The Roman Empire

The Roman Empire
However, numerous aspects allowed the Byzantine Empire to stay in power for a 1000 years after the end of the Roman Empire; primarily the
emperors were focused on the political, culture and economic affairs from top to bottom. This triangle strategy of the empire backed by a greater
strategic communication and well–designed political warfare against their rivals enabled the empire to stay stable and secure. There are also few
other internal and external factors and advantages. Including some great permanent resource such as Anatolia for workforce and Egypt for cash. The
regional stability was also a significant factor and the Persia, and the Islamic caliphates have not significantly challenged the emperors. There was also
some natural and geographic advantages, such as shorter borders and few disputes over the land and boundaries. The active Macedonians military and
the Thema system militias were an essential factor in the security. But, the role of leadership should not be ignored in the empire, and most of the
Byzantine emperors were either smart or had the brightest around them. Martine Luther's challenge of the Catholic Church's through written theses was
mostly a political warfare through existing means and tools. Of course, he is one of the most influential figures in the history of West, his works even
influenced eastern scholars and religious leaders. At the, while the social media was not a top of discussions and any such technology has not existed,
but he
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Bishop Jacques Boussuet: The Divine Right Of King
There are a lot of theories of government but in the sixteenth century they used a specific theory that involves religion. In the medieval time period
the divine right theory was employed. The theory that God chose kings and gave kings the right to rule. Back then people did not have much
knowledge but were really religious, they believed in God and rely on him for the answer of everything. When it came to the king saying he was
chosen by God, citizens did not argue because it seemed reasonable. The king did not need approval of anyone and even if the king wasn't a good
king it did not matter because they believed that he had the authority to rule by God. The king was viewed as "shadow of God on earth". The practice
of the Divine Right of Kings has been applied by many monarchs.
Bishop Jacques Boussuet (1627–1704) believed "that government was divinely ordained so that humans could live in an organized society"
(Spielvogel). He believed that in the divine right theory would help society function together. Expressed his ideas in his book politics taken from the
very words of scripture. Believed that God chose a king and his authority is absolute. Therefore no one can ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At thirteenth months old he was crowned King of Scotland. His mother was removed from her position by George Buchanan. George Buchanan then
started to tutor James with his own principles that kings derive their authority from their subjects. James did not agree with those principles, but was
interested in the divine right of kings. Finished his education at the age of twelve and spoke many languages. Became king in 1603 of England and
believed. He believed that he was chosen by God to be king and if anyone question him then he was questioning God too. Had trouble gaining
acceptance in the English society. Stressed heredity rights. His son Charles I also had beliefs in the Divine right of

Absolutism And King Louis XIV
Absolutism was an idea in which a ruler had an unlimited power and authority in the state in which he ruled . One of the most well known rulers
who practiced absolutism was King Louis XIV who declared: "I am the state" . King Louis XIV believed that he deserved absolute power, so his
decisions were not to be challenged by anyone. Divine right was the entitlement that a king was given in his position by a higher power. Absolutism
was based on the foundation that God granted monarchs earthly power to rule, and that only God gave them there power so that they could spread his
will here on earth . This meant that rulers could validate any of their rules by calling themselves the promoters for God's will and punishing all those
who defied their

The Divine Rights Of Kings In The Epic Of Gilgamesh
In ancient times, when humans are in the infant stage of development of human history, humans' understandings of nature are just only based in their
imagination. While facing the powerful forces of nature, people are aware of their own strength is pretty small, and their fate is controlled by an
invisible power–– they called this unknown force "god". With the passage of time, people seem to foresee the possibility of overcoming nature, and
they begin to look forward to their own peers, a powerful figure, to complete the great cause of beating nature. The emergence of priests shows the
beginning of religion. When it comes to priest, the first thing come up with the most people's mind is "The divine right of Kings" in British, which
refers to the god empowers Kings with the rights to manage citizens. Date back to the era of Babylon, the time of the first written form of
literature, The Epic of Gilgamesh, "The divine right of Kings" had already loomed. In The Epic of Gilgamesh, Gilgamesh, the great king of Urk in
the history, had decreed density of king. He had "given the supreme power over people, victory form with no fugitive returns, in forays and assaults
from which there is no going back."( ,24) But at the same time, the right of king was also retracted by gods. After Gilgamesh's royal friend Enkidu
died, he placed his hope on the everlasting life. In his journey of pursuing everlasting life, even he found the mysterious plant that enable human to
restore lost youth

