Friday, May 22, 2020
RUNNING HEADER: KAWASAKI DISEASE Dinesh 1 Kawasaki Disease Rekan Dinesh Mrs. Cheryl Taylor Southeastern College Abstract Kawasaki disease is a disease that predominately affects children. It is a condition that causes an inflammation of walls of arteries. The disease is very rare, so rare that there are fewer than 20,000 cases per year in the United States. Due to its rarity, the etiology of the disease is unknown, causing the medical diagnosis of the disease very difficult. In order to diagnose a child with Kawasaki disease, all other diseases and conditions must be ruled out. This is hard to do because some of the symptoms that a diagnosed child may present are common amongst other conditions. Although rare, the disease is usually not life threatening and is easily treatable. When diagnosed, the child undergoes an initial treatment that includes an intravenous immunoglobulin along with high doses of aspirin. This usually cures the child of the disease but in the cases where the disease is not cured, further medical interventions are necessary. Kawasaki disease, also known as mucocutaneous lymph node syndrome, is a very frightening disease amongst children. It affects people by causing inflammation in the arteries throughout the body, including the coronary arteries, which supplies the muscles with blood. This disease is the leading cause of acquired heart disease among first world countries (Gordon, Kahn,Show MoreRelatedSymptoms And Treatment Of Kawasaki Disease852 Words Ã |Ã 4 PagesWhat is Kawasaki? Perhaps, your first thought was this is a vehicle. No, I will be discussing about Kawasaki Disease. This is a rare vasculitis, which is inflammation of a blood vessel. This disease may be rare, but is serious. This disease strikes children under the age of five. There is no known cause of Kawasaki, but it is not contagious. Ã¢â¬Å"Over 4,000 children develop it each year. 80% of patients are under the age of five.Ã¢â¬ What are some of the symptoms? One of the first symptoms is that theRead MoreKawasaki Disease : An Autoimmune Disease2138 Words Ã |Ã 9 PagesKawasaki Disease is a rare, life threatening autoimmune heart disease that is rarely taught even in medical school. Kawasaki Disease is an autoimmune disease in which the immune system attacks and destroys healthy blood vessels in the body, specifically targeting the hearts blood vessels and arteries. The immune system instead goes against the body and destroys the body, instead of viruses and dangerous foreign substances. Kawasaki Disease affects only one in 271,440 people in the world, yet it continuesRead MoreDifferential Diagnoses And Physical Examination721 Words Ã |Ã 3 PagesDifferential Diagnoses and Physical Examination Differential diagnoses for the case study presented above include scarlet fever, measles, roseola, and Kawasaki disease (KD) (Glass, 2014). Scarlet fever presents within one to two days of the onset of symptoms from a group A streptococcal infection (Friedman, Scholes Yoon, 2014). The rash associated with scarlet fever is diffuse, fine, erythematous, and blanches with pressure (Friedman et al., 2014). A strawberry-appearing tongue is also associatedRead MoreOutline Of The Workup Of Cervical Lymphadenopathy1258 Words Ã |Ã 6 Pagescomes with cervical lymphadenopathy is to get a detailed history. The history should include questions such as the onset of lump; pain on lump; if the lump is unilateral or bilateral and other lumps present anywhere else in the body; any associated symptoms like fever, cough, sore throat, shortness of breath, hemoptysis, night sweats, weight loss, or poor appetite; and any recent foreign travel, upper respiratory infection or TB exposure. It may be nec essary to obtain a detailed sexual, smoking andRead MoreGrey s Anatomy Created By Shonda Rhimes Essay1484 Words Ã |Ã 6 Pageshospital were surgeons spend the majority of their time. Throughout all thirteen seasons you are watching doctors treat and diagnose patients. Doctors are going through the steps of running tests, coming up with treatments plans and performing all kinds of surgeries from an Appendectomy to a heart transplant. The television series shows when running tests or the doctors common knowledge with medicine doesnÃ¢â¬â¢t seem to work or treatRead MoreEssay about Advances in ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s Disease1345 Words Ã |Ã 6 Pagesall affected by one disease (ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s Disease Foundation, Statistics). That disease is ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s disease. ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s takes away little things like movement that many of us take for granted. Lives are changed because of ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s, but there is hope. Through medical breakthroughs discovered in recent years, my grandpa and many others suffering from ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s disease have a chance at a better life. History of ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s Disease Signs or symptoms of ParkinsonÃ¢â¬â¢s disease have been recordedRead MoreThe Probability of Inheriting a Disease Is Not Random1816 Words Ã |Ã 7 PagesThe probability of inheriting a disease is not random. There are several factors that determine the chances on inheriting a disease such as race, gender, genetics, etc. A person of Caucasian decent is more likely to develop cystic fibrosis, an Asian person has a higher chance of inheriting Kawasaki disease and there is a very high rate of Sickle Cell Anemia among people of African lineage. Sickle Cell disease is inherited and it affects the anatomy of the red blood cells, resulting in a sickle shapeRead MoreMeasles2158 Words Ã |Ã 9 PagesMeasles is an airborne disease that is spread through respiration (contact with fluids from an