time?"
Galileo is known as the “father of science.” He is a famous scientist, who, to this day, still provokes debate and controversy over his beliefs. Galileo studied the microscope, was an advocate for the Copernican theory, and named the moons of Jupiter after the Medici. Galileo was a well known scientist, but he gained more credit than he deserved because during the time of his life others were creating scientific ideas that were just as inventive as his were, and within a short period of time, the scientific revolution would have occurred, even without Galileo.
Galileo was one who advocated the Copernican theory. He was in favor of Nicolas Copernicus, a man who lived before Galileo and invented the heliocentric model of the universe. The Copernican theory stated that the sun is at the center of the universe. The Copernican theory also explained the order of the planets and that Earth has three rotations: daily, annually, and the annual tilting of its axis. Galileo received so much attention because he defended Copernicus and the Copernican theory. He discussed Copernicanism in his books and was finally asked not to teach or advocate the Copernican theory after being brought in front of an audience. Galileo was made very famous because he defended the Copernican theory, but he was not the one who came up with the innovative ideas. Galileo merely accepted the theory to be true, while Nicolas Copernicus was the one who changed the course of history by introducing these facts of the universe and planets. Copernicus should receive credit for his ideas, rather than Galileo receiving credit for defending them. Without Nicolas Copernicus bringing about his ideas of heliocentricism, Galileo would have had nothing to defend and nothing to advocate to the public. Galileo did not come up with the Copernican theory; he simply believed in what it said. It was Nicolas Copernicus who really deserved credit for his ideas.
It is true that Galileo can be credited with advancing science during his time and offering new ideas to be accepted or rejected, but others during his time had already begun thinking in these terms. A 16th century French essayist asked the question, “What do I know?” and answered, “Nothing.” Later both a French man and an English man looked further than thinking about the information and ideas presented to them in the past. Instead, they taught new ways to obtain knowledge. They practiced methods that could be applied to nature, new inventions, and improving ways of life. Francis Bacon, the English man who looked further than thinking about the past, came up with the empirical method and from his ideas emerged the possibility of “progress.” Descartes was the French man who looked further than thinking about the past, and he said people should start with a blank slate in order to learn the basics of things and then increase in the difficulty of what one was learning. He divided everything into mind and matter, which was the physical world and the spiritual world. He believed that matter could be described mathematically. After Bacon and Descartes, men such as Kepler, Galileo, and Newton used their ideas to further their thinking and mathematical and scientific achievement. Without Bacon, Descartes, and their thinking, Galileo would not have made as many improvements as he did. Galileo’s work was based off of other men who should have received more credit than they did. Galileo received the credit for work in which he used other’s ideas and would not have been able to produce without those ideas.
The scientific revolution was going to occur, with or without Galileo’s inventions or ideas. The world, with its advancements and new ideas, was ready for a revolution. There were people just as smart, if not smarter, as Galileo who could take the world into a new chapter of science. Isaac Newton, for example, was a man who invented the law of universal gravitation. Many men in the field of medicine improve science, and Vesalius was even the founder of biological science. He was the first to assemble a human skeleton. William Harvey explained blood circulation; Marcello discovered blood corpuscles and bacteria, and Regnier described ovaries. Edward Jenner achieved the biggest medical advancement. These men, along with many others during their time not mentioned, would have made the scientific revolution happen. Galileo did not need to be involved.
Although Galileo was a man who is said to be a ‘hero’ of science, his inventions only contributed partially to the scientific revolution, and many of his ideas were based off of other people that should receive the same amount, if not more credit than Galileo did.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Great Fire of London
View Great Fire of London in a larger map
Monday, December 6, 2010
Galileo Free Response Essay
"Why are the trials and tribulations of Galileo often considered both predicative of the future of Western Civilization as well as a perfect encapsulation of the context of his own time?"
