Understanding Parasocial Relationships with Celebrities

Have you ever wondered what a movie character, a celebrity, or a TV personality would do, even when you’re not watching them on-screen? Have you felt close to a character or celebrity even though you’ve never met them in real life? If youve had one of these common experiences, youve experienced a parasocial relationship: an enduring relationship with a media figure. Key Terms Parasocial relationship: An ongoing, one-sided bond with a media figureParasocial interaction: An imagined interaction with a media figure during a discrete viewing situation Donald Horton and Richard Wohl first introduced the concept of parasocial relationships, along with the related idea of parasocial interaction, in the 1950s. Although the relationship is one-sided, it is psychologically similar to a real-life social relationship. Origins In their 1956 article, â€Å"Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a distance,† Horton and Wohl described both parasocial relationships and parasocial interaction for the first time. They used the terms somewhat interchangeably, but mostly focused their exploration on the illusion of conversational give-and-take a media consumer experiences with a media figure while watching a TV show or listening to a radio program. This led to some conceptual confusion. Although a great deal of research has been done on parasocial phenomena, especially since the 1970s and 1980s, the most widely utilized scale in that research, the Parasocial Interaction Scale, combines questions about parasocial interactions and parasocial relationships. However, today, scholars generally agree the two concepts are related but different. Defining Parasocial Interactions and Relationships When a media consumer feels like they are interacting with a media figure—a celebrity, fictional character, radio host, or even a puppet—during a discrete viewing or listening scenario, they are experiencing a parasocial interaction. For example, if a viewer feels like they are hanging out at the Dunder-Mifflin office while watching the TV comedy The Office, they are engaging in a parasocial interaction. On the other hand, if the media user imagines a long-term bond with a media figure that extends outside the viewing or listening situation, it is considered a parasocial relationship.  The bond can be either positive or negative. For instance, if an individual adores the host of their local morning program and often thinks about and discusses the host as if he is one of their friends, that individual has a parasocial relationship with the host. Scholars have observed that parasocial interactions can lead to parasocial relationships, and parasocial relationships can strengthen parasocial interactions. This process resembles the way that spending time with a person in real-life can result in a friendship that then gets deeper and more committed when the individuals spend additional time together. Parasocial vs. Interpersonal Relationships Although the idea of parasocial relationships may seem unusual at first, it’s important to remember that for most media consumers, this is a perfectly normal and psychologically healthy reaction to encounters with on-screen individuals. Humans are wired to make social connections. Media did not exist through a majority of human evolution, and so when consumers are presented with a person or person-like individual via video or audio media, their brains respond as if they were engaging in a real-life social situation. This response does not mean that the individuals believe the interaction is real. Despite media consumers’ knowledge that the interaction is an illusion, however, their perception will cause them to react to the situation as if it were real. In fact, research has shown that the development, maintenance, and dissolution of a parasocial relationship is similar in many ways to real-life interpersonal relationships. For example, one study found that when television viewers perceive a favorite television performer as having an attractive personality and as being competent in their abilities, a parasocial relationship will develop. Surprisingly, physical attraction was found to be less important to the development of parasocial relationships, leading the researchers to conclude that television viewers prefer to develop relationships with television personalities they find socially attractive and who are attractive for their capabilities.  Ã‚   Another investigation assessed the way psychological commitments to a media figure led to the maintenance of parasocial relationships. Two different studies showed that for both fictional television characters, like Homer Simpson, and non-fictional television personas, like Oprah Winfrey, people were more committed to their parasocial relationship when (1) they felt satisfied watching the figure, (2) felt committed to continue watching the figure, and (3) felt that they didnt have good alternatives to the media figure. The researchers used a scale originally developed to assess interpersonal relationships to measure commitment to parasocial relationships, demonstrating that theories and measures of interpersonal relationships can be successfully applied to parasocial relationships. Finally, research has demonstrated that media consumers can experience parasocial breakups when a parasocial relationship ends. This can happen for a number of reasons, such as a television or movie series coming to an end, a character leaving a show, or a media consumer deciding to no longer watch or listen to a show where a character or personality appears. For example, a 2006 study examined how viewers reacted when the popular TV sitcom Friends ended its broadcast run. The researchers found that the more intense the viewers’ parasocial relationships with the characters, the greater the viewers’ distress when the show ended. The pattern of loss Friends fans exhibited was similar to that displayed by those who have lost a real-life relationship, although the emotions were less intense overall. Of course, while this research demonstrates the similarities between parasocial and interpersonal relationships, there are also important distinctions. A parasocial relationship is always mediated and one-sided, with no opportunity for mutual give-and-take. People can engage in as many parasocial relationships as they want and and can break them off whenever they choose without consequence. In addition, parasocial relationships can be shared with family members and friends without jealousy. In fact, discussing a mutual parasocial relationship can actually strengthen the bond in a real-life social relationship. Parasocial Bonds in the Digital Age While much of work involving parasocial phenomena has centered on parasocial bonds with radio, movie, and especially television characters and personalities, digital technology has introduced a new medium through which parasocial relationships can be developed, maintained, and even strengthened. For example, a researcher examined the way fans of the boy band New Kids on the Block maintained their parasocial relationships with the band members by posting to the band’s website. The analysis was conducted following the announcement of the band’s reunion after a 14-year break. On the website, fans expressed their continued devotion to the band, their affection towards its members, and their desire to see the band again. They also shared stories about how the band had helped them in their own lives. Thus, computer-mediated communication assisted fans in their parasocial relationship maintenance. Before the dawn of the internet, people could write fan letters to achieve a similar experience, but the researcher observed that online communication appeared to make fans feel closer to media figures, and that this could make the disclosure of personal feelings and anecdotes more likely.  Ã‚   It stands to reason, then, that social networks like Facebook and Twitter would make an even more substantial contribution to the maintenance of parasocial relationships. Celebrities appear to write and share their own messages with fans on these sites, and fans can respond to their messages, creating the potential for fans to develop even greater feelings of intimacy with media figures. So far, minimal research has been conducted on the way these technological developments impact parasocial relationships, but the topic is ripe for future research. Sources Branch, Sara E., Kari M. Wilson, and Christopher R. Agnew. â€Å"Committed to Oprah, Homer, and House: Using the Investment Model to Understand Parasocial Relationships.† Psychology of Popular Media Culture, vol. 2, no. 2, 2013, pp. 96-109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030938Dibble, Jayson L., Tilo Hartmann, and Sarah F. Rosaen. â€Å"Parasocial interaction and Parasocial Relationship: Conceptual Clarification and a Critical Assessment of Measures.† Human Communication Research, vol. 42, no. 1, 2016, pp. 21-44, https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12063  Eyal, Keren, and Jonathan Cohen. â€Å"When Good Friends Say Goodbye: A Parasocial Breakup Study.† Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, vol. 50, no. 3, 2006, pp. 502-523, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem5003_9Giles, David, C. â€Å"Parasocial Interaction: A Review of the Literature and a Model for Future Research.† Media Psychology, vol. 4, no. 3., 2002, pp. 279-305, https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XM EP0403_04Horton, Donald, and R. Richard Wohl. â€Å"Mass Communication and Parasocial Interaction: Observation of Intimacy at a Distance.† Psychiatry, vol. 19, no. 3, 1956, pp. 215-229, https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049Hu, Mu. â€Å"The influence of a scandal on parasocial relationship, parasocial interaction, and parsocial breakup.† Psychology of Popular Media Culture, vol. 5, no. 3, 2016, pp. 217-231, http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000068Rubin, Alan M., Elizabeth M. Perse, and Robert A. Powell. â€Å"Loneliness, parasocial interaction, and local television news viewing.† Human Communication Research, vol. 12, no. 2, 1985, pp. 155-180, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1985.tb00071.xRubin, Rebecca B., and Michael P. McHugh. â€Å"Development of Parasocial Interaction Relationships.† Journal of Broadcasting Electronic Media, vol. 31, no. 3, 1987, pp. 279-292, https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158709386664Sanderson, James. â€Å"’You Are All Loved So Much:’ Exploring Relational Maintenance Within the Context of Parasocial Relationships.† Journal of Media Psychology, vol. 21, no. 4, 2009, pp. 171-182, https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105.21.4.171

A Brief Note On Internal Communications And Internal...