infected persons nose and mouth, either directly or through aerosol transmission (coughing or sneezing)), and is highly contagiousÃ¢â¬â90% of people without immunity sharing living space with an in fected person will catch it. An asymptomatic incubation period occurs nine to twelve days from initial exposure. The period of infectivity has not been definitively established, some saying it lasts from two toRead MoreClinical Overview Template ( Dental Pain )2308 Words Ã |Ã 10 Pagescategorized based on cause of pain2 o Tooth Ã¯â § Dental caries Ã¯â § Pulpitis Ã¢â¬ ¢ Reversible Ã¢â¬ ¢ Irreversible Ã¯â § Trauma Ã¯â § Cracked tooth syndrome Ã¯â § Alveolar osteitis o Peridontium Ã¯â § Dental hypersensitivity Ã¯â § Pericoronitis Ã¯â § Periodontal disease DIAGNOSIS CLINICAL PRESENTATION History Ã¯â § Symptoms vary based on origin of pain2 Ã¯â § Dental caries Ã¢â¬ ¢ Pain generally localized, intermittent, moderate intensity, and dull. Ã¢â¬ ¢ May be aggravated by hot, cold, and/or sweet foods Ã¯â § Pulpitis Ã¢â¬ ¢ Reversible o Pain generally localizedRead MoreSTUDY GUIDE: EXAM 4 Essay1797 Words Ã |Ã 8 Pagesarterial wall, which leads to the formation of a lesion called a plaque. It is not a single disease but rather a pathologic process that can affect vascular syustemns throughtout the body, resulting in ischemic syndromes that can vary widely in their severity and clinical manisfestations. It is the leading contributor to coronary artery and cerebrocascular disease. Athrosclerosis is an inflammatory disease, the lesions progress from endothelial injury and dysfunction to fatty streak to fibrotic plaque
Saturday, May 9, 2020
Top Psychology Multiple Choice Questions Tips! Type of Psychology Multiple Choice Questions If you would like a copy of the questions only, print only the very first page. Lists are typically not too long, but you might be better off finding another agency. Multiple option, matching, and true-false questions require that you recognize the proper answer. Whenever you have answered all of the multiple choice questions, return and review your answers. A multiple answer question must have a very clear question and a set of potential alternatives. In addition, the APUSH exam often groups similar topic questions with each other, so continuing on to the next question could remind you of the previous answers. The Supreme Approach to Psychology Multiple Choice Questions The smallest dog breed is owned by the chihuhua, who cannot weigh more than six pounds in line with the American Kennel Club. Some test takers for some examination subjects may have accurate first instincts about a specific test item, but it does not imply that all test takers should trust their very first instinct. You might even need to take different kinds of tests too. Again, it is possible to only take the tests online, and that means you won't necessarily get as much from the experience. Exam 70-515 is especially made for developers. Assessments can be categorized in many various ways. Tests ought to be constructed to teach. Practice tests are a few of the very best review tools for AP Psychology. A Startling Fact about Psychology Multiple Choice Questions Uncovered 100 multiple choice questions isn't a simple task, but nonetheless, it still possible for any student. If anything, the association between the questions and the answer choices can offer you with the broader conceptual connections that you are going to be requested to write about in the totally free response questions. The majority of the moment, if you're choosing between two answers, your first instinct is going to be the correct choice. Incorrect answers will be highlighted and you're going to be shown the best answer together with an explanation to provide wisdom and comprehension. The job of recognition is to choose the appropriate answer from among the alternatives. A good way to practice for the AP psychology multiple choice is by way of practice. The candidate is needed to display physically his or her skills in that special profession. Unfortunately, contemporary HR procedures concern themselves with hiring candidates as speedily as possible. What the In-Crowd Won't Tell You About Psychology Multiple Choice Questions If you're answering questions from several people at the same setting, like a husband-wife team during a house presentation, look at both people when answering your question. When an answer choice doesn't fit within the time length of the question, eliminate it. Our quizzes with answers are often updated and area fit for pubs, schools and family. Having only a minute per question appears difficult, but with the appropriate preparation, you will be on your way to a 5 in virtually no time. Possessing this much to learn can be quite overwhelming at the conclusion of the year so that you must use your questions. By way of example, learners that are new to an industry might not be knowledgeable about industry-specific terminology. Figure out how AP classes can result in college credits. If you're on the lookout for more official AP tests, speak to your teacher and see if they can give you any additional resources. In humans, damage can be brought on by head injuries, brain tumors, stokes, and other sorts of trauma. Eighteen kinds of assignments are discussed. Consider how impossible it's to multiply huge numbers in your head, but how simple it is on paper. You won't have the ability to move onto the absolutely free response section until the 70 minutes are up anyway, so when you have spare time you should use it. The passive participant might be the decision-maker. There are a lot of resources you are able to utilize to enhance your scores on multiple choice tests. As an example, always exchange the product, would suggest that the learner should provide an exchange under any conditions. Independent variable is what it is you are manipulating.