Bishop Bossuet's True Law Of Free Monarchies
In many civilizations throughout history the responsibility of governing has fallen on a variety of governing bodies from kings to presidents to
parliaments. What many of these governments lacked was a focus on God and his plan for governing. During the period known as the 'Age of
Absolutism' (1650–1776), a great struggle waged throughout Europe between the pursuit to see monarchs rise to power, as in France, and those who
sought to make a shift toward representative government, as in England. Those who believed in a king's absolute power and divine right to rule were
crucial to France's development of absolutism, while innovators like John Locke steered England away from this tendency and toward representative
government.
Spurred on by radical ideas, absolutism took hold in France. Bishop Bossuet was one such idealist. In Politics Drawn from the Very Words of Holy
Scripture, Bossuet argues that a king is divinely chosen and therefore should have superiority over the church, including the Pope. He explains how the
king and his authority are "sacred" and divine. He goes on to express ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He believed very strongly in a king's divine right to rule. In True Law of Free Monarchies, he uses scripture to back his ideas. He also refers to the
king as being "a naturall Father" with "fatherly duties of caring for his subjects. Though he was never able to really secure an absolutist rule, some
shared his ideas. Philosopher Robert Filmer wrote "I cannot find anyone place or text in the Bible where any power or commission is given to a people
either to govern themselves, or to choose themselves governors, or to alter the manner of government at their pleasure." James' own son, Charles I, also
tried to implement absolutism by suspending Parliament and attempting to quell those who opposed it. Attempts to implement an absolutist state in
England ultimately failed and limited monarchy and, in addition, representative government

Charles I The Divine Right Of King
This essay will focus on the actions of King Charles I and how his decisions impacted on each of his three kingdoms, England, Scotland and Ireland
during the years 1638 – 1642. It will look at the relationships and retrospectively the breakdown of relations within each of these kingdoms. Charles
inherited three very different Kingdoms from his father King James I in 1625. Ireland was predominantly Catholic apart from the few Protestants that
James had planted on Irish soil. England was Anglican, although many known as puritans felt that the Anglican Church was not protestant enough,
possibly due to Charles marriage alliance with the French Princess Henrietta Maria, who was openly Catholic and was allowed to publicly practice her
religion. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Firstly, his belief in "the Divine Right of Kings" was seen by many of his subjects as an attempt by the king to gain absolute power. The second was
his wish to push his ideal religious views in England; his idea to reintroduce bishops to govern the Church of Scotland angered the Scots. The fact that
he was married to a Catholic meant that many in his kingdoms felt he was seeking to revert to Catholicism; making him extremely unpopular with
many of his subjects. The conflict was whether the monarch was trying to dictate the religion of individuals. While the monarch wanted to exercise
authority by controlling the religion of the land, most people wished to make personal choices on matters of faith. They felt that Charles was denying
them the right of worship.Charles managed to provoke Parliament, by dissolving them and refusing to listen to sense. On the other hand, Parliament
sought independence from the monarch by establishing laws that empowered it. Parliaments concern was about the King taking control of raise taxes
without seeking Parliament's approval. This troubled members of the House of Lords; they believed the monarch was overstepping its mandate. The
Wars of the Three Kingdoms was based on the sovereignty of individual kingdoms. For instance, Ireland and Scotland were pleased with the
domination of England in most political matters, but they were not satisfied by the fact that their religious beliefs were ignored.
Bibliography
Beaumond, H. (1884). Protestant deposition in Ireland,1641 p.227. In M. Hickson, Ireland in the seventeenth Century or the Irish massacres of
1641–2, their causes and results (p. 191). London: Longmans, Green and Co.
Henderson, A. (1638). The National Covenant. In N. Wilson, Scottish Historical Documents (pp. 199–200). Glasgow: G. Donaldson ([1970]

Essay on Shakespeare, Kingship, and the Chain of Being in...
Shakespeare, Kingship, and the Chain of Being in Macbeth
Shakespeare's play "Macbeth" is largely based upon the theme of kingship. "Macbeth" was written for James the 1st, who would have been
interested in kingship and believed in the "chain of being" and the "divine right" of kings. The "chain of being" is the belief that everything is
connected like a chain, and is affected by anything above it. God was believed to be at the top of the chain, and the King was believed to be the
highest on earth. The "divine right" was the belief that rightful kings were put there by God, and should not be removed. Shakespeare represents these
with the prosperity when Duncan is king and the unnaturalness and evil, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Also, in the morning, Lennox says, "the night has been unrulyГўв‚¬В¦Lamentings heard I'th'air, strange screams of deathГўв‚¬В¦ Some say, the earth
Was feverous and did shake". Nature itself has been disturbed, as the King is the highest thing on earth in the chain of being, so when his place is
broken then everything below him is disturbed. Shakespeare reinforces the fact that kingship is given to the king by God, when Macduff says, "Most
sacrilegious murder hath broke ope The Lords anointed temple". Even when Macbeth is trying to excuse his murder of the kings guards, he described
Duncan's body as "silver skin lac'd with his golden blood." Even Duncan's murderer gives his right to the throne credit.
At the beginning of the play Macbeth is looked on in good light, due to the successful defeat of the Norwegian invaders, God is on his side. After he
murders Duncan, Macbeth took the throne. He has taken the throne by evil means, and not by divine right so he should not be there and the chain of
being is broken. Shakespeare uses Macbeth's growing madness, nature's disturbance and Macbeth's growing madness to show that he is not the
rightful king. After he has murdered Duncan, Macbeth loses the ability to sleep; this is a sign of evil. He says, "I heard a voice cry, "sleep no more:
Macbeth does murder sleep"". Shakespeare is emphasising the point that only