How to Better Manage Internal Communications Internal communication is an important part of any business. Employees need to have the ability to communicate with one another even when they are not in the same building. This is also something managers will require to ensure they are able to collaborate with their employees and develop the products and services that customers are looking for. However, it is also something that should be carefully monitored and managed in order to create the most powerful internal communications system possible. Here are a few things you can do to accomplish this goal in your business. What is Internal Communications? Internal communication is simply the process a business goes through to allow information disbursement amongst their employees. The specific information being shared could be in regard to specific company related news, policy changes, issues with customers, or a great number of other items. It is believed that internal communications can track its origins back to the late 19th century. During this time, businesses shared information with their employees through publications that were passed from one employee to the next. Naturally, this was an extremely rudimentary way to allow communication to flow through the company. Because of this, other forms of internal communications were quickly developed. Today, much of internal communication takes plays on company intranets and through computers. With these devices, businesses are ableShow MoreRelatedInternal Of An Internal Communication Audit825 Words   |  4 PagesTask 2 2.1Internal corporate communications audit The primary purpose of conducting an internal communication audit is to ensure the corporate communication strategy in the organisation whether the proposed strategy meets the company’s goals. Audit can be processed by observations, analysis and evaluations, interviews, focus groups and surveys of employees and other key stakeholders who support needed to improve the internal communication strategy. Internal communication audit process Channel mappingRead MoreEffective Listening Essay examples1124 Words   |  5 Pagesresolution of problems more likely. Good listeners are prepared to listen, show interest, keep an open mind, listen critically, resist distractions, make notes, ask questions, and summarize what was being said.  One of the most important people skill is effective listening. Listening is hard work; it is active not passive. Effective communication begins with learning to listen before speaking. Listening is difficult because people dont work as hard at it as they should. Active listening includesRead MoreManagerial Applications of Information Technology1623 Words   |  7 PagesManagement April 13, 2014 Subject of Course Project: Information Technology Management: Unification of the actual and future information systems used by Incodepf and the new global innovations in technology. Table of Contents 1. Abstract 2. Brief Company background 3. Discussion of business problem(s) 4. High level solution 5. Benefits of solving the problem 6. Business/technical approach 7. Business process changes 8. Technology or business practices used to augment the solution 9.Read MoreProject Manager And The Lead Designer And Lead Engineer1039 Words   |  5 PagesThe client-related risk will be mitigated by implementing an effective communication plan with early client engagement and by drafting a contract that delineates the client’s duties beyond payment. The risks of schedule’s delay and over-budget will be mitigated by minimizing changes of scope, planning a realistic schedule, avoiding communication breakdown, tracking resources and deliverables and enforcing and monitoring the quality gates. The Project Manager and the Lead designer and Lead EngineerRead MoreBusiness Communication Practice at Bat4241 Words   |  17 PagesInternal Communication Practice in British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB) 1. Introduction 1. Origin This report is prepared as part of the course requirement of â€Å"C501 Managerial Communication† and is submitted to the instructor of the course Ms. Mahjabeen Ahmad, Professor, Institute of Business Administration, University of Dhaka. 2. Objective The objective of this report is to study the steps, tools, process and the role of internal communication practices in British AmericanRead MorePromotional Activities Coordination Project : Sample Resume1143 Words   |  5 PagesPart B: Promotional activities coordination project Send an email all of the staff that will be involved in the project. Your email must include: – A brief overview of the project and the promotional activities to be undertaken. – A brief summary of the role of TTNQ, the benefits it provides to the region and the importance of the promotional activities in attracting international visitors. – A summary of person’s roles and responsibilities, as well as the action plan that you developed in PartRead MoreMBA semester 1 assignments970 Words   |  4 Pagesaffect group behaviour? Q6. Define the term ‘leadership’. Write a brief note on â€Å"Contingency Theories of Leadership† MB0039 –Business Communication Answers available on www.smuHelp.com Q1. As a speaker you are addressing a group of people. Explain the elements involved in this communication. Q2. What is the importance of Kinesics and Proxemics in communication? Explain with examples. Q3. How does internal business communication affect the organization? Discuss the role of each stakeholder inRead MoreDiscussing Conflict Of Systems Within Healthcare Essay1303 Words   |  6 PagesImportance of Communication in the Workplace According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the average worker spends approximately 50 percent of his/her time communicating (Higuera, 2016). Communication is more than just conveying ideas and messages. Developing Clear communication skills and methods can help strengthen a company and contribute to the goals within the organization (Higuera, 2016). Due to the arise of organizational challenges, it is vital to have strong communication skills. TheRead MoreAbb Case Analysis908 Words   |  4 PagesABB Power and Productivity for a Better World COMPANY BRIEF ABB (Asea Brown Boveri) was formed in 1988 by the merger of two companies: the Swedish company ASEA and the Brown Boveri of Switzerland to create a global electrical engineering giant. Percy Barnevik (of ASEA) was the chief executive and master mind of the restructuring process that integrated both the companies. * In your opinion, was the organization structure chosen for Asea Brown Boveri by Barnevick appropriate? The OrganisationRead MoreAbb Case Analysis916 Words   |  4 PagesABB Power and Productivity for a Better World COMPANY BRIEF ABB (Asea Brown Boveri) was formed in 1988 by the merger of two companies: the Swedish company ASEA and the Brown Boveri of Switzerland to create a global electrical engineering giant. Percy Barnevik (of ASEA) was the chief executive and master mind of the restructuring process that integrated both the companies. * In your opinion, was the organization structure chosen for Asea Brown Boveri by Barnevick appropriate? The Organisation

The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02 Free Essays

â€Å"Alexandru Ioan Cuza† National College Specialization: Philology – Bilingual English Discipline: English The triumphant reign of Henry the VIII Coordinating Professors: Mariana Gaiu Sorina Soaica Student: Irina Stan 2011 Contents Introduction2 1. Social background of the age3 2. Henry VIII9 2. We will write a custom essay sample on The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02 or any similar topic only for you Order Now 1 Henry VIII’s character10 2. 2 Cardinal Wolsey11 2. 3 Henry VIII Christianity12 a)Popular religious idealism12 b)Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning14 2. 4 Henrician Reformation16 a)Henry VIII’s first divorce16 )Supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana18 c)The dissolution of the religious houses20 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of Henry VIII22 2. 6 An extension of English hegemony23 a)The Union of England and Wales23 b)Tudor Irish policy24 c)The need to control Scotland25 Conclusions28 Bibliography29 Introduction The age of the Tudors has left its impact on Anglo-American minds as a watershed in British history. Hallowed tradition, native patriotism, and post imperial gloom have united to swell our appreciation of the period as a true golden age. Names alone evoke a phoenix-glow – Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, and Mary Stuart among the sovereigns of England and Scotland; Wolsey, William Cecil, and Leicester among the politicians; Marlowe, Shakespeare, Hilliard, and Byrd among the creative artists. The splendors of the Court of Henry VIII, the fortitude of Sir Thomas More, the making of the English Bible, Prayer Book, and Anglican Church, the development of Parliament, the defeat of the Armada, the Shakespearian moment, and the legacy of Tudor domestic architecture – there are the undoubted climaxes of a simplified orthodoxy in which genius, romance, and tragedy are superabundant. Reality is inevitably more complex, less glamorous, and more interesting than myth. The most potent forces within Tudor England were often social, economic, and demographic ones. Thus if the period became a golden age, it was primarily because the considerable growth in population that occurred between 1500 and the death of Elizabeth I did not so dangerously exceed the capacity of available resources, particularly food supplies, as to precipitate a Malthusian crisis. Famine and disease unquestionably disrupted and disturbed the Tudor economy, but they did not raze it to its foundations, as in the fourteenth century. More positively, the increased manpower and demand that sprang from rising population stimulated economic growth and the commercialization of agriculture, encouraged trade and urban renewal, inspired a housing revolution, enhanced the sophistication of English manners, especially in London, and (more arguably) bolstered new and exciting attitudes among Tudor Englishmen, notably individualistic ones derived from Reformation ideals and Calvinist theology. In order to present a clear picture of 16th century England, we considered depicting Henry VIII reign in a period of instability from the point of view of religion and state limits. The king’s egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to brood over suspected wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able but distinctly second—rate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VII’s treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory; on Arthur’s death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of Wales—a signal of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, Henry VIII had resolved to rule, even where, as in the case of the Church, it would have been enough merely to reign. He would put monarchic theory into practice; would give the words Rex Imperator a meaning never dreamt of even by the emperors of Rome, if he possibly could. Henry was eager, too, to conquer- to emulate the glorious victories of the Black Prince and Henry V, to quest after the Golden Fleece that was the French Crown. Repeatedly the efforts of Henry’s more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the king’s militaristic dreams, and by costly Continental ventures that wasted men, money, and equipment. Evaluation is always a matter of emphasis, but on the twin issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be said for the view that Henry VIII’s policy was consistent throughout his reign; that Henry was himself directing that policy; and that his ministers and officials were allowed – freedom of action only within accepted limits, and when the king was too busy to take a personal interest in state affairs. 1. Social background of the age The matter is debatable, but there is much to be said for the view that England was economically healthier, more expensive, and more optimistic under the Tudors than at any time since the Roman occupation of Britain. Certainly, the contrast with the fifteenth century was dramatic. In the hundred or so years before Henry VII became king of England in 1485, England had been under populated, underdeveloped, and inward-looking compared with other Western countries, notably France. Her recovery after the ravages of the Black Death had been slow – slower than in France, Germany, Switzerland, and some Italian cities. The process of economic recovery in pre-industrial societies was basically one of recovery of population, and figures will be useful. On the eve of the Black Death (1348), the population of England and Wales was between 4 and 5 millions; by 1377, successive plaques bad reduced it to 2. 