Galileo was considered to be a “hero” of science, one who brought about new ideas, and questioned and contemplated old ones. He became a famous man because of his accomplishments, and also because of his impact on Western Civilization. He went through hardships to reach his goals of becoming a great mathematician and philosopher. The trials and tribulations of Galileo were beneficiary to the science of his own time, while also affecting the science, mathematics, and methodology that would bring about debate and be revolutionized in the years to come.
Galileo was a man of great knowledge. He supported the Copernican theory, which was a theory introduced by Nicolas Copernicus. This theory, or system, dealt with the axis of planets, the sun, and their rotation. Galileo was a supporter of this theory, and even wrote a book about it. He was then asked not to be a promoter for this theory and to stop all advocacies that he was doing. Later in Galileo’s life, he was put on trial and condemned because of a book he wrote that was published. With these examples, it is obvious to see that Galileo put himself on the line for what he believed in and for what he had accomplished He did not back down from his beliefs, even though he was questioned about them because of the skeptical period of time that he lived in. When Galileo was born, the word ‘science’ was not a known thing, but when he died, science was well on its way to becoming very popular, and at the same time, very interesting. Galileo took great part in this new idea and way of thinking. He was named Mathematician at the University of Padua and was an aid to the Duke of Tuscany because of his knowledge. He was appreciated and admired for his knowledge in the world of science and mathematics. During Galileo’s time, science and mathematics were not the focus on most people mind, but Galileo’s mind worked differently, and he thought differently. He continued to gain knowledge, ideas, skills, and facts that would help him to be a great mathematician and philosopher, and ultimately, the ‘hero’ of science that he is known as today. He helped to establish a way of thinking and a new subject to be studied during his years of life.
During the time of Galileo, the world of science started to grow. Science was not known when Galileo was born, but when he died, it was very well on its way to being a well-known idea, instead of just a new concept that was beginning to be looked at. He contributed immensely to this monumental time in history with his wealth of knowledge and ideas. Galileo made improvements that would forever change the world. Improvements were such that he named the moons of Jupiter after the Medici, studied the telescope and all the wondrous things that could be achieved with it, and wrote many books about the knowledge that he was gaining. With the findings from studying the telescope, Galileo wrote The Starry Messenger. Galileo was a man who brought about much change and intelligibility that affected the age of science that was prevalent in the world around him. His ideas stayed with those he left before him, and they are still with the world today.
To this day, Galileo’s work is being questioned. A common question asked, ‘How does his mathematics relate to natural philosophy?’ It is said that Galileo’s work is able to be split into three groups: science, methodology, and mathematics. Without his improvements during his years of life, Western Civilization would not have been impacted in the way that it has been, and debate would not still be going on hundreds of years later about Galileo’s life and works. Galileo’s wise thoughts and words helped to shape the scientific revolution that occurred in Europe. His work showed the revolution that was just yet to come. It pointed towards a bright future that expressed the new age of science and math in the world.
Galileo’s knowledge will never be forgotten. His ways of thinking changed the history of the world and the way that many topics and subject are looked at and viewed. He truly was a ‘hero’ of science, one whose accomplishment were tremendous. Galileo went through trials and tribulations, but shared his knowledge with the world, shaped the future, and perpetually changed how people look at the world of science and mathematics.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Part 2 of The Test That Ruined My Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday
Monday, November 22, 2010
The Test That Ruined My Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
DBQ Format Quiz
2. The highest score you can get is a 4.
Monday, November 1, 2010
EDITED: France 1450 - 1600
Royal forces started to surround La Rochelle, with an army of 7,000 soldiers, 600 horses and 24 cannons, led by Charles of Angouleme. They started to reinforce fortifications at Bongraine (modern Les Minimes), and at the Fort Louis. On September 10, the first cannons shots were by La Rochelle against Royal troops at Fort Louis, starting the third Huguenot rebellion. La Rochelle was the greatest stronghold among the Huguenot cities of France, and the centre of Huguenot resistance.