Wednesday, May 6, 2020
Ã¢â¬Å"Alexandru Ioan CuzaÃ¢â¬ National College Specialization: Philology Ã¢â¬â 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬â 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 Ã¢â¬â 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 kingÃ¢â¬â¢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 secondÃ¢â¬ârate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VIIÃ¢â¬â¢s treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory; on ArthurÃ¢â¬â¢s death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of WalesÃ¢â¬âa 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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kingÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s policy was consistent throughout his reign; that Henry was himself directing that policy; and that his ministers and officials were allowed Ã¢â¬â 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 Ã¢â¬â 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 peasantsÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 dayÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬â 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 craftsmanÃ¢â¬â¢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 queenÃ¢â¬â¢s death in 1603 it had recovered to a figure of 45Ã¢â¬âwhich 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 craftsmanÃ¢â¬â¢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 1595-8Ã¢â¬âthough 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, 1519Ã¢â¬â21, 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 1555Ã¢â¬â8. On top of its other difficulties, MaryÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬ËnationalÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 BritainÃ¢â¬â¢s preÃ¢â¬âindustrial political economyÃ¢â¬âan 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 pricesÃ¢â¬âit 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, LondonÃ¢â¬â¢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 termsÃ¢â¬âand must thus have been inhabited by a reduced share of population in proportional terms. . Henry VIII Henry VIIÃ¢â¬â¢s death in 1509 was greeted with feasting, dancing, universal rejoicingÃ¢â¬âfor no one who survived until 1547 could have thought, with hindsight, that it was the accession of Henry VIII that inspired the nationÃ¢â¬â¢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 fatherÃ¢â¬â¢s executors, Henry began his Ã¢â¬ËtriumphantÃ¢â¬â¢ reign by marrying his late brotherÃ¢â¬â¢s widow, Catherine of AragonÃ¢â¬âa 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 employerÃ¢â¬â¢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 stigmasÃ¢â¬âno one complained that Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 kingÃ¢â¬â¢s natural cruelty, and inherent assumption that clean breaks with the past could solve deepÃ¢â¬ârooted problems, was already evident. 2. 1 Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s character Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s character was certainly fascinating, threatening, and intensely morbid, as HolbeinÃ¢â¬â¢s great portrait illustrates to perfection. The kingÃ¢â¬â¢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 secondÃ¢â¬ârate mind and a pronounced inferiority complex that derived from Henry VIIÃ¢â¬â¢s treatment of his second son. For the first of the Tudors had found his younger son unsatisfactory; on ArthurÃ¢â¬â¢s death, Henry had been given no functions beyond the title of Prince of WalesÃ¢â¬âa 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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s more constructive councillors were bedevilled, and overthrown, by the kingÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s policy was consistent throughout his reign; that Henry was himself directing that policy; and that his ministers and officials were allowed Ã¢â¬â 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s first minister, and the fourteen years of that proud but efficient ascendancy (15 15-29) saw the king in a comparatively Ã¢â¬ârestrained mood. Henry, unlike his father, found writing Ã¢â¬Ëboth tedious and painfulÃ¢â¬â¢; 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 Ã¢â¬Ëstars from the roof of a royal palace. He wrote songs, and the words of one form an epitome of HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 powerÃ¢â¬âthough Wolsey happily pursued uniform and equitable ideals of justice in Star Chamber in place of Henry VIIÃ¢â¬â¢s selective justice linked to fiscal advantage. But WolseyÃ¢â¬â¢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 tyrantÃ¢â¬âfor 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 selfÃ¢â¬âcriticism. Anti Ã¢â¬â was the most volcanic of the smoldering emotions that pervaded the Eng lish laity; an ancient Ã¢â¬ËdiseaseÃ¢â¬â¢, it had been endemic in British society since ConstantineÃ¢â¬â¢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 laityÃ¢â¬âmonks, 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 ChurchÃ¢â¬â¢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 lawÃ¢â¬âa 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 Ã¢â¬Ëobjective` Church ritual and obligation, as opposed to Ã¢â¬ËsubjectiveÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 EnglandÃ¢â¬âthe 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 WolseyÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬Ëit 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 convenientÃ¢â¬â¢. 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 CoverdaleÃ¢â¬â¢s translation was first achieved in 1536, a year after MoreÃ¢â¬â¢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. PaulÃ¢â¬â¢s and founder of its school. Colet, who was also young Thomas MoreÃ¢â¬â¢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 studyÃ¢â¬âespecially 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 purseÃ¢â¬âwhich 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 silenceÃ¢â¬âa 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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, UtopiaÃ¢â¬â¢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 LutherÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬Å"new learningÃ¢â¬ , as it was called, became the most potent of the- forces released in the 1520s and 1530s. LutherÃ¢â¬â¢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 failureÃ¢â¬âfor 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 LutherÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s first divorce Into this religious maelstrom dropped Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 IIÃ¢â¬â¢s dispensation, necessarily obtained by Henry VIII to enable the young Henry VIII to marry his brotherÃ¢â¬â¢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 PapacyÃ¢â¬â¢s unwillingness to concede the matter, Henry had to prove against the reigning pope, Clement VII that his predecessorÃ¢â¬â¢s dispensation was