5 millions. Yet the figure for England (without Wales) was still no higher than 2. 26 millions in 1525, and it is transparently clear that the striking feature of England demographic history between the Black Death and the reign of Henry VIII is the stagnancy of population which persisted until the 1520s. However, the growth of population rapidly accelerated after 1525: Between 1525 and 1541 the population of England grew extremely fast, an impressive burst of expansion after long inertia. This rate of growth slackened off somewhat after 1541, but the Tudor population continued to increase steadily and inexorably, with a temporary reversal only in the late 1550s, to reach 4. 10 millions in 1601. In addition, the population of Wales grew from about 210,000 in 1500 to 380,000 by 1603. While England reaped the fruits of the recovery of population in the sixteenth century, however, serious problems of adjustment were encountered. The impact of a sudden crescendo in demand, and pressure on available resources of food and clothing, within a society that was still overwhelmingly agrarian, was to be as painful as it was, ultimately, beneficial. The morale of countless ordinary Englishman was to be wrecked irrevocably, and ruthlessly, by problems that were too massive to be ameliorated either by governments or by traditional, ecclesiastical philanthropy. Inflation, speculation in land, enclosures, unemployment, vagrancy, poverty, and urban squalor were the most pernicious evils of Tudor England, and these were the wider symptoms of population growth and agricultural commercialization. In the fifteenth century farm rents had been discounted, because tenants were so elusive; lords had abandoned direct exploitation of their demesnes, which were leased to tenants on favourable terms. Rents had been low, too, on peasants’ customary holdings; labour services had been commuted, and servile villeinage had virtually disappeared from the face of the English landscape by 1485. At the same time, money wages had risen to reflect the contraction of the wage-labour force after 1348, and food prices had fallen in reply to reduced market demand. But rising demand after 1500 burst the bubble of artificial prosperity born of stagnant population. Land hunger led to soaring rents. Tenants of farms and copyholders were evicted by business-minded landlords. Several adjacent farms would be conjoined, and amalgamated for profit, by outside investors at the expense of sitting tenants. Marginal land would be converted to pasture for more profitable sheep-rearing. Commons were enclosed, and waste land reclaimed, by landlords or squatters, with consequent extinction of common grazing rights. The literary opinion that the active Tudor land market nurtured a new entrepreneurial class of greedy capitalists grinding the faces of the poor is an exaggeration. Yet it is fair to say that not all landowners, claimants, and squatters were entirely scrupulous in their attitude; certainly a vigorous market arose among dealers in defective titles to land, with resulting harassment of many legitimate occupiers. The greatest distress sprang, nevertheless, from inflation and unemployment. High agricultural prices gave farmers strong incentives to produce crops for sale in the dearest markets in nearby towns, rather than for the satisfaction of rural subsistence. Rising population, especially urban population, put intense strain on the markets themselves: demand for food often outstripped supply, notably in years of poor harvests due to epidemics or bad weather. In cash terms, agricultural prices began to rise faster than industrial prices from the beginning of the reign of Henry the VIII, a rise which accelerated as the sixteenth century progressed. Yet in real terms, the price rise was even more volatile than it appeared to be, since population growth ensured that labour was plentiful and cheap, and wages low. The size of the work-force in Tudor England increasingly exceeded available employment opportunities; average wages and living standards declined accordingly. Men (and women) were prepared to do a day’s work for little more than board wages; able-bodied persons, many of whom were peasants displaced by rising rents or the enclosure of commons, drifted in waves to the towns in quest of work. The best price index hitherto constructed covers the period 1264-1954, and its base period is most usefully 1451-75 – the end of the fifteenth-century era of stable prices. From the index, we may read the fortunes of the wage-earning consumers of Tudor England, because the calculations are based on the fluctuating costs of composite units of the essential foodstuffs and manufactured goods, such as textiles, that made up an average family shopping basket in southern England at different times. Two indexes are, in fact, available: first the annual price index of the composite basket of consumables; secondly the index of the basket expressed as the equivalent of the annual wage rates of building craftsmen in southern England. No one supposes that building workers were typical of the English labour force in the sixteenth century, or at any other time. But the indexes serve as a rough guide to the appalling reality of the rising household expenses of the majority of Englishmen in the Tudor period. t is clear that in the century after Henry VIII’s accession, the average prices of essential consumables rose by some 488 per cent. The price index stood at the 100 or so level until 1513, when it rose to 120. A gradual rise to 169 had occurred by 1530, and a further crescendo to 231 was attained by 1547, the year of Henry VIII’s death. In 1555 the index reached 270; two years later, it hit a staggering peak of 409, though this was partly due to the delayed effects of t he currency debasements practiced by Henry VIII and Edward VI. On the accession of Elizabeth I, in I5 58, the index had recovered to a median of 230. It climbed again thereafter, though more steadily: 300 in 1570, 342 in 1580, and 396 in 1590. But the later ISQOS witnessed exceptionally meagre harvests, together with regional epidemics and famine: the index read 515 in 1595, 685 in 1598, and only settled back to 459 in 1600. The index expressed as the equivalent of the building craftsman’s wages gives an equally sober impression of the vicissitudes of Tudor domestic life. An abrupt decline in the purchasing power of wages occurred between 1510 and 1530, the commodity equivalent falling by some 40 per cent in twenty years. The index fell again in the 1550s, but recovered in the next decade to a position equivalent to two-thirds of its value in 1510. It then remained more or less stable until the 1590s, when it collapsed to 39 in 1595, and to a catastrophic nadir of 29 in 1597. On the queen’s death in 1603 it had recovered to a figure of 45—which meant that real wages had dropped by 57 per cent since 1500. These various data establish the most fundamental truth about the age of the Tudors. When the percentage change of English population in the sixteenth century is plotted against that of the index of purchasing power of a building craftsman’s wages over the same period, it is immediately plain that the two lines of development and commensure (see graph). Living standards declined as the population rose; recovery began as population growth abated and collapsed between 1556 and I560. Standards then steadily dropped again, until previous proportions were overthrown by the localized famines of 1585-8 and 1595-8—though the cumulative increase in the size of the wage-labour force since 1570 must also have had distorting effects. In other words, population trends, rather than government policies, capitalist entrepreneurs, European imports of American silver, the more rapid circulation of money, or even currency debasements, were the key factor in determining the fortunes of the British Isles in the sixteenth century. English government expenditure on warfare, heavy borrowing, and debasements unquestionably exacerbated inflation and unemployment. But the basic facts of Tudor life were linked to population growth. In view of this fundamental truth, the greatest triumph of Tudor England was its ability to feed itself. A major national subsistence crisis was avoided. Malthus, who wrote his historic Essay on the Principle of Population in 1798, listed positive and preventive checks as the traditional means by which population was kept in balance with available resources of food. Positive ones involved heavy mortality and abrupt reversal of population growth. Fertility in England indeed declined in the later 1550s, and again between 1566 and 1571. A higher proportion of the population than hitherto did not marry in the reign of Elizabeth I. Poor harvests resulted in localized starvation, and higher mortality, in 1481-3, 1519—21, 1527-8, 1544-5, 1549-51, 1555-8, 1585-8, and 1595-8. Yet devastating as these years of dearth were for the affected localities, especially for the towns of the 1590s, the positive check of mass mortality on a national scale was absent from Tudor England, with the possible exception of the crisis of 1555—8. On top of its other difficulties, Mary’s government after 1555 faced the most serious mortality crisis since the fourteenth century: the population of England quickly dropped by about 200,000. Even so, it is not proved that this was a ‘national’ crisis in terms of its geographical range, and population growth was only temporarily interrupted. In fact, the chronology, intensity, and geographical extent of famine in the sixteenth century were such as to suggest that starvation crises in England were abating, rather than worsening, over time. Bubonic plagues were likewise confined to the insanitary towns after the middle 1 of the century, and took fewer victims in proportion to the expansion of population. The inescapable conclusion is that, despite the vicissitudes of the price index the harsh consequences for individuals of changed patterns of agriculture, and the proliferation of vagabondage, an optimistic view of the age of the Tudors has sufficiently firm foundations. The sixteenth century witnessed the birth of Britain’s pre—industrial political economy—an evolving accommodation between population and resources, economics and politics, ambition and rationality. England abandoned the disaster-oriented framework of the Middle Ages for the new dawn of low-pressure equilibrium. Progress had its price, unalterably paid by the weak, invariably banked by the strong. Yet the tyranny of the price index was not ubiquitous. Wage rates for agricultural workers fell by less than for building workers, and some privileged groups of wage-earners such as the Mendip miners may have enjoyed a small rise in real income. Landowners, commercialized farmers, and property investors were the most obvious beneficiaries of a system that guaranteed fixed expenses and enhanced selling prices—it was in the Tudor period that the nobility, gentry, and mercantile classes alike came to appreciate fully the enduring qualities of land. But many wage-labouring families were not wholly dependent upon their wages for subsistence. Multiple occupations, domestic self-employment, and cottage industries flourished, especially in the countryside; town-dwellers grew vegetables, kept animals, and brewed beer, except in the confines of London. Wage-labourers employed by great households received meat and drink in addition to cash income, although this customary practice was on the wane by the 1590s. Finally, it is not clear that vagabondage or urban population outside London expanded at a rate faster than was commensurate with the prevailing rise of national population. It used to be argued that the English urban population climbed from 6. 2. per cent of the national total in 1 520 to 8. 