Theory Of Kingship In Macbeth
– Hasna Taha – 155667:– Kingship is basically holding the position and dignity of a sacred king and having a legitimate power. Ever since decades,
holding such position has fascinated millions of people. Being king also had religious aspects, for he who held the position of a legitimate king was
known to be sacred and had divine rights. However, the theory of kingship was one of the aspects adopted by William Shakespeare in two of his
well–known plays Macbeth and Richard II. They are both historical tragedies, focusing on the sacred position of the king and murdering the legitimate
king; Shakespeare's play Richard II was written during the maturity of Shakespeare. It revolves around a young king who fails to meet his duties and
repeats ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It influence the illustrations of many mixtures of concepts such as love and war, politics and religion way of rule and many aspects that reflects
the era and the type of rule that happen in the old era of England and Scotland " Very many wise and subtle theories as to Shakespeare's purpose in
this plays have been set forth by critics who engage in the task for him (Richard White, 1887). In England and Scotland, the concept of a king's
way to rule the people is by the divine right which is mean in an easy language "the kings are ruling by the god word " The nature of kingship in
William Shakespeare's 1606 play Macbeth and 1595 Richard II reflects the theories through of the unnatural events that occur following Macbeth's
and Richard's illegitimate rise to the throne. These events are shown in most of Shakespearean Tragedies works such as: Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet,
Macbeth, and the Histories works such as : Richard II, King John, Henry V, and Henry VIII, and many and many of Shakespeare works it shown the
theory of king ship clearly in the same way of thoughts which reflect the way of ruling in the early age in England and Scotland with all the striving
for the kingship between the royal families, and how that way of ruling created the new England we know, Shakespeare in his works also mixed the
love and war, the tragedies with the romance event's and how

Absolutism During The Period Of The Enlightenment
As Plato once wrote, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." This concept can apply to many ideas, other than beauty. How similar governments are run
is a good example of how something could be fundamentally the same, but in reality very different. Absolutism during the period of the Enlightenment
can show many differences, even though the concept is the same. Absolutism is the form of government where power is concentrated in the hands of an
individual. In an absolute monarchy, the monarch exhibits and exercises unrestrained, supreme power over the people. A strong centralized government
is the key to the success of an absolute monarchy. Monarchs could create a strong government in their hands through various means, but all monarchs
exercised the four characteristics of an absolute monarch no matter what they did to keep their country under control, but still powerful. The methods
of exercising the four characteristics of absolutism had many similarities and differences. The contemporary monarchs, King Louis XIV of France and
Tsar Peter the Great of Russia, display the similarities and differences that are demonstrated between absolute monarchs. The similarities and
differences in the four characteristics of an absolute monarchy, divine right, skilled administration, control of the economy, and a professional army, are
good examples of how something can differ in practise, but still be fundamentally similar. Divine right is characterized by the belief that the authority of

Divine Justice In King Lear And Antigone
In and around 441 BC, the idea of divine justice was challenged in the work of Antigone, when she battles Creon to establish a predominant theme of
God versus man. During the Elizabethan era/Pre–Christian world, divine justice was a major concept in King Lear because religion played a
substantial role in everyday life. Divine justice is belief that a higher power has all the answers to life's questions, and that good triumphs over evil. In
the works of King Lear and Antigone divine justice is a standard of living. Good does not triumph over evil throughout any of these works especially
without the honorable characters suffering equivalent demises as the wicked characters. This then supports the concept that there is no such thing as
divine... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The conditions resulting from "bias of nature" (Hermesmann 1–2) indicates that nature is uncaring for humanity, and the possibility of there not being a
just force to govern the world. Without established social order, there cannot be any justice. Correspondingly, Lear, like anyone else, falls victim to
making several poor decisions. Most noticeably, the misjudgment of Cordelia's true meaning behind her words. He does not recognize Cordelia's
humble love amid the flattery, which he so desperately craves. In the first act of the play, the darker aspect of how Lear views the universe is revealed.
He believes laws and traditions can be broken and defied without any fear of consequences. Lear's fall from grace of an all–mighty king to an old
broken man reveals this breakdown of order. When Lear encounters Edgar, disguised as Poor Tom, during the storm, Lear rips off his clothes
symbolizing that "Unaccommodated man is no more than such a poor, bare, unforked animal" (Shakespeare III.iv.113–115). The act of removing his
clothes is symbolic because of the breakdown of "Western Hierarchy" and "Societal order in general" (Spotswood 2). The betrayal of Lear by his
two oldest daughters, Goneril and Regan, prompts his rebirth. Lear's horrendous condition is caused by the oblique amount of justice in the Gods.
Lear cries out in despair "Who is it that can tell me who I am" (Shakespeare I.iv. 226–237), after Goneril reprimanded Lear; to which "Lear's