France v. La Rochelle and England
Stalemate
"Siege of La Rochelle." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 30 Oct. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_La_Rochelle>.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Machiavelli Questions
1. Which of the following would be most successful in business today? And what kind of business would they run (Internet startup, chain store, international conglomerate, NGO, mafia)? Remirro da Orca (chapter 7), Oliverotto da Fermo (chapter 8) Cesare Borgia.
Ramiro d’Orco, Oliverotto da Fermo, and Cesare Borgia are three very noteworthy people that are talked about in The Prince.
Ramiro d’Orco “a swift and cruel man.” (Chapter VII) During his time, Romagana was being ruled by weak rulers who “rather plundered their subjects than ruled them, and gave them more cause for disunion than for union.” (Chapter VII) Ramiro d’Orco was given the fullest power by the Duke Valentino, who was otherwise known as Cesare Borgia, to take over Romagna. In just a short time, Ramiro d’Orco restored peace and unity to Romagna with a huge success. Because d’Orco was successful at restoring peace and unity, he could be a present-day political leader and restore our country to what it should be. The chaos that is going on in the political aspect of our country could be controlled and lessened with the help of d’Orco. He could eradicate the problems that our country is facing and propose new solutions to move us into the future.
Oliverotto da Fermo was left an orphan and raised by his uncle, Giovanni Foglianni. In the early days of his youth, he was sent to fight under Pagolo Vitelli. It was the hope that under Vitelli’s discipline, Fermo could abtain a high position in the military profession. “After Pagolo died, he fought under his brother Vitellozzo, and in a very short time, being endowed with wit and a vigorous body and mind, he became the first man in his profession” (Chapter VIII). Fermo was seized by Vitelleschi and Vitellozzo. Fermo went to visit Giovanni Foglianni and stayed in his house. He also “gave a solemn banquet to which he invited Giovanni Fogliani and the chiefs of Fermo” (Chapter VIII). He was arranging a wicked plan. Fermo began a speech and rose and said that the matters he was speaking about needed to be discussed in a more private place. He went into a chamber, where Giovanni and the rest of his citizens followed. There, soldiers from secret places came out and slaughtered Giovanni and the rest. Fermo then rode up and down the town on horseback and “killed all the malcontents who were able to injure him, and strengthened himself with new civil and military ordinances.” (Chapter VIII) Because of this type of deceitfulness and evil plan, Oliverotto de Fermo could be a part of the mafia. He knows how to accomplish the mean acts that he wants to, and for that reason he could be a mafia leader in the present day.
Cesare Borgia is mentioned and referred to many times in The Prince. Borgia’s father was Pope Alexander VI and Borgia’s title was Duke Valentino. “Cesare is acclaimed by some critics as the ‘hero’ of ‘The Prince.’” (OFFICE) Borgia is portrayed “a type of man who rises on the fortune of others, and falls with them; who takes every course that might be expected from a prudent man but the course which will save him; who is prepared for all eventualities but the one which happens; and who, when all his abilities fail to carry him through, exclaims that it was not his fault, but an extraordinary and unforeseen fatality.” (OFFICE) Cesare Borgia acquired his state with the help of his father. Borgia entered the Romagna with auxiliaries. He took with him French soldiers and captured Imola and Forli, and afterwards turned to mercenaries, and enlisted the Orsini and Vitelli. He destroyed them and turned them into his own men. (Chapter XIII) Today, Borgia could be the head of a big and successful company because he knows how to keep order. He knows how to make people listen to him and have them do what they’re told. Borgia’s company would be very productive and successful, and he would be a very good businessman.