4 per cent by the end of the century. However, London’s spectacular growth alone explains this apparent over-population: the leading provincial towns, Norwich, Bristol, Coventry, and York, grew slightly or remained stable in absolute terms—and must thus have been inhabited by a reduced share of population in proportional terms. . Henry VIII Henry VII’s death in 1509 was greeted with feasting, dancing, universal rejoicing—for no one who survived until 1547 could have thought, with hindsight, that it was the accession of Henry VIII that inspired the nation’s confidence. Henry VIII succeeded, at barely eighteen years of age, because his elder brother, Arthur, had died in 1502. Under pressure from his councillors, essentially his father’s executors, Henry began his ‘triumphant’ reign by marrying his late brother’s widow, Catherine of Aragon—a union that was to have momentous, not to say revolutionary, consequences. He continued by executing Empson and Dudley, who were now thrown to the wolves in ritual expiation of their former employer’s financial prudence. Needless to say, these executions were a calculated ploy to enable the new regime to profit from the stability won by Henry VII without incurring any of its attendant stigmas—no one complained that Henry VIII’s government omitted to cancel the last batch of outstanding bonds until well into the 1520s. Yet Henry VIII had started as he meant to go on; something of the king’s natural cruelty, and inherent assumption that clean breaks with the past could solve deep—rooted problems, was already evident. 2. 1 Henry VIII’s character Henry VIII’s character was certainly fascinating, threatening, and intensely morbid, as Holbein’s great portrait illustrates to perfection. The king’s egoism, self-righteousness, and unlimited capacity to brood over suspected wrongs, or petty slights, sprang from the fatal combination of a relatively able but distinctly second—rate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VII’s treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory; on Arthur’s death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of Wales—a signal of unmistakable mistrust. As a result, Henry VIII had resolved to rule, even where, as in the case of the Church, it would have been enough merely to reign. He would put monarchic theory into practice; would give the words Rex Imperator a meaning never dreamt of even by the emperors of Rome, if he possibly could. Henry was eager, too, to conquer- to emulate the glorious victories of the Black Prince and Henry V, to quest after the Golden Fleece that was the French Crown. Repeatedly the efforts of Henry’s more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the king’s militaristic dreams, and by costly Continental ventures that wasted men, money, and equipment. Evaluation is always a matter of emphasis, but on the twin issues of monarchic theory and lust for conquest, there is everything to be said for the view that Henry VIII’s policy was consistent throughout his reign; that Henry was himself directing that policy; and that his ministers and officials were allowed – freedom of action only within accepted limits, and when the king was too busy to take a personal interest in state affairs. 2. 2 Cardinal Wolsey Cardinal Wolsey was Henry VIII’s first minister, and the fourteen years of that proud but efficient ascendancy (15 15-29) saw the king in a comparatively —restrained mood. Henry, unlike his father, found writing ‘both tedious and painful’; he preferred hunting, dancing, dallying, and playing the lute. In his more civilized moments, Henry studied theology and astronomy; he would wake up Sir Thomas More in the middle of the night in order that they might gaze at the ‘stars from the roof of a royal palace. He wrote songs, and the words of one form an epitome of Henry’s youthful sentiments. Pastime with good company I love and shall until I die. Grudge who lust, but none deny; So God be pleased, thus live will I; For my pastance, Hunt, sing and dance; My heart is set All goodly sport For my comfort: Who shall me let? Yet Henry himself set the tempo; his pastimes were only pursued while he was satisfied with Wolsey. Appointed Lord Chancellor and Chief Councillor on Christmas eve 1515, Wolsey used the Council and Star Chamber as instruments of ministerial power in much the way that Henry VII had used them as vehicles of royal power—though Wolsey happily pursued uniform and equitable ideals of justice in Star Chamber in place of Henry VII’s selective justice linked to fiscal advantage. But Wolsey’s greatest asset was the unique position he obtained with regard to the English Church. Between them, Henry and Wolsey bludgeoned the pope into granting Wolsey the rank of legate a latere for life, which meant that he became the superior ecclesiastical authority in England, and could convoke legatine synods. Using these powers, Wolsey contrived to subject the entire English Church and clergy to a massive dose of Tudor government and taxation, and it looks as if an uneasy modus vivendi prevailed behind the scenes in which Henry agreed that the English Church was, for the moment, best controlled by a churchman who was a royal servant, and the clergy accepted that it was better to be obedient to an ecclesiastical rather than a secular tyrant—for it is unquestionably true that Wolsey protected the Church from the worst excesses of lay opinion while in office. . 3 Henry VIII Christianity The trouble was that, with stability restored, and the Tudor dynasty apparently secure, England had started to become vulnerable to a mounting release of forces, many of which were old ones suppressed beneath the surface for years, and others which sprang from the new European mood of reform and self—criticism. Anti – was the most volcanic of the smoldering emotions that pervaded the Eng lish laity; an ancient ‘disease’, it had been endemic in British society since Constantine’s conversion to Christianity. By the sixteenth century, English anti-clericalism centered on three major areas of lay resentment: first, opposition to such ecclesiastical abuses as clerical fiscalism, absenteeism, pluralism, maladministration, and concubinage; secondly, the excessive numbers of clergy, as it appeared to the laity—monks, friars, and secular priests seemed to outnumber the laity, and form a caste of unproductive consumers, which was untrue but reflected lay xenophobia; and thirdly, opposition to the jurisdiction of the bishops and Church courts, especially in cases of heresy. It was pointed out by prominent writers, notably the grave and learned Christopher St. German (1460-1541), that the Church’s procedure in cases of suspected heresy permitted secret accusations, hearsay evidence, and denied accused persons the benefit of purgation by oath helpers or trial by jury, which was a Roman procedure contrary to the principles of native English common law—a clerical plot to deprive Englishmen of their natural, legal rights. Such ideas were manifestly explosive; for they incited intellectual affray between clergy and common lawyers. a) Popular religious idealism Popular religious idealism was another major problem faced by the English ecclesiastical authorities. Late medieval religion was sacramental, institutional and ritualistic; for ordinary people it seemed excessively dominated by ‘objective` Church ritual and obligation, as opposed to ‘subjective’ religious experience based on Bible reading at home. The educated classes, who were the nobility clergy, and rich merchants, knew that traditional Catholic piety and meditation did not lack for subjectivity and individual introspection, but few non-literate persons had the mental discipline needed to meditate with any degree of fulfillment. For ordinary people, personal religion had to be founded on texts of Scripture and Bible stories (preferably illustrated ones), but vernacular Bibles were illegal in England—the Church authorities believed that the availability of an English Bible, even an authorized version, would ferment heresy by permitting Englishmen to form their own opinions. Sir Thomas More, who was Wolsey’s successor as Lord Chancellor, was the premier lay opponent of the commissioning of an English Bible, and ally of the bishops. He declared, in his notorious proclamation of 22 June 1530, that ‘it is not necessary the said Scripture to be in the English tongue and in the hands of the common people, but that the distribution of the said Scripture, and the permitting or denying thereof, dependant only upon the discretion of the superiors, as they shall think it convenient’. More pursued a policy of strict censorship: no books in English printed outside the realm on any subject whatsoever were to be imported; he forbade the printing of Scriptural or religious books in England, too, unless approved in advance by a bishop. It was a case of one law for the rich and educated, who could read the Scriptures in Latin texts and commentaries, and another for the poor, who depended on oral instruction from semi-literate artisans and travelling preachers. But More and the bishops were swimming against the tide. The invention of printing had revolutionized the transmission of new ideas across Western Europe, including Protestant ideas. Heretical books and Bibles poured from the presses of English exiles abroad, notably that of William Tyndale at Antwerp. The demand for vernacular Scriptures was persistent, insistent, and widespread; even Henry VIII was enlightened enough to wish to assent to it, and publication an English Bible in Miles Coverdale’s translation was first achieved in 1536, a year after More’s death. b) Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning Of the forces springing from the new European mood of reform and self-criticism, Christian Humanism and the influence of Greek learning came first. The humanists, of whom the greatest was Erasmus of Rotterdam (1467-1536), rejected scholasticism and elaborate ritualism in favor of wit and simple biblical piety, or philosophia Christi, which was founded on primary textual scholarship, and in particular study of the Greek New Testament. Erasmus read voraciously, wrote prodigiously, and travelled extensively; he made three visits to England, and it was in Cambridge in 1511-14 that he worked upon the Greek text of his own edition of the New Testament, and revised his Latin version that improved significantly on the standard Vulgate text. But the renaissance of Greek learning owed as much to a native Englishman, John Colet, the gloomy dean of St. Paul’s and founder of its school. Colet, who was also young Thomas More’s spiritual director, had been to Italy, where he had encountered the Neo-Platonist philosophy of Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola. He had mastered Greek grammar and literature, which he then helped to foster at Oxford and at his school, and the fruits of his philosophical and literary knowledge were applied to Bible study—especially to the works of St. Paul. The result was a method of Scriptural exegesis that broke new ground. Colet emphasized the unity of divine truth, a literal approach to texts, concern for historical context, and belief in a personal and redemptive Christ. These were exciting ideas, and they inspired both Erasmus and the younger generation of English humanists. The clarion call of humanist reform was sounded in 1503, when Erasmus published A Handbook of a Christian Knight, a compendium, or guide, for spiritual life. (Parvulorum Institutio, 1512-13) This book encapsulated the humanism, evangelism, and laicism that its author had imbibed from Colet, and made Europe uncomfortably aware that the existing priorities of the Church would not do. Erasmus added reforming impetus to traditional lay piety, and his pungent criticisms of the scholastic theologians, of empty ritual, ecclesiastical abuses, and even the mores of the Papacy, were as stimulating as they were embarrassing. For Erasmus, whose classic satire was Praise of Folly (1514), highlighted his reforming posture by means of his immortal wit, combining the serious, the humorous, and the artistic in peerless texture, and delighting everyone except the senior Church authorities. Wit is an essential literary commodity, and Erasmus drew on his as from a bottomless purse—which was just as well, for it was his sole pecuniary endowment. His effervescent humor flowed quite naturally. Works of piety, that might otherwise have been mere pebbles thrown into the European pond, thus generated ripples that increasingly had the force of tidal waves. The best English exponent of humanist satire in the wake of Praise of Folly was Thomas More, whose Utopia, first published at Louvain in 1516, described imaginary and idealized society of pagans living on a remote island in accordance with principles of natural virtue. By implicitly comparing the benign social customs and enlightened religious attitudes of the ignorant Utopians with the inferior standards, in practice, of (allegedly) Christian Europeans, More