Macbeth, By William Shakespeare Essay
Throughout the play Macbeth, written by William Shakespeare, there is a constant theme of questioning what quantifies a good leader and what
qualifies someone to lead. These questions, however, are more easily posed than answered because they change immensely depending upon the
individual responding. Some follow the school of thought that a king should be selected based on divine inheritance while others focus more
holistically on a king who possesses good qualities that would make them a worthy ruler. In Macbeth there are not many examples of decent
leadership that the reader can clearly grasp due to the political instability of the setting of the play: Scotland. King Duncan, while presented in a more
favorable light than Macbeth, was no angelic being or exemplary ruler. On the other side of the sword, however, King Macbeth was presented as a
bloody tyrant hell–bent on putting his wishes above the desires and needs of the people of Scotland. When presented with the few rulers that are
shown throughout the play, King Duncan was a better ruler with his mild temperament and placement of his country above self. While choosing what
quantifies a respectable king is arduous, it is simple to see that Macbeth was not a good ruler. In fact, he was quite the opposite. Thus, based on
contradicting Macbeth's faults, a good ruler is the physical embodiment of God, maintains command over the nobles, and favors the interest of the
country over their own. The notion of leaders of

Protestant Reformation Research Paper
To start off this essay i will talk about the protestant reformation. The protestant reformation was one of many violent times because of the very few
wars.The Protestant Reformation was a breakdown of authority and power of the Catholic Church. This breakdown happened because of the Black
Plague, Renaissance, etc. (humanism and secularism). One of the biggest impacts this breakdown had on the community was that wars erupted in
Europe between the Catholics and Protestants.
An absolute monarch is a king or queen who believes that all of the power rests in their hands. There is no limit to their power. You are most likely to
just be born into this family of Monarchs. King Philip II came up with this theory. The Monarchs wanted to build bigger armies but couldn't because
they didn't have the money so the taxes were raised.
A divine right is the idea that God created the monarchy. The monarch is God's representative on Earth. This means this is God's way of touching
people while being in an unknown location. The absolute monarch answers only to God, not to their subjects.
Absolute power + Theory ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many started to realize how unfair it was to work while the King was sitting there gathering the money. Many disagreed with the church and turned
against it. This started to happen because of Martin Luther. He wrote the 95 theses and put it up on the church door. The King found him and put him in
the dungeon. Luther finally escaped from the underground chamber. He lived continuously among the community but wearing a disguise. The king put
up rewards for people to find him but realized that he was right. The Catholic Church wasn't fair. The disagreed with the king and then all went on
strike. They protested and the king no longer could control him. This helped the community get a few things they wanted so that the Catholic Church
could be

Essay Absolute Monarchism
The prevailing government of Europe from 1900–century back was absolute monarchism, this form of government worked very well considering the
belief of all people in god and the teaching. Monarchist use this belief to justify this rule in. if they could make the people believe that they were
ordained position by god then they had no worries because the people belief in god was so prevailing that it was not mentionable in private to go
against it. Napoleon and Louis XIV were the ideal rules to use this type of ruling. Napoleon and Louis XIV were the same type of rulers by using the
divine right monarchy to control the people of their country, which was France. Napoleon and Louis way of ruling and other similarity were so alike that
they ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"I gave orders to the four Secretaries of state no longer to sign anything whatsoever without speaking to me: likewise to the controller, and that he
should authorize nothing as regards finance without its being registered in a book which must remain with me(R 17). Louis wrote this to his heirs
as advice on how to rule. He kept everyone under a close eye, he could not trust. . He even went as far as to invaded the postal system "The king was
informed of what was passing for many years before anybody knew it was that of opening letters"(R 24). If the letter say anything against the king or
France the writer of the letter were exiled without even trial.
: "In fact Napoleon crowned himself emperor since he did no recognize the pope's authority as superior to his own"(R 138). Napoleon would not
even let the pope honor him as the king of France. It was like he was saying that I am more divine than you, I am more superior to god than you
because I am the divine ruler. Appropriately, Napoleon found divine sanction for his power. The imperial Catechism made the people believe that
Napoleon was the divine ruler. Peists use to ask the commoners "What are the duties of Christians towards those who govern them and what in
Particular are our duties towards Napoleon I, our emperor"(R 142). . The Christians would answer, " Christians owe to the princes who govern them,
and we in particular owe to Napoleon I, our emperor,

The Divine Rights Of King James I Essay
James I was king of England from March 24th 1603 till March 17th 1625 and wrote the "The Divine Right of Kings" in 1609 he presented it to the
English parliament. His goal was to resolve three crucial issues: 1–parliamentary financial support for his estate, grievances of his subjects, and
uncertainties surrounding his intention to rule according to the country's ancient customs (common law). James I first sought to establish the king's
absolute right to rule, restating his belief in the Divine Right of Kings. King James VI of Scotland became King James I of England in 1603. He was the
first monarch of the House of Stewart (or Stuart) and succeeded Queen Elizabeth I, the last monarch of the House of Tudor. James was the son of
Mary, Queen of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
His views in his time lead to an entrenchment on the views of the document in his society. The common people strongly believed in his God
chosen ability to rule, however soon people started to see flaws in the ideology. Whenever the king made mistakes, mishaps or the nation was
heading down a dark road questions started to appear. Even though James put countless hours and days into abolishing the questioning it persisted.
Having a monarchy added a sense of stability and security in the nation because the people always knew there would be another leader and that he
/she was God chosen. This idea was heavily criticized because it challenged the Magna Carta. James I basically went fully against that piece of
legislature and stated that kings are above the law and that the rule of law should not and does not apply to them. The long term effects of this are
also very impactful. This ideology was created by James I but it was carried on by "The Sun King" Louis XIV, and it was fully abolished in 1688–89
aka the "Glorious Revolution". James I began his speeches in 1609 so therefore this theory lasted roughly 90 years (1689–1609=80). This theory was
very important to all of Europe because well even if you were a king and didn't believe in the theory you would still want to promote it because it
would place you above the