2. Who is a prince's greatest ally? (Chapters 9, 19, 20, 21)
A prince should be on good terms with many people, but there are a few specific people or groups of people that a prince should be allied with. A good principality is obtained when the prince has the favor of the people in the country and the nobles. A prince needs to stay allies with the nobles in the country because if he is not on good terms with them, they can abandon him and rise against him. The nobles always come forward in time to save themselves. A prince ought to be on friendly terms with his people, and “this he can easily do seeing they only ask not to be oppressed by him.” (Chapter IX). A prince is also respected when he is either a “true friend or a downright enemy,” meaning that he declares himself in favor of one party against another (Chapter XXI). In a dispute, this will always be more advantageous then standing neutral, because “if two of your powerful neighbours come to blows, they are of such a character that, if one of them conquers, you have either to fear him or not.” (Chapter XXI).
A prince’s greatest ally when he reigns is ultimately the people. The people that he is ruling can destroy him as a prince, or make his reign magnificent. If he does not have the support of the people, then his reign will not last very long. They can turn against him because they are so big in numbers. A civil principality is made when a leading citizen becomes the leader of his country, not by cruelty or wickedness, but by the support and favor of his people. A prince needs to be allied with the people in order to be successful and even reach the throne. The prince can satisfy the people, “for their object is more righteous than that of the nobles.” (Chapter IX). The people are wishing to oppress. If a prince is not allied with his people, they can turn against him and abandon him. It is necessary for a prince to be friendly with the people, “otherwise he has no security in adversity.” (Chapter IX).
3. According to Machiavelli, when is generosity a good thing? (Be specific, identify, and cite his argument).
In ordinary life, it is best to be generous and kind to others. In the life of a prince, however; generosity needs to be given in moderation. Generosity is needed to gain power and to be liked by the people of your country, but you cannot have too much because you need to keep the people in order and under your control. Generosity is not needed very often when you are a prince, but it is needed so the prince does not seem terribly cruel. When a leading citizen wants to become prince of his country, he needs to show generosity in order to gain favor from his fellow citizens. (Chapter IX) According to Machiavelli, "every prince ought to desire to be considered clement and not cruel." This means that a prince should not want to be thought of as terribly mean and harsh, but rather kind and pleasant. While a prince wants to be kind, he does not want to misuse this clemency. For example, Cesare Borgia was considered a cruel ruler, but his cruelty reconciled the Romagna. His cruelty unified it and then restored it to peace and loyalty. If this is considered the right thing to do, Borgia is then considered to have been much more merciful then the Florentine, who, trying to avoid a reputation for cruelty, permitted Perstoia to be destroyed during the rioting between the Cancellieri and Panciatichi factions. If a prince shows too much mercy to his people, disorders will arise, which can cause murders, robberies, etc.
A prince should wish to be both feared and loved. If a prince does not win the love of his people, he can endure being feared, but if he is hated, then that will become a problem. (Chapter XVII) Machiavelli says that “we have not seen great things done in our time except by those who have been considered mean; the rest have failed.” Pope Julius II was assisted in reaching the papacy by a reputation for liberty. He used generosity to reach his goal. Afterwards, he did not strive to keep this liberty, for when he made war on the King of France, he supplied additional expenses out of his long thriftiness. The King of Spain during Machiavelli’s time would not have undertaken or conquered so many enterprises if he had been reputed liberal. A prince, therefore, provided that he does not rob his people, that he can defend himself, that he does not become poor, that he is not forced to become rapacious, “ought to hold of little account a reputation for being mean, for it is one of those vices which will enable him to govern.” (Chapter VXI) A prince’s goal considering generosity and meanness is not to be hated. According to Machiavelli, a prince should be more mean than generous, but he should use generosity to gain favor. A prince needs to be generous to keep people satisfied with him, and this is most necessary for a king to accomplish great things. He should do whatever possible to be successful, but he should avoid being hated by the people he is ruling.