produced a strident indictment of the latter, based purely on deafening silence—a splendid, if perplexing, achievement of the sort More perennially favored. But to the distress of Erasmus, More abandoned reform for repression and extermination of heresy during his thousand days as Lord Chancellor, and has gone down to history , save in the writings of his a apologists as persecutor rather than a prophet. However, his terrible end in 1535 as a victim of Henry VIII’s vengeance, and his willingness to suffer torment for the truth he had discovered in the (then controversial) dogma of papal primacy, perpetually guarantee that his steadfastness was not a delusion; when the axe fell, Utopia’s author earned his place among the few who have enlarged the hori2ons of the human spirit. In fairness to More, the Brave New World of Utopia had been crudely shattered by Luther’s debut upon the European stage in1517. For the Christian Humanists, to their sorrow, had unintentionally, but irreversibly, prepared the way for the spread of Protestantism. In England, the impact of Lutheranism far exceeded the relatively small number of converts, and the rise of the â€Å"new learning†, as it was called, became the most potent of the- forces released in the 1520s and 1530s. Luther’s ideas and numerous books rapidly penetrated the universities, especially Cambridge, the City of London, the Inns of Court, and even reached Henry VIII s Household through the intervention of Anne Boleyn and her circle. At Cambridge, the young scholars influenced included Thomas Cranmer and Matthew Parker, both of whom later became Archbishops of Canterbury. Wolsey naturally made resolute efforts as legate to stamp out the spread of Protestantism, but without obvious success. His critics blamed his reluctance to burn men for heresy as the cause of his failure—for Wolsey would burn books and imprison men, but shared the humane horror of Erasmus at the thought of himself committing bodies to the flames. However the true reason for Luther’s appeal was that he had given coherent doctrinal expression to the religious subjectivity of individuals, and to their distrust of Rome and papal monarchy. In addition his view of the ministry mirrored the instincts of the anticlerical laity, and his answer to concubinage was the global solution of clerical marriage. 2. 4 Henrician Reformation a) Henry VIII’s first divorce Into this religious maelstrom dropped Henry VIII’s first divorce. Although Catherine of Aragon had borne five children, only the Princess Mary (b. 1516) had survived, and the king demanded the security of a male heir to protect the fortunes of the Tudor dynasty. It was clear by 1527 that Catherine was past the age of childbearing; meanwhile Henry coveted Anne Boleyn, who would not comply without the assurance of marriage. Yet royal annulments were not infrequent, and all might have been resolved without drama, or even unremarked, had not Henry VIII himself been a proficient, if mendacious, theologian. The chief obstacle was that Henry, who feared international humiliation, insisted that his divorce should be granted by a competent authority in England-this way he could de rive his wife of her legal rights, and bully his Episcopal judges. But his marriage had been founded on Pope Julius II’s dispensation, necessarily obtained by Henry VIII to enable the young Henry VIII to marry his brother’s widow in the first place, and hence the matter pertained to Rome. In order to have his case decided without reference to Rome, in face of the Papacy’s unwillingness to concede the matter, Henry had to prove against the reigning pope, Clement VII that his predecessor’s dispensation was invalid — then the marriage would automatically terminate, on the grounds that it had never legally existed. Henry would be a bachelor again. However, this strategy took the king away from matrimonial law into the quite remote and hypersensitive realm of papal power. If Julius II’s dispensation was invalid, it must be because the successors of St. Peter had no power to devise such instruments, and the popes were thus no better than other human legislators who had exceeded their authority. Henry was a good enough theologian and canon lawyer to know that there was a minority opinion in Western Christendom to precisely this effect. He was enough of an egotist, too, to fall captive to his own powers of persuasion—soon he believed that papal primacy was unquestionably a sham, a ploy of human invention to deprive kings and emperors of their legitimate inheritances. Henry looked back to the golden days of the British imperial past, to the time of the Emperor Constantine and of King Lucius I. In fact, Lucius I had never existed- he was a myth, a figment of pre-Conquest imagination. But Henry’s British ‘sources’ showed that this Lucius was a great ruler, the first Christian king of Britain, who had endowed the British Church with all its liberties and possessions, and then written to Pope Eleutherius asking him to transmit the Roman laws. However, the pope’s reply explained that Lucius did not need any Roman law, because he already had the lex Britunniue (whatever that was) under which he ruled both regnum and sacerdotium: For you be God’s vicar in your kingdom, as the psalmist says, ‘Give the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness to the king’s son’ (Ps. xxii: 1) . . . A king hath his name of ruling, and not of having a realm. You shall be a king, while you rule well; but if you do otherwise, the name of a king shall not remain with you . . . God grant you so to rule the realm of Britain, that you may reign with him forever, whose vicar you be in the realm. Vicarius Dei-vicar of Christ. Henryâ€⠄¢s divorce had led him, incredibly, to believe in his royal supremacy over the English Church. b) Supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana With the advent of the divorce crisis, Henry took personal charge of his policy and government. He ousted Wolsey, who was hopelessly compromised in the new scheme of things, since his legatine power came directly from Rome. He named Sir Thomas More to the chancellorship, but this move backfired owing to More’s scrupulous reluctance to involve himself in Henry’s proceedings. He summoned Parliament, which for the first time in English history worked with the king as an omnicompetent legislative assembly, if hesitatingly so. Henry and Parliament finally threw off England’s allegiance to Rome in an unsurpassed burst of revolutionary statute-making: the Act of Annates (1532. , the Act of Appeals (1533), the Act of Supremacy (1534), the First Act of Succession (1534) the Treasons Act (1534), and the Act against the Pope’s Authority (1536). The Act of Appeals proclaimed Henry VIII’s new imperial status-all English jurisdiction, both secular and religious, now sprang from the king-and abolished the pope’s right to decide English ecclesiastical cases. The Act of Supremacy declared that the king of England was supreme head of the Ecclesia Anglicana, or Church of England—not the pope. The Act of Succession was the first of a series of Tudor instruments used to settle the order of succession to the hrone, a measure which even Thomas More agreed was in itself unremarkable, save that this statute was prefaced by a preamble denouncing papal jurisdiction as a ‘usurpation’ of Henry’s imperial power. More, together with Bishop Fisher of Rochester, and the London Carthusians, the most rigorous and honorable custodians of papal primacy and the legitimacy of the Aragonese marriage, were tried for ‘denying’ Henry’s supremacy under the terms of the Treasons Act. These terms inter alia made it high treason maliciously to de rive either king or queen of ‘the dignity, title, or name of their royal estates’—that is to deny Henry’s royal supremacy. The victims of the act, who were in reality martyrs to Henry’s vindictive egoism, were cruelly executed in the summer of 1535. A year later the Reformation legislation was completed by the Act against the Pope’s Authority, which removed the last vestiges of papal power in England, including the pope’s ‘pastoral’ right as a teacher to decide disputed points of Scripture. Henry VIII now controlled the English Church as its supreme head in both temporal and doctrinal matters; his ecclesiastical status was that of a lay metropolitan archbishop who denied the validity of external, papal authority within his territories. He was not a riest, and had no sacerdotal or sacramental functions—the king had tried briefly to claim these but had been rebuffed by an outraged episcopate. Yet Henry was not a Protestant, either. Until his death in 1547, Henry VIII believed in Catholicism without the pope—a curious but typically Henrician application of logic to the facts of so—called British ‘history’ as exemplified by King Lucius I. As a lay archbishop, Henry could make ecclesiastical laws and define doctrines almost as he pleased—provided he did not overthrow the articles of faith. In fact, this gave him a wider latitude than might be thought, because the bishops could not agree what the articles of faith were, beyond the fundamentals of God’s existence, Christ’s divinity, the Trinity, and some of the sacraments. The Greek scholarship of the Christian Humanists had weakened the structure of traditional, medieval Christian doctrine by questioning texts and rejecting scholasticism: a mood of uncertainty prevailed. Before 1529, then, Henry had ruled his clergy through Wolsey; after 1534 he did so personally, and through his new chief minister, Thomas Cromwell, whom Henry soon appointed his (lay) vicegerent in spirituals. A former aide of Wolsey, Cromwell had risen to executive power as a client of the Boleyn interest, and had taken command of the machinery of government, especially the management of Parliament, in January 1532. By combining the offices of Lord Privy Seal and vicegerent, Cromwell succeeded Wolsey as the architect of Tudor policy under Henry, until his own fall in july 1540—but with one striking difference. As vicegerent he was entirely subordinate to Henry; Wolsey, as legate, had been subordinate only as an Englishman. Yet the accomplishment of Henry’s dream to give the words Rex Imperator literal meaning raises a key historical question. Exactly why did the English bishops and abbots, the aristocracy of the spirit who held a weight of votes in the House of Lords, permit the Henrician Reformation to occur? The answer is partly that Henry coerced his clerical opponents into submission by threats and punitive taxation; but some bishops actually supported the king, albeit sadly, and a vital truth lies behind this capitulation. Those clerics who were politically alert saw that it was preferable to be controlled by the Tudor monarchs personally, with whom they could bargain and haggle, than to be offered as a sacrifice instead to the anticlerical laity in the House of Commons, which was the true alternative to compliance. For as early as 1532, it was on the cards that the Tudor supremacy would be a parliamentary supremacy, not a purely royal one, and only the despotic king’s dislike of representative assemblies ensured that Parliament’s contribution was cut back to the mechanical, though still revolutionary, task of enacting the requisite legislation. It was plain to all but the most ultramontane papalists on the Episcopal bench that a parliamentary supremacy would have exposed the clergy directly to the pent—up emotional fury and hatred of the anticlerical laity and common lawyers. The laity, furthermore, were fortified for the attack by the humanists’ debunking of ritualism and superstition. In short, royal supremacy was the better of two evils: the clergy would not have to counter the approaching anticlerical backlash without the necessary filter of royal mediation. c) The dissolution of the religious houses Henry VIII’s supremacy did save the bishops from the worst excesses of lay anticlericalism, and the king’s doctrinal conservatism prevented an explosion of Protestantism during his reign. However, nothing could save the monasteries. Apart from anticlericalism, three quite invincible forces merged after 1535 to dictate the dissolution of the religious houses. First, the monastic communities almost parent institutions outside England and Wales—this was juridically unacceptable after the Acts of Appeals and Supremacy. Secondly, Henry VIII was bankrupt. He needed to annex the monastic estates in order to restore the Crown’s finances. Thirdly, Henry had to buy the allegiance of the political nation away from Rome and in support of his Reformation by massive injections of new patronage—he must appease the lay nobility and gentry with a share of the spoils. Thus Thomas Cromwell’s first task as vicegerent was to conduct an ecclesiastical census under Henry’s commission, the first major tax record since Domesday Book, to evaluate the condition and wealth of the English Church. Cromwell’s questionnaire was a model of precision. Was divine service observed? Who were the benefactors? What lands did the houses possess? What rents? and so on. The survey was completed in six months, and Cromwell’s genius for administration was shown by the fact that Valor Ecclesiasticus, as it is known, served both as a record of the value of the monastic assets, and as a report on individual clerical incomes for taxation purposes. The lesser monasteries were dissolved in 1536; the greater houses followed two years later. The process was interrupted by a formidable northern rebellion, the Pilgrimage of Grace, which was brutally crushed by use of martial law, exemplary public hangings, and a wholesale breaking of Henry’s promises to the ‘pilgrims’. But the work of plunder was quickly completed. A total of 56o monastic institutions had been suppressed by November 1539, and lands valued at ? 