Gilgamesh Kingship
Gilgamesh was the fifth king of the Uruk society, a city in the Sumerian society during early Mesopotamia days. The kings in ancient Mesopotamia
were worldly representatives of the gods and Sumerians believed they had higher percentage of godliness. A Sumerian proverb asserted that a man
was like a shadow of the gods while the kings were a complete reflection of the gods (Abusch & West, 2014). Duties and characteristics of Kingship
The characteristics of kingship included being the divine agent. The kings like Gilgamesh was refereed divine because people believed the gods
selected him and his duty was to do the will of the gods and therefore a divine agent. As divine leader, the king had the divine responsibility of
sleeping with the brides

Thomas Hobbes Despotism
After attending the press conference on January 18, 1783 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Nine political philosophers advocated their views on the best
form of government. They have reached a consensus. The most focal being Thomas Hobbes' views on the relationship of the governed and the
authority, King Louis's stance on an absolute ruler, and William Laud's premise of religious applications ingovernment. Therefore, the best form of
government is one of an absolute sovereign.
Thomas Hobbes promoted despotism in which the common man is, by all means, submissive to the unquestionable decision maker. For instance, he
claims that men are selfish in their natural state. Hobbes emphasizes that "The condition of man... is a condition of war of everyone against everyone."
This freedom spurs chaos and insecurity. This leads us to his "Social Contract" theory. Hobbes argues that people should surrender their rights that limit
another's to the governing body in exchange for security. In other words, since men are inherently driven to act by their wants, a tacit agreement
between men and the monarch is made to shield them from their wickedness. Lastly, Hobbes states that a division of power will cause internal conflict
within government. To put it in another way, there will always be debate in compromise. Therefore, the nation will... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He thoroughly believed in the divine right of kings. Likewise, if you didn't, you were a bad christian. Laud also supported the principles of the Book
of Common Prayer which supported obedience to god. Nonetheless, Laud voiced for religious uniformity. He feared that the church would lose its
influence. To infer, Laud suggested to solely rely on the teachings of the anglican church, thereby increasing the influence of the church and the king.
Since the king was a prophet from god, he therefore should be the ruler. Essentially, if the common people revolt, they were straying away from

Ap Euro Dbq Absolute Monarchies
The 16th and 17th centuries were a powerful time for European monarchies. Absolutism had taken hold, allowing Kings to have powerful rules over
their states. This was due to the absolute monarchies that had taken hold and the belief in a divine right that kept them there. This allowed the countries
under the rule of powerful monarchs to thrive and prosper. Absolute monarchies and the belief in a divine right to rule made absolutism a period of
prosperity in 16th and 17th century Europe. Absolute monarchies helped to make Europe prosperous during this period. This type of government gave
the king complete power over his state, leaving the people of the state with little to no influence in the government. This helped to control and keep
peace within the country. In The Prince, by Machiavelli, it is stated that,"... fear is accompanied by the dread of punishment, which never
relaxes"(Document A). A leader that provoked fear of punishment in his people was, in turn, a strong and powerful leader. The fear of breaking the
laws and rules of the state kept the people in line, and, therefore, kept the country in a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It was widely believed that kings had the power to enforce God's works and messages in the country that he ruled. As expressed by King James the
First of England,"...kings are...God's lieutenants on earth..."(Document B). Kings are meant to act as God's second in command on earth and enforce
God's mission on the people that he rules. According to Bishop Jaques Bousset's Political Treatise,"... the king is sacred, and that to attack him in any
way is sacrilege"(Document F). Kings were believed to be sent by God to rule and, therefore, should not be questioned. This belief allowed absolute
monarchies to take hold in countries throughout Europe. The rule of these powerful governments allowed prosperity to take hold in