invalid Ã¢â¬â 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 IIÃ¢â¬â¢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 persuasionÃ¢â¬âsoon 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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s British Ã¢â¬ËsourcesÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 popeÃ¢â¬â¢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 GodÃ¢â¬â¢s vicar in your kingdom, as the psalmist says, Ã¢â¬ËGive the king thy judgments, O God, and thy righteousness to the kingÃ¢â¬â¢s sonÃ¢â¬â¢ (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. HenryÃ¢â¬â ¢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 MoreÃ¢â¬â¢s scrupulous reluctance to involve himself in HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬â¢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 PopeÃ¢â¬â¢s Authority (1536). The Act of Appeals proclaimed Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s new imperial status-all English jurisdiction, both secular and religious, now sprang from the king-and abolished the popeÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬ânot 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 Ã¢â¬ËusurpationÃ¢â¬â¢ of HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬ËdenyingÃ¢â¬â¢ HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬Ëthe dignity, title, or name of their royal estatesÃ¢â¬â¢Ã¢â¬âthat is to deny HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s royal supremacy. The victims of the act, who were in reality martyrs to HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s vindictive egoism, were cruelly executed in the summer of 1535. A year later the Reformation legislation was completed by the Act against the PopeÃ¢â¬â¢s Authority, which removed the last vestiges of papal power in England, including the popeÃ¢â¬â¢s Ã¢â¬ËpastoralÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 functionsÃ¢â¬âthe 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 popeÃ¢â¬âa curious but typically Henrician application of logic to the facts of soÃ¢â¬âcalled British Ã¢â¬ËhistoryÃ¢â¬â¢ as exemplified by King Lucius I. As a lay archbishop, Henry could make ecclesiastical laws and define doctrines almost as he pleasedÃ¢â¬âprovided 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 GodÃ¢â¬â¢s existence, ChristÃ¢â¬â¢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 1540Ã¢â¬âbut 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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 kingÃ¢â¬â¢s dislike of representative assemblies ensured that ParliamentÃ¢â¬â¢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 pentÃ¢â¬âup emotional fury and hatred of the anticlerical laity and common lawyers. The laity, furthermore, were fortified for the attack by the humanistsÃ¢â¬â¢ 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s supremacy did save the bishops from the worst excesses of lay anticlericalism, and the kingÃ¢â¬â¢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 WalesÃ¢â¬âthis 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 CrownÃ¢â¬â¢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 patronageÃ¢â¬âhe must appease the lay nobility and gentry with a share of the spoils. Thus Thomas CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s first task as vicegerent was to conduct an ecclesiastical census under HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s commission, the first major tax record since Domesday Book, to evaluate the condition and wealth of the English Church. CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢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 CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s promises to the Ã¢â¬ËpilgrimsÃ¢â¬â¢. 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 KingÃ¢â¬â¢s Revenue, the new department of state set up by Cromwell to cope with the transfer of resources. HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 CrownÃ¢â¬â¢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 endowmentsÃ¢â¬âPeterborough, 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 CrownÃ¢â¬â¢s regular income was seemingly doubled-but for how long? The bitter irony of the dissolution was that Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s colossal military expenditure in the 1540s, together with the laityÃ¢â¬â¢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 threeÃ¢â¬âquarters 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 Ã¢â¬â 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s constant dissipation of the monarchyÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 moderateÃ¢â¬âsized gentryÃ¢â¬â¢ families, were the ultimate beneficiaries of the CrownÃ¢â¬â¢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 exÃ¢â¬âmonastic lands by 1558. But if Norfolk is a typical county, the changing pattern of wealth distribution at ElizabethÃ¢â¬â¢s accession was that 4. 8 per cent of the countyÃ¢â¬â¢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 gentryÃ¢â¬â¢ families. Without Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s preparatory break with Rome, there could not have been Protestant reform in Edward VIÃ¢â¬â¢s reignÃ¢â¬âÃ¢â¬âthus 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 kingÃ¢â¬â¢s back, to endow his contemporaries with Erasmian, and enlightened idealism: the Elizabethan via media owed much to the eirenic side of CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s complex character. But CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢s reward was the blockÃ¢â¬âira 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 GodÃ¢â¬âin 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 Ã¢â¬Ëthe Flemish mareÃ¢â¬â¢, 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 ClevesÃ¢â¬âentirely inappropriatelyÃ¢â¬âand became HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 HenryÃ¢â¬â¢s paternal indulgence. 2. 