132,000 per annum immediately accrued to the Court of Augmentations of the King’s Revenue, the new department of state set up by Cromwell to cope with the transfer of resources. Henry’s coffers next received ? I5,000 or so from the sale of gold and silver plate, lead, and other precious items; finally, the monasteries had possessed the right of presentation to about two-fifths of the parochial benefices in England and Wales, and these rights were also added to the Crown’s patronage. The long-term effects of the dissolution have often been debated by historians, and may conveniently be divided into those which were planned, and those not. Within the former category, Henry VIII eliminated the last fortresses of potential resistance to his royal supremacy. He founded six new dioceses upon the remains of former monastic buildings and endowments—Peterborough, Gloucester, Oxford, Chester, Bristol, and Westminster, the last-named being abandoned in 1550. The king then reorganized the ex-monastic cathedrals as Cathedrals of the New Foundation, with revised staffs and statutes. Above all, though, the Crown’s regular income was seemingly doubled-but for how long? The bitter irony of the dissolution was that Henry VIII’s colossal military expenditure in the 1540s, together with the laity’s demand for a share of the booty, politically irresistible as that was, would so drastically erode the financial gains as to cancel out the benefits of the entire process. Sales of the confiscated lands began even before the suppression of the greater houses was completed, and by 1547 almost two thirds of the former monastic property had been alienated. Further grants by Edward VI and Queen Mary brought this figure to over three—quarters by 1558. The remaining lands were sold by Elizabeth I and the early Stuarts. It is true that the lands were not given away: out of 1,593 grants in Henry VIII’s reign, only 69 were gifts or partly so; the bulk of grants (95. 6 per cent) represented lands sold at prices based on fresh valuations. But the proceeds of sales were not invested – quite the opposite under Henry VIII. In any case, land was the best investment. The impact of sales upon the non-parliamentary income of the Crown was thus obvious, and there is everything to be said for the view that it was Henry VIII’s constant dissipation of the monarchy’s resources that made it difficult for his successors to govern England. Of the unplanned effects of the dissolution, the wholesale destruction of fine Gothic buildings, melting down of medieval metalwork and jewellery, and sacking of libraries were the most extensive acts of licensed vandalism perpetrated in the whole of British history. The clergy naturally suffered an immediate decline in morale. The number of candidates for ordination dropped sharply; there was little real conviction that Henry VIII’s Reformation had anything to do with spiritual life, or with God. The disappearance of the abbots from the House of Lords meant that the ecclesiastical vote had withered away to a minority, leaving the laity ascendant in both Houses. With the sale of ex-monastic lands usually went the rights of parochial presentation attached to them, so that local laity btained a considerable monopoly of ecclesiastical patronage, setting the pattern for the next three centuries. The nobility and gentry, especially moderate—sized gentry’ families, were the ultimate beneficiaries of the Crown’s land sales. The distribution of national wealth shifted between 1535 and 1558 overwhelmingly in favor of Crown and laity, as against the Church, and appreciably in favor of the nobility and gentry, as against the Crow n. Very few new or substantially enlarged private estates were built up solely out of ex—monastic lands by 1558. But if Norfolk is a typical county, the changing pattern of wealth distribution at Elizabeth’s accession was that 4. 8 per cent of the county’s manors were possessed by the Crown, 6. 5 per cent were Episcopal or other ecclesiastical manors, II. 4 per cent were owned by East Anglican territorial magnates, and 75. 4 per cent had been acquired by the gentry. In 1535, 2. 7 per cent of manors had been held by the Crown, 17. 2 per cent had been owned by the monasteries, 9. 4 per cent were in the hands of magnates, and 64 per cent belonged to gentry’ families. Without Henry VIII’s preparatory break with Rome, there could not have been Protestant reform in Edward VI’s reign——thus evaluation can become a question of religious opinion, rather than historical judgment. However, it is hard not to regard Henry as a despoiler; he was scarcely a creator. Thomas Cromwell did his utmost, often behind the king’s back, to endow his contemporaries with Erasmian, and enlightened idealism: the Elizabethan via media owed much to the eirenic side of Cromwell’s complex character. But Cromwell’s reward was the block—ira principis mors est. He was cast aside by his suspicious employer, and fell victim to the hatred of his enemies. And without Wolsey or Cromwell to restrain him, Henry could do still more harm. He resolved to embark on French and Scottish wars, triggering a slow-burning fuse that was extinguished only by the execution of Mary Stuart in February 1587. Yet if Henry turned to war and foreign policy in the final years of his reign, it was because he felt secure at last. Cromwell had provided the enforcement machinery necessary to protect the supreme head from spontaneous internal opposition; Jane Seymour had brought forth the male heir to the Tudor throne; Henry was excited about his marriage to Catherine Howard, and was happily cured of theology. 2. 5 The matrimonial adventures of Henry VIII The matrimonial adventures of Henry are too familiar to recount again in detail, but an outline may conveniently be given. Anne Boleyn was already pregnant when the king married her, and the future Elizabeth I was born on 7 September 1533. Henry was bitterly disappointed that she was not the expected son, blaming Anne and God—in that order. Anne had turned out to be a precocious flirt, who meddled fatally in politics: she was ousted and executed in a coup of May 1536. Henry immediately chose the homely Jane Seymour, whose triumph in producing the baby Prince Edward was Pyrrhic, for she died of Tudor surgery twelve days later. Her successor was Anne of Cleves, whom Henry married in January 1540 to win European allies. But this gentle creature, which Henry rudely called ‘the Flemish mare’, did not suit; divorce was thus easy, as the union was never consummated. Catherine Howard came next. A high-spirited mind, she had been a maid of honour to Anne of Cleves—entirely inappropriately—and became Henry’s fifth queen in July 1540 as the key to the coup that destroyed Cromwell. She was executed in February 1542 for adultery. Finally, Henry took the amiable Catherine Parr to wife in July 1543. Twice widowed, Catherine was a cultivated Erasmian, under whose benign influence the royal children lived under one roof, and were spared the more malign components of Henry’s paternal indulgence. 2. 6 An extension of English hegemony Henry VIII’s plans for war which were conceived after his marriage to Catherine Howard, and which hardened when he learned of her infidelity, resurrected youthful dreams of French conquests. Wolsey had monitored the king’s futile early campaigns of 1 511-16, and brilliantly transformed Henry’s military failures into the diplomatic prize of the treaty of London (1518). At the Field of Cloth of Gold in 1520, Henry had feted Francis I of France in a Renaissance extravaganza that was hailed as the eighth wonder of the world, for Francis was the king whom Henry loved to hate. More wasteful campaigns in 1522 and 1523 were curtailed by England’s financial exhaustion—then Henry’s policy fell into labyrinthine confusion. England was at war with France; then in alliance with France. In the end, Henry was perhaps grateful for the European peace which prevailed from 1529 to 1536, and even more relieved by the resumed rivalry that kept Habsburg and Valois mutually engaged until the reverberations of the Pilgrimage of Grace had died away. By 1541 Henry was moving towards a renewed amity with Spain against France, but he was prudent enough to hesitate. Tudor security required that before England went to war with France, no doors should be open to the enemy within Britain itself. This meant an extension of English hegemony within the British Isles—Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. Accordingly Henry undertook, or continued, the wider task of English colonization that was ultimately completed by the Act of Union with Scotland (1707). a) The Union of England and Wales The Union of England and Wales had been presaged by Cromwell’s reforming ambition and was legally accomplished by Parliament in 1536 and 1543. The marcher lordships were shired, English laws and county administration were extended to Wales, and the shires and county boroughs were required to send twenty-four MPs to Parliament at Westminster. In addition, a refurbished Council of Wales, and new Courts of Great Sessions, were set up to administer the region’s defenses and judicial system. Wales was made subject to the full operation of royal writs, and to English principles of land tenure. The Act of 1543 dictated that Welsh customs of tenure and inheritance were to be phased out and that English rules were to succeed them. Welsh customs persisted in remote areas until the seventeenth century and beyond, but English customs soon predominated. English language became the fashionable tongue, and Welsh native arts went into decline. Englishmen have regarded the Union as the dawn of a civilizing process that ended with the abolition of the Council of Wales in 1689 and of the Great Sessions in 1830. Welshmen, by contrast, view Henry VIII’s Acts as a crude annexation, which technically they were—for they were not in the nature of a treaty between negotiating parties as was the case with Scotland in 1707. In fact, Welsh civilization was already advanced in the sixteenth century, and flourished despite the Acts. Sir John Prise, ia relation of Thomas Cromwell, defended Welsh history against the skepticism of Polydore Vergil; Humphrey Llwyd of Denbigh supported him with geographical learning—and there were others. John Owen of Plas Du, Llanarmon, and New College, Oxford, enjoyed a higher literary reputation abroad during his lifetime than did William Shakespeare, his contemporary. He wrote 1,500 Latin epigrams in the style of Martial. Welsh grammars were compiled to perpetuate the native tongue—by Sion Dafydd Rhys (1592. ), who wrote in Latin in order to reach the widest European audience, and by john Davies of Mallwyd (1621), who publicly justified the utility of Welsh studies. b) Tudor Irish policy Tudor Irish policy had begun with Henry VII’s decision that all laws made in England were automatically to apply to Ireland, and that the Irish Parliament could only legislate with the king of England’s prior consent. English territorial influence, in reality, did not extend much beyond the Pale—the area around Dublin—and the Irish chiefs held the balance of power. Henry VIII ruled mainly through the chiefs before the Reformation, but was obliged to protect England in the 1530s from a possible