The Restoration of Moral Order in Hamlet
The Restoration of Moral Order in Hamlet
The fabric of every society relies on a set of laws, morals and ethics. When these aspects of a "good society" are corrupted, disorder ensues. A play
which examines the result of a corrupted state is William Shakespeare's play Hamlet. The audience immediately witnesses the corrupted nature of
the play when early on in the story a character observes, " Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."(1.4. 99) In the Elizabethan era it was
believed the king was directly appointed by God. This is known as the divine right of kings. When the divine order of kings is broken by unlawful
means, the natural order is ruined, and this leads to a state if corruption. The moral order is upset when the king, Old ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Upon taking over Denmark, Fortinbras ensures that Hamlet's honorability is recognized, by giving him a royal burial. Once noticing that Hamlet dead,
Fortinbras instructs,
"Let four captains
Bear Hamlet like a soldiers to the stage,
For he was likely, had he been put on,
To have proved most royally. And for his passage,
The soldiers' music and the rites of war
Speak loudly for him." (5. 2. 419–424)
A proper burial is significant because Hamlet is recognized as a hero, rather then an insane killer. The audience feels pathos for Hamlet because of
all the struggles he has been through, and also because it seems as if everyone was plotting against him. The audience feels relieved that Hamlet,
who is one of the only good characters, is remembered as a hero, rather then forgotten by Fortinbras. Therefore Justice for the audience is served
because Hamlet is given a royal burial at the conclusion of the play, and is remembered as a hero. This leads to moral order further being resorted in

the play.
In order for justice to be fully served, not only must the audience get what they want, but also justice must be served in the play, amongst the character.
Therefore all the evil, and corrupted characters must be brought to justice for the wrongful deeds that they carried out throughout the play. In the final
duel scene, justice is finally complete when Claudius is poisoned by Hamlet. Claudius is the most corrupt, and evil character

What Is Hobbes True Conceptualization Of Punishment?
Introduction
At first glance, Hobbes' theory of rule within his artificial commonwealth appears deceptively simple: an omnipotent, totalitarian sovereign who
compels absolute obedience through the use of terror, fear, and the constant threat of violence. Nothing illustrates this apparent simplicity more aptly
than the common–held notion of the sovereign as the dispenser of cruel and malevolent punishment. However, upon closer examination of Hobbes'
views on the purpose and character of punishment, this one–dimensional understanding of sovereign rule becomes rather problematic.
By demonstrating the rights–based (semi–liberal) nature of Hobbes's punishment theory, this paper will present a reconceptualization of the sovereign
and his relationship ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It is not some indulgent means by which the sovereign can vent passions of anger or vengeance. Rather, punishment is a necessary function of the
Sovereign, but it is clearly not ideal.
вћўAccording to Holmes (as cited in Van Mill 2002), "Hobbes stressed the self–defeating character of attempts to change people's minds by brutal
means." o "transgression of the Law"
вћўIt is interesting to note that Hobbes emphasizes "transgression of the law" rather than sovereign prerogative. This runs counter to most individual's
understandings of the Sovereign as a despot, ruling according to his present whim rather than an established system of laws. Hobbes appears to place
more weight on adherence to clearly promulgated laws than on the "omnipotent will" of the sovereign. (Potential Argument for Legal positivism)
вћўCattaneo asserts that, "If 'absolutism' means a system of government founded essentially on arbitrary rule, then Hobbes's conception, primarily
concerned with assuring security and upholding the authority of the law duly promulgated by the sovereign in clear, unequivocal terms, does not favor
absolutism" (Hobbes Studies pg. 276). o "to the end that the will of men may thereby be better disposed to

Impact Of The Age Of Absolutism
In the history of Europe, 17th and the beginning of 18th century is called the age of absolutism. Absolutism was the age which monarchs were in the
peak of their power. Monarchy, coming from the Latin mono, meaning one, and absolute, meaning only, meant absolute and full power. Kings
believed they had the "divine right" and their position was given by God. There were many different ideas and responses to Absolutism. We must
keep in mind that the age of Enlightenment came right after, which really shows us how people really felt towards the matter. Looking from today's
view, one cannot agree with the idea of being ruled with an absolute monarchy, for they have always caused a rebellion and is a violation of personal
rights. To understand why this matter had different responses, we should look at the different thinkers of the time.
Different great thinkers had different opinions, and this can be explained with their personal outlook and experiences. I will try to analyze John Locke's
Second Treatise of Government, which was published around 1689, (around a year after the Glorious Revolution) for it was so influential that the
American Declaration of Independence had ideas from it. Locke lived from 1634 to 1702 and wrote many essays on ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
First of all it is interesting that he English historian Peter Laslett in the 20th century claimed that Locke actually wrote the both treatise in 1679, and
even revised it until 1683. This allegation does not change in the fact it is justifying the revolution, it also makes it a call for a revolution. We know
that his first treatise was actually written in response to Robert Filmer's Patriarcha, which supported the divine right of kings. Locke dismissed this by
saying Filmer believes that every man is born naturally slaves to chosen kings. Yet the second and more famous one was kind of a political proposal
to worlds more modern countries like England, a solution for the