4. Use The Beatitudes to argue against Machiavelli.
Machiavelli was an intelligent person with wise thoughts on being a clever, successful, and memorable prince, but some of his thoughts contradict with what is written in the Beatitudes. In Chapter VII of the Prince, Machiavelli says people become princes by good fortune, and in Chapter IX, he says that citizens can also become a prince by the favor of the people or the favor of the nobles. Machiavelli is not completely accurate here because line 5 of the Beatitudes states, “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.” (Line 5) This means that humble and timid citizens can become powerful and make an impact. This is definitely true in some cases. Luck can play into someone’s life and they could be discovered and be memorable. This happened with the case of Michelangelo and Lorenzo de Medici. Lorenzo discovered Michelangelo, who was a middle class average child, and Michelangelo grew to be a great artist. Lorenzo took Michelangelo under his wing, and because of this, Michelangelo grew up with a wealthy family and became very successful.
“Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God” is line 8 of the Beatitudes. (Line 8) Anyone who has a pure heart, pure thoughts, and/or a pure mind, will live happily and be with God. Cruel acts do not need to be committed to be successful or be at the top. Clemency can be used and rulers can be just as or more successful than if they were cruel. Machiavelli praises cruelty and expresses this when he says that “we have not seen great things done in our time except by those who have been considered mean; the rest have failed.” (Chapter XVI) Machiavelli is not correct because with a pure heart you can see God and live eternally with God, and this is most definitely not failing.
The Beatitudes make a few very strong points that prove that Machiavelli is not always correct.
5. Use Machiavelli to argue against The Beatitudes.
The Beatitudes were given from Jesus to the people. They were in response to the Ten Commandments that God has revealed in the Old Testament of the Bible. (Exodus 20) The Beatitudes are blessings from Jesus that are recorded in Matthew and Luke in the Bible. Many of the lines in the Beatitudes contradict what Machiavelli is telling a prince to do in order to be a good ruler. The line, “5Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth,” (Line 5) is saying that the meek in the world will inherit the earth and become wealthy and powerful. That is absolutely not the case in Machiavelli’s mind. Machiavelli says, “Those who solely by good fortune become princes from being private citizens have little trouble in rising, but much in keeping atop; they have not any difficulties on the way up, because they fly, but they have many when they reach the summit.” (Chapter VII) These people that reach the top by good fortune do not reach it by being meek. Being modest and gentle will not get someone the title of prince. Good fortune or winning the favor of the people /the nobles will earn the title of prince. “I say then that such a principality is obtained either by the favour of the people or by the favour of the nobles.” (Chapter IX) A citizen cannot be humble and be extremely timid if they want to rule. They will not be noticed. If they are too shy to speak in front of others, promote themselves, or be on friendly terms with the people, then they have no chance at becoming prince.
Line 6 of the Beatitudes states, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” Machiavelli would argue that one cannot just hunger or thirst for something, rather they have to go and fight for it themselves. Machiavelli explains this by talking about Nabis, the Prince of the Spartans. He says that Nabis “sustained the attack of all Greece, and of a victorious Roman army, and against them he defended his country and his government; and for the overcoming of this peril it was only necessary for him to make himself secure against a few, but this would not have been sufficient had the people been hostile.” (Chapter IX) Nabis wanted to defend his country, but just because he wanted that badly did not mean his country would be protected. He had to fight and protect his country to keep it safe and secure.
Many of Machiavelli’s explanations and stories contradict what is said in the Beatitudes, and his thoughts can be used to argue against the Beatitudes.
Works Cited
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 XVI]. 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
. (n.d.). [Matthew 5 (New International Version) ]. Retrieved from http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205&version=NIV
France: 1450-1600
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
EDITED: Henry VIII Divorcing Catherine and Becoming Head of the Church of England
EDITED!
(For 5 more points to reach an 88)
Was Henry VIII justified in divorcing Catherine and making himself head of the Church of England?