papal counter—attack launched from Ireland. Lord Leonard Grey was named deputy of Ireland by Cromwell, but his coercive actions proved counter-productive. He was replaced by Sir Anthony St. Leger, who made a fresh start. St. Leger reshaped the Irish policy of the Tudors, and his basic philosophy persisted until 1783. Instead of consolidation and coercion, he proposed friend-ship and conciliation, but the essence of the plan was to create a subordinate national superstructure for Ireland by translating Henry VIII’s lordship into kingship. The kings of England were dominus Hiberniae, not rex. But St. Leger persuaded Henry to assume the Crown—that would overthrow papal claims to feudal overlordship, and subordinate the chiefs to royal authority. Henry assented, and was proclaimed king in June 1541. His understanding was probably that kingship would enhance his security within the British Isles. Moreover, if the idea was to form a framework for peaceful, constitutional relations between the Crown and the Irish nation, that was laudable and altruistic. Yet it was also visionary and impractical. The Irish revenues were insufficient to maintain royal status—a separate Council, Star Chamber, Chancery, and Parliament in Dublin, operating independently of, but subject to controls from, the English Parliament and Privy Council. Above all, kingship committed England to a possible full-scale conquest of Ireland in the future, should the chiefs rebel, or should the Irish Reformation, begun by Cromwell, fail. As it turned out, ‘conciliation’ by benevolent kingship was probably worse than external ‘consolidation’ and ‘coercion’, since Tudor attitudes to conquest in Ireland were based on experiences in the New World, something the disillusioned Edmund Spenser, who lived in Ireland, pointed out in Elizabeth’s reign. The harsh vicissitudes of Irish history, especially in the seventeenth century, were hardly attributable to Henry VIII and St. Leger. However, the new policy of the Tudors perpetuated the disadvantages both of subordination and of autonomy. In the wake of Irish pressure and the revolt of the American Colonies, the British Parliament abandoned its controls over Ireland in 1783. The Act of Union of 1801 reversed this change in favour of direct rule from Westminster, after which Irish history owed nothing to the Tudors. c) The need to control Scotland Yet the linchpin of Tudor security was the need to control Scotland. James IV (1488-1513) had renewed the Auld Alliance with France in 1492 and further provoked Henry VII by offering support for Perkin Warbeck. But the first of the Tudors declined to be distracted by Scottish sabre-rattling, and forged a treaty of Perpetual Peace with Scotland in 1501, followed a year later by the marriage of his daughter, Margaret, to King James. However, James tried to break the treaty shortly after Henry VIII’s accession; Henry was on campaign in France, but sent the earl of Surrey northwards, and Surrey decimated the Scots at Flodden on 9 September 1513. The elite of Scotland—the king, three bishops, eleven earls, fifteen lords, and some 10,000 men—were slain in an attack that was the delayed acme of medieval aggression begun by Edward I and III. The new Scottish king, James V, was an infant, and the English interest was symbolized for the next twenty years or so by the person of his mother, Henry VIII’s own sister. But Scottish panic after Flodden had, if anything, confirmed the nation’s ties with France, epitomized by the regency of john duke of Albany, who represented the French cause but nevertheless kept Scotland at peace with England for the moment. The French threat became overt when the mature James V visited France in 1536, and married in quick succession Madeleine, daughter of Francis I, and on her death Mary of Guise. In 1541 James agreed to meet Henry VIII at York, but committed the supreme offence of failing to turn up. By this time, Scotland was indeed a danger to Henry VIII, as its government was dominated by the French faction led by Cardinal Beaton, who symbolized both the Auld Alliance and the threat of papal counter-attack. In October 1542 the duke of Norfolk invaded Scotland, at first achieving little. It was the Scottish counterstroke that proved to be a worse disaster even than Flodden. On 25 November 1542, 3,000 English triumphed over 10,000 Scots at Solway Moss—and the news of the disgrace killed James V within a month. Scotland was left hostage to the fortune of Mary Stuart, a baby born only six days before James’s death. For England, it seemed to be the answer to a prayer. Henry VIII and Protector Somerset, who governed England during the early years of Edward VI’s minority, none the less turned advantage into danger. Twin policies were espoused by which war with France was balanced by intervention in Scotland designed to secure England’s back door. In 1543 Henry used the prisoners taken at Solway Moss as the nucleus of an English party in Scotland; he engineered Beaton’s overthrow, and forced on the Scots the treaty of Greenwich, which projected union of the Crowns in form of marriage between Prince Edward and Mary Stuart. At the end of the same year, Henry allied with Spain against France, planning a combined invasion for the following spring. But the invasion, predictably, was not concerted. Henry was deluded by his capture of Boulogne; the emperor made a separate peace with France at Crepi, leaving England’s flank exposed. At astronomical cost the war continued How to cite The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02, Papers

Changes free essay sample

On the song Dear Mama he writes They say Im wrong and Im heartless, but all along I was looking for a father he was gone (1995) these lyrics give the assumption that he might have looked for a father within himself and thus created in persona founded on the character Of the two people he thought could be his father. Tuba created binary oppositions as creative mechanisms, the socially constructive poet vs.. He destructive street thug and he could write as well as speak from both alter egos. His conscious rapper ego tackled social issues such as racism, violence, drug abuse whilst his gangster rapper ego talked about selling drugs, perpetrating violence and called women derogatory names. To understand just a little part of Tubas complex character, the following quotation by Carl Jung would give some insight. Such a man knows that whatever is wrong in the world is in himself, and if he only learns to deal tit his own Shadow he has done something real for the world. Outpace Shakers music Is characterized by hard hitting hip hop beats sampled room different music genres and lyrics that criticize, the capitalist system that divides America into the haves and have-nots. The collective identity in Tubas music is identified In the struggle of the lower classes to find political, economic, social discourse In a capitalist society by chronicling from the perspective of a young black male growing up in post civil rights America.His work vocalizes the thoughts of the masses trapped within a modern slavery system (poverty and discrimination). The writers credited on the album sleeve are Shaker, T. , Evans, D. , Horns, B. ; Changes ample the beat and part of the chorus from Bruce Harmonys The way It is(1986) and appropriated It Into a Hip Hop political anthem. This part of the paper will delve into the psyche of the artist and explore the lyrics of Changes. ANALYZING OUTPACE When did I ever say I was a gangs rapper? Is Frank Sinatra a gangs singer?Is Steve Seal a gangs actor? What is that? Thats such a limited term. Maroon Brandon is not a gangs actor, hes an actor. Axle Rose and them are not gangs rock and rollers, thieve rock and rollers. So Im a rapper, this is what I do. Im an artist. And I AP about the oppressed taking back their place. I rap about fighting back. To me, my lyrics and my verses are about struggling and overcoming, you know (Shaker, 2003) Left: OPAC. 1996. All Eyes On Me (outpace. Com) Right: OPAC. 1995. Me against the World (outpace. Mom) Outpace Shakers controversial image drowned his work; the media at the time concentrated on what he did off record and forget that he was a brilliant rapper, lyricist and actor. He did cultivate the gangster image with Thug Life tattered across his abdomen and his persona as seen on the album cover of All eyes on me (1996) Is that of a gangs, The persona Is evident on him with the words Outlaw tattered on his lower arm, a panthers head on his upper arm with a miscreant intensity and 1 OFF on music videos, further reiterates that he is a gangs rapper.However on the cover of an earlier album Me against the world(1995) another side of the rapper is seen, with his back against a wall, he stares at the camera like a deer caught between two headlights. In interviews and talk shows when he takes off his mask, an intelligent, misunderstood, creative young man who wants to change the world with his music merges. Tyson (2002) in his explanation of Tubas dua l persona mentioned something very interesting that Tubas mother Affine was impregnated by one of two possible candidates, a revolutionary black panther by the name of Billy Garland and Legs a drug dealer.On the song Dear Mama he writes They say Im wrong and Im heartless, but all along I was looking for a father he was gone (1995) these lyrics give the assumption that he might have looked for a father within himself and thus created twin personae founded on the character of the two people he thought could e his father. Outpace created binary oppositions as creative mechanisms, the socially constructive poet vs.. The destructive street thug and he could write as well as speak from both alter egos.His conscious rapper ego tackled social issues such as racism, violence, drug abuse whilst his gangster rapper ego talked about selling drugs, perpetrating violence and called women derogatory names. To understand Just a little part of Tubas complex character, the following quotation by Carl Jung would give some insight. Such a man knows that whatever is wrong in the world is in myself, and if he only learns to deal with his own Shadow he has done something real for the world.He has succeeded in shouldering at least an infinitesimal part of the gigantic, unsolved social problems of our day. These problems are mostly so difficult because they are poisoned by mutual projections. How can anyone see straight when he does not even see himself and the darkness he unconsciously carries with him into all dealings? Nouns, 1938). The two images of Outpace show that instead of hiding his other self (the shadow) he consciously projected it and White toes (1997) that a misguided Outpace drew his masculine principles from Legs his father figure.Outpace Shaker was born on the 16th of June 1971; a month after his mother Affine Shaker was released from prison for her suspected part in the alleged Black Panther plot to bomb banks and department stores (White, 1997). In several songs and interviews Outpace has mentioned his birth and childhood as a miracle. l was born not to make it, but I did (Still I Rise, 1999) and on the last verse of Mama Just a Little Girl (Better Days, 2002) he philosophies You see you wouldnt ask why the rose hat grew from the concrete had damaged petals, on th e contrary, we would all celebrate its tenacity.We would all love its will to reach the sun. Well we are the roses, this is the concrete and these are my damaged petals He uses symbolic words to compare himself and his peers to that of beauty natured in an unnatural environment. This verse is a self reflective analysis of his impoverished childhood in socially depraved ghettos of America and by noting We are the roses he feels that any child that grows up in that environment and makes it however damaged they are should be celebrated.According to Goals (2007) in 1985 Outpace was enrolled at the prestigious Baltimore Schools of the Arts, where he learned how to act and he spent Outpace went through moral Juggling as a teenager, selling Drugs whilst writing poetry. His childhood experiences gave him the canon to be able to articulate social and political commentary easily identifiable with his audience. Tyson emphasis (2003) that Outpace believed in keeping it real a slang term defined on (revolutionary. Com) as try to benefit the environment and society that surrounds you a nd eventually serving humanity for the greater good.Outpace has achieved musical immortality with eight albums produced posthumously, an art center (task. Org) producing