6 An extension of English hegemony Henry VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 kingÃ¢â¬â¢s futile early campaigns of 1 511-16, and brilliantly transformed HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬â¢s financial exhaustionÃ¢â¬âthen HenryÃ¢â¬â¢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 IslesÃ¢â¬âWales, 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 CromwellÃ¢â¬â¢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 regionÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s Acts as a crude annexation, which technically they wereÃ¢â¬âfor 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 learningÃ¢â¬âand 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 tongueÃ¢â¬âby 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 VIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬â¢s prior consent. English territorial influence, in reality, did not extend much beyond the PaleÃ¢â¬âthe area around DublinÃ¢â¬âand 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 counterÃ¢â¬âattack 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s lordship into kingship. The kings of England were dominus Hiberniae, not rex. But St. Leger persuaded Henry to assume the CrownÃ¢â¬âthat 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 statusÃ¢â¬âa 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, Ã¢â¬ËconciliationÃ¢â¬â¢ by benevolent kingship was probably worse than external Ã¢â¬ËconsolidationÃ¢â¬â¢ and Ã¢â¬ËcoercionÃ¢â¬â¢, 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 ElizabethÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢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 ScotlandÃ¢â¬âthe king, three bishops, eleven earls, fifteen lords, and some 10,000 menÃ¢â¬âwere 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 VIIIÃ¢â¬â¢s own sister. But Scottish panic after Flodden had, if anything, confirmed the nationÃ¢â¬â¢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 MossÃ¢â¬âand 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 JamesÃ¢â¬â¢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 VIÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬â¢s back door. In 1543 Henry used the prisoners taken at Solway Moss as the nucleus of an English party in Scotland; he engineered BeatonÃ¢â¬â¢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 EnglandÃ¢â¬â¢s flank exposed. At astronomical cost the war continued How to cite The Triumphant Reign of Henry the Viii-V02, Papers
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Psychology of criminals It is a well-known fact that criminals exist. They are there, beside us, every minute, and we know that it so happens that sometimes people steal wallets, and a girl should not walk alone at night because a rapist might attack her, and at times people are murdered for no reason by serial killers. Nobody is safe, the media tells us, bringing us news of further disasters and crime. And we nod knowingly, accepting this fact as if it were natural. We are so used to the very fact of the existence of criminals, that we do not question it whatsoever. Need essay sample on "Psychology of criminals" topic? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you Proceed However, we should. Community survival has reached its peak at the moment. Very few humans can survive on their own, without the aid of others. Doing harm to these others, then, eventually reduces the chances for ones own survival many criminals are intelligent enough to know that everyone makes mistakes eventually, that getting caught comes with the territory - and it is a well-known notion that no person will willingly do evil unto himself. He will either think of it as good of some kind or suffer, soon bringing his crimes to an end because of the pangs of consciousness. Thus, criminals especially ones that do not one crime, but many are an abnormality. So why would a person knowingly go against one of the most basic instincts? What can make humans undermine their own chances for survival? There are many explanations for this abnormal behavior, as there are many traits that are found in criminals and not all of them overlap all the time. The versions are, therefore, different combinations of these traits, putting emphasis on different similarities in criminals. As Shirley Lynn Scott says in her article What makes them tick, And while many girls are victimized as children, very few grow up to be sadistically violent toward strangers.(3) Most experts agree that a complex of factors causes criminal behavior, including upbringing, inborn abnormalities, circumstance, et cetera. However, these factors generally fall into two categories: genotype (inborn) and phenotype (influence of circumstances). Both sets of factors cause criminal behavior; however, it is still unknown which is more determining in making a person into a criminal. We still know very little of what precisely makes people become criminals. As Detective Mark Godo points out in his article, Bad to the Bone: Criminological theories have gone through an evolutionary process that still continues today. For what seemed like a valid explanation during one era, bordered on the verge of madness the next. And there is probably no other aspect of social science that is so permeated with superstition, quackery, sensationalism and outright fraud as crime theory. (2) A prime component of the nature versus nurture debate is defining nature and nurture. By nature I define any factors that are inborn from neurochemistry to certain traits of character. By nurture I define any factors that are acquired, be they psychological, social or physical. I will first examine the biological factor and inborn theories, and then the phenotype theories. They often overlap, circumstances sometimes producing factors that can be inborn, as well, and no single theory has so far given the motivation for all types of crimes for instance, the so-called white collar crimes are very differently motivated than the crimes of mothers who kill their children. My thesis is that acquired factors cause criminal behavior more, and I will attempt to prove it by examining what is known to us about the reasons of criminal behavior, and show that the outside world influences a person more in general than their inborn predisposition especially when it comes to abnormalities such as criminal behavior. A number of important studies have been conducted on the biology of the crime. These also fall into two categories: genetic (twin studies, adoption studies and family studies) and biochemical studies. It must be noted on the latter that biochemical disorders are not only inborn, but can be acquired, as well, thus placing them in both categories. Caitlin M. Jones of the Rochester Institute of Technology details them in her paper Genetic and Environmental Influences on Criminal Behavior. Let us take a look at the genetic studies first. The scientists examining these studies have come to conflicting conclusions. Some, like Tehrani and Mednick, conclude that genetics are the basis for criminal behavior; while others, like Lowenstein, think that there is not enough evidence to conclude that genetics play a role in criminal behavior. (1) However, it is now almost universally accepted that genetics do play a part in criminal behavior, and an important one, at that. This has been studied in a number of ways. Twin studies (comparing sets of monozygotic twins to dizygotic twins when these twins have been reared apart to see whether there is a higher concordance rate between the identical twins than the fraternal) show that there is a 54% heritability for crime. Other studies done at the time, however, show that the concordance rate isnt higher than the norm, and there has been evidence of selective research in the twin studies. Jeffrey C. Tatar, commenting on Jones article, writes about the newest statistics in twin studies: Statistics show a high concordance between identical and non-identical twins for schizophrenia and manic depression. Analysis of the statistics clearly show the genetic basis for these disorders: For schizophrenia the concordance in identical twins was 60%, compared to only 10% in non-identical twins, and the normal frequency being 1% in northern European populations. Similarly, manic depression showed a 70% concordance between identical twins, a 15% concordance between non-identical twins, and again only a 1% frequency in the normal population (Russo (1) The adoptive studies of Tehrani and Mednick show that children adopted from incarcerated mothers had a higher crime rate as adults than the control group of children of normal parents given up for adoption. Another study in Denmark showed an interesting point that children whose biological fathers had engaged in property crimes were more likely to engage in similar behavior than those whose fathers had engaged in violent crimes. According to Jay Jones, the majority of researchers now agree that genes are a non-significant influence in violent crime; however, they may bear some influence in property crime. However, there has been no similar research for corporate crime, nor for many other kinds of offense. Only a small number of family studies have been done so far. The reason is simple: it is very difficult to separate the nature aspect from the nurture aspect, even more difficult than in twin studies. The earliest studies, such as Dudgales study of the Juke family and Goddards studies of the Kallikak family have been proven selective, done mostly to prove the researchers own convictions. (2) However, Caitlin Jones takes note of a family study by Brunner, Nelen, Breakefield, Ropers, and van Oost, which seems to prove the role of a point mutation in one of the structural genes, influencing the criminal behavior of a number of males in the family. Jones also notes that no follow-up studies have been done yet, which leaves this question also open. (1) The common problem with all of these studies is the difficulty of telling which of the criminals came from their genetic predisposition, and which were influenced by the environment to become one. This brings us to a number of cases which can be both inborn and acquired. This is the research on neurochemicals and psychological disorders. There have been a number of studies done on neurochemicals influencing criminal behavior. Without going into the biochemical details, there is a number of substances (serotonin, dopamine, etc.) that, when applied, have a profound effect on the human psyche. These substances may be either applied from the outside (drug abuse is the most well-known instance, and there are numerous crimes done under the influence of drugs, especially alcohol, as in the case of Gacy, for instance)(3) or be synthesized in the body due to a chemical imbalance. The former falls under the nurture factors and will be discussed later, and we know very little about the latter just about only that it happens, and that it can be treated by neutralizing these chemicals. Inborn brain damage falls into this category, however, brain damage can be acquired as well, as shown by the infamous case of Raymond Fernandez.(2) As for the personality disorders, the relationship between them and criminal behavior has been long proven. Of special importance are three disorders: Conduct Disorder (CD), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and Oppositional Defiance Disorder (ODD). What is interesting about these disorders is that they rarely manifest openly in adults; rather, they show in children. These disorders are inborn, theoretically placing criminals on which they have had an influence into the nature group. However, as Tatar points out, it is very difficult to distinguish what causes criminals to grow up from this group: is it the genetical difference, criminal activity being a logical development of the disease except in cases where nurture somehow removes the influence, or is it the fact that children with these disorders are usually treated differently, and their criminal behavior is a response to the environment. (1) Also, a predisposition towards a disorder does not a disorder truly make , like a predisposition towards criminal behavior does not yet make a criminal. There have been studies on the influence of other factors, such as television, on disorders, and they have found that the environment also influences these disorders and their severity. Other disorders, which may or may not be inborn (such as schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, major depressive disorder, et cetera), also play a relevant part. The rate of the mentally ill among criminals is much higher than among good civilians. What must be noted here is that for nearly any inborn disorder, a similar one can be created by the upbringing. This makes for another gray area in the study of the criminal mind, once again making it very difficult to distinguish which are inborn and which come from the environment. We know that the disorders are there, we do not know what they are more caused by. Jones gives a proposed division between primary sociopaths and secondary sociopaths. Primary sociopaths are those who are afflicted mostly by physiological factors. Secondary are those who become sociopaths as a reaction to a hostile environment in which they cannot realize themselves for some reason or other. It seems this distinction can be extended to other kinds of crime, as well. (1) The other category of factors is the nurture category all acquired factors. As we have previously seen, nearly all instances of inborn disorders can be covered by the influence of environmental factors. However, there are also factors that are environmental-only. These are the sociological factors, which, too, have a dire influence on the behavior of criminals. These factors include upbringing and pressure from society around the person in question. This is only a seeming simplicity, because these two sets of factors are incredibly varied and widespread. Upbringing plays a major factor in the making of a criminal. Statistics show that abusive families and those with poor connections between the family and the child or children are more likely to produce criminals than families which are well bound and connected. Neglecting a child or abusing a child physically or mentally harms the personality at its most vulnerable stages, producing unstable individuals likely to pursue crime for some reason or other. And not only the parents take a role in the rearing of a child mass media does, as well. Statistically, a child before the age of 12 will have viewed 8,000 murders on television. (2) It seems impossible to deny that this has no effect on children. Also, the environment which children and adolescents are reared in is of primary importance to