Divine Right Rule
If I was a ruler in the eighteenth century, I would claim my reign by Divine Right of Kings because it is the most advantageous of the three. Divine
right of kings is the idea that the power of the king or queen derives from God, not the people. This is advantageous because the ruler would have
absolute power with little to no consequences. In addition, any political dissent against authority figure would be viewed as an insurrection against God
because only God can appoint ruler to govern. Consequently, power is concentrated on a single individual with little resistance. However, a possible
downside to divine right of kings is that a high religious figure can challenge my authority, claiming that God has revoked my right as ruler. This can
lead to rebellion. However, religion and government have a history of colluding with each other in order keep their power.... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
It states that emperors were given power by the heaven to rule as long as they are just ruler. This is similar to Divine Right of Kings because
power derives from cosmic source. Unlike Divine Right of Kings, the Mandate of Heaven states that the person in power could be overthrown if
they lose the mandate. Losing the mandate can be interpreted as natural disasters like famine, drought, or diseases. This can lead to revolt.
Consequently, the Mandate of Heaven is not as desired as Divine Right of Kings if I was a ruler. The social contract is an agreement between the
ruler and the subject. It states that the subjects give up a portion of their rights in order to be ruled providing that the person in charge does not abuse
his power. The benefit to the social contract is that violence is not the main conclusion to if the people are not happy. However, as a ruler from the
18th century the most obvious downside is that the power gained from social contract is not as large compared to Divine Right of Kings or Mandate of

Divine Law In Protestant Countries
The divine law was an idea, which is believed since the middle Ages in Europe.
Kings claimed that they had been chosen by God and were his representatives on earth pore so only had to look up to God for their actions. This was
called the divine right of kings.
Therefore, the kings had absolute power and exercised as wanted.
The same right became that anyone who wanted to depose a king or limit his powers went against the will of God, which meant sacrilege
In Protestant countries, the idea of the divine right of kings started very strong but tends to disappear even faster than in Catholic countries where it
had never been fully adopted to start.
In Protestant countries it was very difficult to question the authority of the pope but quickly

How Did Absolutism Change During The 17th Century?
The monarchical rule of England and France changed completely during the 17th century. Absolutism existed in most of the western countries
including England and France but during the rule of Charles I and King Louis XIV, both the countries went in different political directions. There were
many factors that were responsible for this including the religious and the financial instabilities of the countries. In England, constitutional monarchy
was being followed which had a policy of religious toleration. On the other hand, France was going in the complete opposite direction of making
absolutism more extreme. King Louis XIV became the divine king and prohibited the practice of other religions except Catholicism.
The two countries differed in their religious, financial, institutional and social policies. Each country chose their specific way of dealing with certain
areas of concerns like political problems, social status and most importantly ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Hobbes suggests that Absolutism is the best solution to the problem because a single absolute ruler would set things right for the people who are not
capable of keeping their power within their limits. On the other hand, Locke's suggests a constitutional monarchy because that is the best way the
people would be given justice. According to him all men are equal and given one person all the power to make laws is not right. He suggests that
there should be a government that can govern the problems of the people. Bossuet has a totally different and religious view about the king. According
to him, the King is the divine ruler appointed by God and that he has all the rights to make laws and amend them as he wishes and nobody can go
against him. This power is stemmed to him by God and thus Divine Right Absolutism is the best solution to the

Henry Iv And Henry V By William Shakespeare
In Henry IV and Henry V by Shakespeare, a father and son have diametrically different reigns as king. While both kings are politically savvy and
gain the favor of the people, only one, Henry V, has the divine right of kings. The divine right of kings is the belief that power is instilled in them
by God and rebellion against them is considered a sin. The influence of divine intervention is shown through the punishment and guilt of Henry IV
and the success of Henry V. The rule of Henry IV illustrates the fate of one who seizes a crown that is not rightfully his by divine ordinance: a reign
troubled with treason and uprisings. He does not have the right to rule because he has not obtained the crown through the law of primogeniture and
therefore lacks the divine power imparted on those who gain the throne legitimately. Henry IV seems to have all of the right characteristics to be a
successful king; however, he comes to the throne as an illegitimate ruler with the responsibility of the death of God's chosen king, Richard II, on his
shoulders. These actions cause Henry IV to incur the wrath of God against him and to have a reign plagued with conflict; his ambitiousness and
political intelligence cannot fight back against the divine punishment inflicted upon him. His divine punishment dictates that he will have no peace in
his rule. The instability of England when Henry IV becomes king is foreshadowed by Carlisle: "In this seat of peace tumultuous wars / Shall kin with
kin and

A Comparison Between Macbeth And The Bible
There are multiple connections between 'Macbeth' and the Bible, the strongest of which are seen in the two books from the Bible, Genesis and 1
Samuel. 'Macbeth' takes the characters of Adam and Eve from Genesis, and uses them as a basis for the two main characters of 'Macbeth', Macbeth
and Lady Macbeth. Just as Eve tempts Adam to go against the direct instruction of God, Lady Macbeth convinces Macbeth to murder the king, Lady
Macbeth and Eve are both seen as the temptress to Macbeth and Adam, and they are punished equally in both stories, either by death, or expulsion
from their home with God. 1 Samuel demonstrates the origins of the Divine Right of Kings: that no one was able to go against the King, for he was
God's appointed one. 'Macbeth' takes it further and demonstrates what happens to the one who does kill the King, that they bring upon themselves only
misery, and eventually death. 'Macbeth' and the Bible have numerous resemblances to each other, indicating how Shakespeare used his Biblical
knowledge, which was common in the Elizabethan era, to influence his plays.
There is a strong connection between story lines of 'Macbeth' and Genesis chapter three. They both have a man and a woman, who are associated with
prominent individuals, Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are associated with King Duncan, and Adam and Eve and in the Garden of Eden with God. They
hear of a way, or prophecy which could raise them to a higher position, either King, or equal to God. In both instances, they