the next generation of thespians, dancers and poets and a Biopic on his life is currently in Production, written by Oscar nominated screenwriters Stephen J Revile and Chris Wilkinson (All, Nixon). In a recent Manage. Com article Revile had this to say about Outpace He was a really sensitive, very romantic talented young poet who also could sing, dance and act, but the realities [of the hip-hop record business] were that he had to create this persona of the gangster.He saw the contradiction between the musical persona of Thug Life and his essential nature as a gentle, sensitive person. And that was partly responsible for his murder. He was not a gangster, but the people around him were, and they saw he was going to leave, that they were going to lose him, and so I think they decided to kill him(Borders-Manner, 2011) CHANGES Changes portrays America from a critical non violent point of view, the view of a young black male living in the projects (Ghetto) committing crime as a survival necessity, whilst been abused by the system.Changes (Shaker, Evans Hornsby, 998) uses basic slang, repetition, melodic rhythm, the artist does not use profanity, the word Niger is used to make a racial statement not intimidate. Analysis of this song elicits reaction in the listener, a desire to become the Change that Outpace requires of his audience. Tubas ability to elicit this type of reaction can be attributed to the authority yet passionate sensitivity of his voice and the flow of his rap.The chorus uses the same melody as The Way it is with a slight change of chorus whereas the or iginal says, Some things will never change, Changes is changed to say, Things will never be the same. Elaborating that inequality will always be rooted in American society; the chorus is repeated to drum the message. The opening line to Changes l see no changes seems to be a modern reply to the original The way it is Bob Dylan The times they are changing(1964), which is considered the civil rights movement theme song.He then continues to show his frustration with his situation, which has not been changed by the I have a dream speech by DRP King Wake up in the morning and ask myself is life worth living should I blast myself, I am tired of en poor and even worse Im black, my stomach hurts so I am looking for purse to snatch, hes telling his audience that he is poor, black, hungry and faced with two choices either to kill himself or alleviate his economical situation by stealing. Cops give a damn about a negro, pull the trigger kill a Amiga hes a hero He uses the N words to emphasize how racist the police are and the reward for killing a black person. Give the crack to the kids who the hell cares, one less hungry mouth on watch me kill each other He paints an image of a big brother conspiracy of shipping rugs and guns into the Ghetto and then watching the fabric of black America dismantle with kids on crack, drug dealers killing each other, a genocidal way of easing the welfare system. Its time to fight back thats what Hue Said, 2 shots in the dark now Hues dead By mentioning Hue Newton founder of the Black Panthers, he acknowledges that Black militant mantra of fighting back the system with guns is wrong because you will be slain by a gun. Outpace then finds a socialist solution in how to beat the system and unify We can never go nowhere unless we share with each there, We goat start making changes, learn to see me as a brother instead of 2 distant strangers, thats how it is supposed to be.How can the Devil take a brother if hes close to me, Id love to go back to when we played as kids, but things changed, and thats the way it is He wants to go back to the innocents of childhood, not complicated by what Freud regards as the ID, however Outpace is resigned to the fact that even if he goes back to that moment, he cannot change Today because change will never happen. L see no changes all I see is racist faces, misplaced hate makes grace to races, We under, I wonder what it takes to make this one better place, lets erase the wasted Outpace is not talking about or to a specific race but to the people of America that racial hatred should not be tolerated but erased from society. Both Black and White is smoking crack tonight Drugs are not Just a black problem It anti a secret and dont conceal the fact the penitentiarys packed and its filled with blacks His observation is backed by Discard, Mouth and Andrews Of the 789,700 male inmates in 1992, 51 percent, or 401,700 were black and that is still a fact today.Although it seems heaven sent we anti ready, to see a black president, uh This line is prophetic in the sense that even though America now has a black President, but some quarters of society are still not ready to accept a Black President Some things will never change. Try to show another way, but you staying in the dope game. Now tells me whats a mother to do. Been real dont appeal to the brother in you.You goat operate the easy way In these lyrics hes now using Frauds structural model of the psyche, the mother is the Super Ego telling the impulsive child (the ID) hat look at another way to survive but morals do not appeal to the ID for it wants everything now and then when it gets satisfaction it shows off l made a G Today the super ego critics but you made it in a sleazy way, selling crack to the kids Finally the ego goes into defense mechanism Well hey, thats Just the way it is The third verse begins with Outpace talking instead of rapping so that everybody understands the clear message he conveys We goat make a change, Its time for us as a people to start making some changes. Lets change the way we eat, Lets change the way we live and lets change the way we treat each other. You see the old ways wasnt working so its on us to do what we goat do, to survive he is speaking to his generation, that the only way to change is complete transformation from the racial philosophies of old for the survival of the human race. Its war on the streets and war in the middle east, Instead of war on poverty they got war on drugs so the police can bother me, And I anti never did a crime I anti have to do. Outpace observes that whilst America concentrates on foreign wars in the Middle East, domestic street wars rage on. He problem poverty.

Andrew Jackson Essays - Cherokee Nation, Andrew Jackson, Free Essays

Andrew Jackson Essays - Cherokee Nation, Andrew Jackson, Free Essays Andrew Jackson Like any hall of fame, its inductees are the best in whatever they do, from baseball or football to something like being President. If you are a member of any hall of fame (including the one for the Presidents), it means that you have done something special or have a certain quality about yourself that makes you worthy to be in a hall of fame. My nominee for the Presidents hall of Fame is our seventh President of the United States, Andrew Jackson. I'll go over his presidency, focusing on both the highs and the lows of his two terms in office, from 1829-1837. The issues that I'll focus on are states' rights, nullification, the tariff, the spoils system, Indian removal and banking policies; these controversies brought forth strong rivalry over his years of president. He was known for his iron will and fiery personality, and strong use of the powers of his office that made his years of presidency to be known as the "Age of Jackson." Andrew Jackson was born on March 15, 1767, in a settlement on the border of North and South Carolina. He was orphaned at age 14. After studying law and becoming a member of the Bar in North Carolina later he moved to Nashville Tennessee. Their he became a member of a powerful political faction led by William Blount. He was married in 1791 to Rachel Donelson Robards, and later remarried to him due to a legal mistake in her prior divorce in 1794. Jackson served as delegate to Tenn. in the 1796 Constitutional convention and a congressman for a year (from 1796-97). He was elected senator in 1797, but financial problems forced him to resign and return to Tennessee in less than a year. Later he served as a Tennessee superior court judge for six years starting in 1798. In 1804 he retired from the bench and moved to Nashville and devoted time to business ventures and his plantation. At this time his political career looked over. In 1814 Jackson was a Major General in the Tennessee Militia, here he was ordered to march against the Creek Indians (who were pro-British in the war of 1812). His goal was achieved at Horseshoe Bend in March of 1814. Eventually he forced All Indians from the area. His victory's impressed some people in Washington and Jackson was put in command of the defense of New Orleans. This show of American strength made Americans feel proud after a war filled with military defeats. Jackson was given the nickname "Old Hickory", and was treated as a national hero. In 1817 he was ordered against the Seminole Indians. He pushed them back into Spanish Florida and executed two British subjects. Jackson instead that his actions were with approval of the Monroe administration. His actions helped to acquire the Florida territory, and he became a provisional governor of Florida that same year. In 1822 the Tennessee Legislature nominated him for president and the following year he was elected the U.S. senate. He also nearly won the presidential campaign of 1824 however as a result of the "corrupt bargain" with Henry Clay. Over the next four years the current administration built a strong political machine with nationalistic policies and a lack of concern of states rights. In 1828 through a campaign filled with mud slinging on both sides, Andrew Jackson became the seventh President to the United States. Instead of the normal cabinet made up by the president, he relied more on an informal group of newspaper writers and northern politicians who had worked for his election. I believe that this made him more in contact with the people of the United States, more in contact with the public opinion and feelings toward national issues. President Jackson developed the system of "rotation in office." This was used to protect the American people from a development of a long-standing political group by removing long-term office holders. His enemies accused him of corruption of civil service for political reasons. However, I think that it was used to insure loyalty of the people in his administration. States rights played an important part in Jackson's policy's as president. In the case of the Cherokee Indians vs. The State of Georgia,

this way for the gasladies and gentlemen essays

this way for the gasladies and gentlemen essays Over the past 25 years, management has emerged as the most sought after profession not only in the United States, but worldwide. Traditionally, managers orchestrate the activities of others and use financial and other resources to accomplish organizational goals. Nowadays, in the midst of corporate downsizing and global expansion, they also must orchestrate their own careers to get the most out of them. Are you a good ideas person looking for skills to make them happen? Do you lead a group in your school or community? Then Management may be the right major for you. There are thousands of management positions in the United States, ranging from chief executive officer (CEO) to shift supervisor. Persons filling these positions are involved in administration, supervision, and leadership. While the positions vary, the managers occupying them employ the same basic skills in carrying out their functions. Interpersonal skills are essential. At certain levels and in certain situations conc eptual, technical, analytical, and diagnostic skills are also essential. During the early-career stage, the first challenge will be to get into an industry, company, and position that fit the needs, values, strengths, and weaknesses of the management candidate. During this time, a person attempts to gain valuable experience and increase his or her power in the organization. Paying attention to developing business knowledge, reputation, interpersonal skills, and informal networks are more important than getting rapid promotions and big pay raises. Persons with limited work experience must cope with longer hours, fewer vacations, more pressure to perform, and difficult coworkers and bosses. However, being given the opportunities to grow and develop will be much more important during this time than short-term benefits. Such opportunities can sharpen professional and social skills plus develop the manager's ability to deal successfully with organizational p...