Henry VIII was the king of England during the time of 1509 until his death in 1547. Henry had eight wives during his lifetime and split the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. Henry married his brother’s widow soon after his father died, which was forbidden under Catholic law. In 1533, Henry and his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, were divorced. Henry believed that his marriage with Catherine was cursed, and he also became smitten with another lady by the name of Anne Boleyn. Because the Church of England was not agreeing to what Henry wanted and would not annul his marriage with Catherine, Henry made himself head of the Church of England. Henry was justified in divorcing Catherine and was justified in making himself head of the Church of England. (Letters from Anne, 1526)
Henry and Catherine of Aragon were married on June 11, 1509. Their coronation took place, “The following day being a Sunday, and also Midsummer's Day, the noble prince with his queen left the palace for Westminster Abbey at the appointed hour.” “His grace and the queen were anointed and crowned by the archbishop of Canterbury in the presence of other prelates of the realm and the nobility and a large number of civic dignitaries.” (Hall, 1509.) Henry VIII and Catherine were happy for a while. Catherine bore six children, but only one of them survived, and this child was a daughter named Mary. Catherine and Henry were married for about twenty years before he divorced her in 1533. (Hall, 1509.)
If Henry was truly convinced that his marriage with Catherine was cursed, then his divorce with her was justified. Henry could be married to whomever he wanted to be married to. Catherine was not able to bear a male heir, and because of this and emotional differences, the pair separated. In the political aspect of Catherine not being able to produce a male son, this was not a good thing. Henry needed a male heir to carry on his rule. Because of the political realities of what it would mean for Henry not to have a male heir, he was justified in divorcing Catherine. He was doing what he could to produce an heir to the throne. Without a son to become king after Henry, he would see his family give up the throne to someone else. Because of the reasoning for Henry’s divorce, he was justified in splitting from Catherine.
Henry VIII wanted to be the head of the Church of England because the Church was not agreeing with Henry. The Act of Supremacy, a Parliamentary act under King Henry VII written in 1534, “gave legal sanction to Henry's assumption of those clerical powers.” (Koeller, 2005) Henry was in charge of Parliament and therefore was able to produce the Act of Supremacy. He signed this Act of Supremacy because the Pope would not annul his marriage. Henry was also justified in making himself the head of the Church because the Pope had no more right to be head of the Church than Henry did. If the Pope could rule and be the head of the Church of England, why couldn’t Henry be? Henry used his wit and manipulative ways to create a plan to altar the rules of the Church. Instead of the Pope ruling the Church, Henry just ruled instead. Henry was justified in making himself head of the Church because he was doing what he needed to in order to have a male heir to continue the family rule and adhere to the political reality of the time. (Hall, 1509.)
Henry had justifications to divorce Catherine and be head of the Church of England. He was smart in his reign and did what he could to protect his family and produce an heir to the throne. He was justified in his actions.
"Primary Sources: The Coronations of King Henry VIII and Katharine of Aragon, 1509."EnglishHistory.net. Web. 02 Oct. 2010.
"The Act of Supremacy." Then Again. . . Web. 03 Oct. 2010.
"Primary Sources - Letter from Anne Boleyn to King Henry VIII, Late Summer 1526."EnglishHistory.net. Web. 02 Oct. 2010.
"Primary Sources: The Romance between Anne Boleyn and Henry Percy, 1523." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 03 Oct. 2010.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Notes on Principalities of England
Sienna
- North central Italy
- Not ruled by Holy Roman Empire
Urbino
- Relatively small
Florence
- controls the agricultural production of the entire area.
- Right in the heart of the Tuscan Valley
Peruguia
- It is in the center country.
These had a history of waring against one another.
Milan, Florence, Pisa, Sienna, Genoa, Ferrara, Verona, Mantua, and Venice.
There is a battle between the Vatican and Holy Roman Empire.
During the 15th century, many of the powerful city states annexed their neighbors. Florence was one of the cities that annexes a neighbor, Pisa in 1406. Nearby Florence's rival Milan was busy annexing areas around it and growing larger. There was a power struggle building between Florence and Milan.
There was almost constant battle going on throughout Italy.
The land battles were primarily carried out by mercenaries. Solders from around Europe were led by Italian generals in campaigns. One of the major strategies of these campaigns was once known as siege war far. This is when you surround their town and starve them out.