their social development adults may choose the environment, whereas children and adolescents cannot. As such, they are even more subject to social pressure than adults are. Social pressure is one of the most serious factors in causing criminal behavior. It takes mainly two forms, ones that I will for convenience call internal and external factors. Internal factors are a persons private psychological reactions to the circumstances. The feeling of inadequacy, for instance, comes under these internal factors, when a person for some reason feels cheated out of the circumstances that others have a classic case of jealousy. This is called anomie, a term coined by Merton. Another example of internal problems is when a person feels pushed to the end of his rope, pressured to do something, anything to get out of the desperate situation he feels himself in. An example of this case would be the case of Andrew Kehoe, who killed 42 children and injured 60 in a school explosion, because he had been pressured by the school board for years. On searching his farm, the police found a sign, which read: criminals are made, not born.(2) The common denominator in such cases is that the society does not actively pressure the person into doing wrong, unlike in external factors. The school board in Kehoes case surely had no idea that the man would crack under the circumstances unlike in other instances. External factors are instances when a group works actively to get a person to do an act, whether consciously or unconsciously. By unconsciously here is meant the so-called mob effect, when a group melds into a crowd a group with one interest, no matter how temporary. Kimball Young in his book Social Psychology: An Analysis of Social Behavior gives an instance of crowd action: When there was potato shortage in Berlin I saw in a market place many hundreds of women waiting in line for potatoes. A farmer appeared driving a small wagon loaded with potatoes. He named a price for his potatoes which was beyond the means of the women. Quickly and spontaneously they raided the wagon, stripped it of potatoes, and dispersed before the police appeared. (5) It is extremely unlikely that these women would have been capable of the theft on their own. The group had one pressing interest: that was all it took at the time to commit a crime. This is unconscious pressure. Conscious pressure is quite a different case. This is the very base of such things as gang dynamics, teenage peer pressure and such, where people go along with unlawful actions because the group wishes them to carry it out, and the victims are too weak-willed to resist. Dr. Francine Hallcom gives a quote from a gang member on her website: Gustavo: "I've done a lot of stupid things just going along, you know? Things where I didn't have no problem with someone, but one of the other vatos did and I helped. I went along with them just because I was there." (4) Another common instance of active pressure is teenage peer pressure. As Alexandra Robbins writes in her book Pledged: the Secret Life of Sororities, there are instances of drug abuse and criminal behavior, simply because other teens wanted them to occur. For instance, when she attempted to go undercover to examine sororities, one of the initial responses shocked her. An adviser said to her: And if for some reason they [National off ice of sororities] do [give you permission to write about sororities], I simply cannot allow you to write about the drugs. (6) As we can see, active pressure takes quite a part in criminal activity. It is very dangerous, because it permeates every level of our society, affecting not only teenagers, but adults, as well. Corporate crime is a good example of this: when people steal because it is not considered stealing per se, more like business and making a profit. The 2002 incident with Enron Corporation shows this sort of active pressure very well (2). None of us live completely out of society, thus, all of us live surrounded by this pressure. Only a small number of people become criminals, yet this is a massive factor, influencing almost everyone, and thus takes its toll on every sort of crime rate imaginable. In conclusion, I would like to remember a story that is over two thousand years old. A physiognomic once had a look at Socrates, and then announced that this was a man with bad predispositions, and an inborn lack of virtue. Socrates friends and pupils were, of course, outraged over this statement Socrates was one of the very paragons of virtue to them. However, when they began to contradict the physiognomic, Socrates himself calmly stopped them, and noted that the physiognomic is absolutely correct. The great philosopher said that he made himself what he was, despite his original bad inclinations. This is what, to me, it all seems to come down to. Predispositions are just that; much more important are the active influences everyday life has on all of us including the influences we make upon ourselves. As I have shown, there is clearly evidence for the reality of the inborn influence; however, this is not the factor which, in the end, makes a criminal. A criminal is made by a combination of factors, a complex interaction between predisposition and environment. However, even the man with the best predispositions can be made into a criminal by circumstance, and even the worst man can be taught to keep himself in his hands. Besides this, there are simply more factors that influence criminal behavior that are purely environmentally caused than there are purely genetically caused, making it statistically more important. Thus, I conclude that nurture is much more important than nature in this case. Works cited Caitlin M. Jones, Genetic and Environmental Influences on Criminal Behavior, (Including peer commentaries by Lisa C. Burt, Jeffrey C. Tatar and Maureen E. Wood) retrieved March 10, 2005, from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/jones.html Mark Gado, Bad to the Bone, retrieved March 10, 2005 Shirley Lynn Scott, What Makes Serial Killers Tick, retrieved March 10, 2005 Dr. Francine Hallcom, An Urban Ethnography of Latino Street: Gangs in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, retrieved March 10, 2005, from http://www.csun.edu/~hcchs006/table.html Kimball Young, (1930) Social Psychology: An Analysis of Social Behavior, retrieved March 10, 2005 Alexandra Robbins, (2004), Pledged: the Secret Life of Sororities, retrieved March 10, 2005
Friday, March 20, 2020