Genoa beats Pisa but then Venice's influence is increasing and Genoa's is decreasing.
By 1454, Florence, Milan, and Venice were the three major powers in central and northern Italy. They signed the Treat of Lodi. That treat will last for a few decades. It’s the first time there had been relative peace in central and northern Italy.
The increase in European exploration in the new world is one of the least studied of the Renaissance but it is essential to understanding what is going on.
Under Giovanni Medici, the bank was established, and under Cosimo is became the largest bank in Europe.
The Albizzi got Cosimo exiled but then he came back.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Elizabethan Trailer
Chronology. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.elizabethi.org/us/chronology/one.html
Elizabeth i quotes. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.elizabethi.org/us/quotes
Halsall, . (1997, August). Modern history sourcebook: queen elizabeth i: against the spanish armada, 1588. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1588elizabeth.html
Notes on Italian Peninsula 1000 - 1400 AD
- Starting paining on the wall
- Marks a resolution in painting
- First painter to break out into what would be Renaissance painting
- Primarily a sculptor
- First major bronze casting
- Mary Magdalene wood is considered one of the great sculpture by early Renaissance
- She is portrayed very harshly
- Entirely carved in wood
- Goes for the unique personality of his subject
- Develops technique of perspective
- You can paint things as the eye actually sees them with perspective
- The paintings include classical forms
- The merging of mathematics, classical order, and Christianity come together to form the three major influences of Italian Renaissance art
- Foster and patronizes the growth of Florence
Giotto
Donatello
Brunelleschi
Medici
Principality: late known as a duchy, was a place of autonomous monarchial rule..a prince or duke would rule over much more area and often be supported by great courts
Friday, October 8, 2010
Notes on Italy
banking system - founded in Florence by the Medici family
Holy Roman Empire - way back in the early middle ages, western Europe and central Europe were completely fractured became the Roman Empire had fallen apart. When the Roman Empire fell, the whole area went into disarray. People clustered closer together with one another. In 800, the Pope sees that he has this huge area of central Europe that is a mess so he wants to centralize some control. He appoint Charlemagne as the first Holy Roman Empire. The are of the Holy Roman Empire
Medici
-huge patrons of the arts
-some became Popes
Art
-a lot of the art was the same
-Giotto
- first painter to really break out from that style of painting into something new. He starts painting on walls of the churches. This is fresco painting.
- painted scenes, instead of just people
-Fra Angelico
- Monk
- His name means brother Angelica
- More detail
Brunelleschi
- Learned how to build the dome for the Florence Cathedral
- Ideas were difficult to understand
- Style was unorthodox
- Vision was to resurrect forgotten concepts of the past
- Using classical orders of architecture
- He would spark an architectural revolution across Europe
- Set to work on the dome and Cozimo would publically support him
- He was fearful his ideas would be stolen so he wrote in code
- Would have to rewrite the rules of western architecture and there was no certainty of succes
- For inspiration he turned to Rome
- Parthenon inspired him
Cosimo
- Wanted to build the biggest dome on the Florence Cathedral
- Giovanni was the guy who really began this dynasty
- Head of the Medici
- Nothing would please Cosimo's enemies more than to see Brunelleschi fail
- The Medici was against the Albizzi family
- Became in grave danger
- His family was terrified that they would never see him again
- Cosimo was found guilty after a vote was taken
- Papacy saved Cosimo
- He survived but the family was banished
- Brunelleschi was thrown into jail
- Accepted control of the city of Florence
- Money began to flood back into Florence and work on the dome began again
- Pope opened huge credit line for the Medici
- Medici bank was now the most profitable business in Europe
Machiovelli
- Based in Florence most of his life
- His career is at the beginning of political science
- Most know for the Prince written in 1513 but it wasn't published until after his death
- Born into a wealthy family, one of the leading in Florence
- His father was a lawyer
- Florence was being run and fought over by the powerful families
- There are also outside pressure