How to effectively communicate with your boss Anyone whoÃ¢â¬â¢s ever been employed and has had to answer to a boss- whether you have one destined for the great boss hall of fame or one whoÃ¢â¬â¢s the devil incarnate- has come to learn that the key to having an effective working relationship is communication. Developing and maintaining an appropriate flow of thoughts, ideas, and work updates with the person you report to on a daily basis does the following:It empowers you to perform the varied tasks and responsibilities associated with your job while minimizing confusion or miscommunication.It helps you stay connected to the flow of essential information across teams and departments.It allows you to build a relationship of mutual respect and trust with your superiors and colleagues- all allowing you to do your best at work every day.Ideally, this communication flow goes two ways- and your boss will be just as eager to maintain a helpful sharing of information with you as you are with them, all of which serves to benefit your teamÃ¢â¬â¢s productivity and effectiveness. However, we donÃ¢â¬â¢t always get to live in the perfect world of our dreams, and most of us donÃ¢â¬â¢t get to control every aspect of our work lives.Although some of us are lucky enough to work with great bosses who are naturally gifted communicators, some of us arenÃ¢â¬â¢t so lucky and must work harder to ensure that key information gets communicated effectively. The flip-side of the coin is also true- some of us are great communicators with minimal effort while others among us have to work harder at it.If youÃ¢â¬â¢re in a position where you need to figure out how to communicate effectively with your boss- whether the issue lies with you, your boss, or somewhere in the middle- there are ways to improve the situation. Like learning any new skill, effective communication requires extensive practice and effort until you get good at it.Use the following strategies to enhance communication with your boss.Cut to the chaseIn todayÃ¢â ¬â¢s insanely hectic work world, most of us are doing multiple jobs and juggling a small universe of responsibilities at any given time. With limited hours in the day to get things done, your work time is extremely valuable- and so is your bossÃ¢â¬â¢s. Therefore, itÃ¢â¬â¢s essential that you make the most of the limited time you have to communicate with your boss. Avoid meandering stories, long speeches, and lengthy preambles when talking to your boss- if you get a rep for being too unnecessarily verbose or too much of a time drain, they may start trying to avoid you at all costs and your relationship might suffer. Whenever possible, just cut to the chase with the precise information you need to share, which hopefully will inspire your boss to do the same. Then, your lives can move on with minimal disruption.Also, be sure to strategically choose your moments for communication. Is your boss about to go into an important meeting or is heading out for the day? Perhaps those arenÃ¢ â¬â¢t the best times to drop an important work bombshell. Choose wisely.Look aheadWhen communicating with your boss, try to anticipate their reaction to the information youÃ¢â¬â¢re about to share. Do you foresee specific questions? If so, then try to have answers prepared for them. Can you envision them asking for additional data or stats to back up something youÃ¢â¬â¢re going to share? Have it at the ready. Not only will you save time and effort every time you speak with your boss, youÃ¢â¬â¢ll also come across as more prepared and effective every time you interact with them- a real win-win for you.Choose your communication approachOf course, the substance of your communication matters a great deal, but what also matters is how you deliver the message. Make sure your body language and tone are appropriate and professional. It might be helpful if you took a second to make sure you look polished and put together when interacting with your boss. Figure out how and when your bos s likes to communicate with others, and do your best to adapt to their preferred style and approach- it will benefit your relationship in the long run.DonÃ¢â¬â¢t waitIf you have important information to share with your boss- even if itÃ¢â¬â¢s not great news- donÃ¢â¬â¢t wait. If you put off providing them with actionable information until itÃ¢â¬â¢s too late to act, then your news will never be well received, whether itÃ¢â¬â¢s good or bad. In almost every conceivable scenario, itÃ¢â¬â¢s to your advantage to communicate as quickly as possible, allowing everyone involved to understand and digest the information, formulate an appropriate reaction, and respond accordingly. If it is bad news, your early warning just might allow for sufficient planning to minimize the damage.Above all, remain professional, polite, direct, and clear- all traits that will move your communication in the right direction during your time at your current place of work.
Wednesday, March 4, 2020
How to Fix Passive Voice The Dead-Simple Guide How to Fix Passive Voice Acquisition editors have eagle-eyes for both talent and for amateurs. TheyÃ¢â¬â¢re looking for stuff to buy and publish, and most are so overwhelmed with submissions, theyÃ¢â¬â¢ve learned to quickly spot anything that allows them to set your piece aside. Sound cruel? They donÃ¢â¬â¢t want reject your writing. But because of their work loads (and their goal- finding something they know will sell), once they see the mark of a novice, theyÃ¢â¬â¢re on to the next manuscript. Even experienced writers see their work land in the reject pile if they allow passive voice to creep in. Give your manuscript a fighting chance and learn how to fixÃ passive voiceÃ before you submit. Need help fine-tuning your writing?Ã Click here to download my free self-editing checklist. What IsÃ Passive Voice? I could tell you about subjects and objects and verbsÃ and which is acting vs. being acted upon, Ã avoiding adverbs, and all that. But unless you excelled at diagramming sentences in school, thatÃ¢â¬â¢s going to sound like gibberish. The easiest way to spot passive voice is to look for state-of-being verbs and often the word by. And the best way I know to teach this is by example. Passive Voice Misuse Passive: The party was planned by Jill. Active: Jill planned the party. Passive: The wedding cake was created by Ben. Active: Ben created the wedding cake. Passive: The Little League team was given trophies by the coaches. Active: The coaches gave the Little League team trophies. Passive: A good time was had by all. Active: Everybody had a good time. Avoid passive voice to increase your chances of getting more than five minutes of an editorÃ¢â¬â¢s time. Active Voice Strengthens Your Prose Avoiding passive voice will set you apart from much of your competition, but even better, it will give your writing a distinct ring of clarity. Scour your work-in-progress for passive voice, root it out, replace it with active, and see how much more powerfully it reads. ThatÃ¢â¬â¢s the kind of writing that gets more of an editorÃ¢â¬â¢s time. Need help fine-tuning your writing?Ã Click here to download my free self-editing checklist. Has this helped clarify how to fix passive voice? Do you still have questions for me or tips for others on how youÃ¢â¬â¢d dealt with this? Tell me in the comments.