English Bill Of Rights Dbq
The end of the 1700s started age of revolution. Many countries, like France were revolting against their government. This era totally annihilated the
thought of the divine right of kings, which was "the doctrine that kings and queens have a God given right to rule and that rebellion against them is a
sin"(Dictionary.com). Some reasons for the end of the divine right of kings was the philosophers, the revolutions and the protestant reformation. The
philosophers of the enlightenment were investigating the concept that all humans are free and equal, that they should have rights and should have a
say in government. In addition, there were a number of documents that took a lot of power from the king . Also the revolutions of this ear were of
great importance.
Some of the important philosophers ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Magna Carta was signed by king john in 1215. Essentially, it said that the king had to fallow the laws of the land and not to abuse his power. Also
it gave the people many right they didn't have before. Next the English Bill of right, "creates separation of powers, limits the powers of the king and
queen, enhances the democratic election and bolsters freedom of speech"(Study.com). Then the declaration of the rights of man and citizen is
considered on of the most important document the French revolution. It gives rights, like freedom of speech, religion, and assembly. The declaration of
Independence announced that America is free and separate from England and is no longer under the authority of England king. it also says that all
men a free and equal and have unalienable rights. Additionally, the bill of rights gives all Americans rights, for example, freedom of speech, assembly,
press, religion and the right to bear

Our True Nationality Is Mankind
"Our true nationality is mankind." вЂ• H.G. Wells
Today, the scourge of nationalism continues to infect humanity. Without doubt, in some circles, nationalism is hotly debated. For most people,
however, the concept of nationalism is rarely questioned. In fact, it 's a foregone conclusion that people should love the nation in which they reside.
Some people even take great pride in the fact that they were arbitrarily born in a specific geographical location. Unfortunately, like religion or
capitalism, nationalism is alive and well in the 21st century.
Throughout the history of human civilization, people have been creating, critiquing and altering institutions. For instance, people have been
condemning religion for centuries, indeed millennia. Yet the institution of religion still remains a dominant force in modern society. Without question,
religious institutions and practices have morphed, dare I say, evolved, over the centuries. But the fundamental concept that human beings exist within
an abstract framework of Gods, mythologies, symbols, and so forth, still remains.
In short, it takes an extremely long time to change ideologies and practices. On the other hand, that doesn 't mean conversations about such topics
should be off–limits or discouraged. Quite the contrary: such conversations are essential, especially today. As the legendary science fiction writer
Ursula K. Le Guin recently said, "We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of

How Did King James Replace The Bible?
In 1604 King James commissioned an English translation of the Bible. James wasn't doing this solely because he was a devout Christian, but also
because of ulterior motives. James planned to use this Bible to enforce the Divine Right of Kings. He wanted this version to replace the Geneva Bible
because he believed that the margin notes show disrespect to kings. James also wanted to use this translation to unite the Church of England and the
Puritans who's fighting was threatening to tear the country apart. In addition, he had many rules for the new translation such as the ecclesiastical words
are to be kept. In my personal opinion this rule was intended to retain the power in the hierarchy because the word church was not to be translated to
congregation.

Sovereignty Essay
Sovereignty
Sovereignty refers to ultimate and absolute authority designated to either an individual or an institutional body.
The term sovereignty could be contested due to the fact that there is no universally agreed definition. Thomas Hobbes defined what he considered the
basis of a political body as 'the most high and perpetual.' (Hobbes, quoted in Heywood, 1997, p26.) This view has proved rather simplistic. It fails to
take into consideration the limitations on the sovereign. Bodin highlighted that although sovereignty provided absolutism, there were restrictions such
as natural laws. (Bodin quoted in Heywood, 1997, p26). Offe supports this by explaining of international restrictions on ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The contested nature of sovereignty is summarised by David Held, who explains it 'no longer retains the meaning that it had 50 years ago. The concept
is premised upon a bounded territorial state system, increasingly threatened by social and technological change.' (Bealey, Chapman, Sheehan, 1999,
p323).
Sovereignty would be useful to a politics student as it is central to the political process. The concept of sovereignty is interrelated to democracy, a key
feature of Western politics, which in some form is adopted throughout the world. Through understanding where ultimate authority resides in political
institutions, the features and key principles of democracy are analysed. Furthermore, through revising sovereignty, it can be understood how it applies
to non–democratic institutions such as dictatorships or one party political regime. By studying sovereignty, a comparison of the contrasting political
regimes, (democracies and dictatorships) can be undertaken. Sovereignty, in this way is an intrinsic part of the study of politics. The concept of
sovereignty enables a student to explore one of the political controversies of the C21st. On a European level, and to a degree on an international level
it is argued that national states have experience a decrease of sovereignty. This is due to some political powers giving been

King James and the Great Chain of Being in Macbeth
MaryAlice Peng Mrs. Frindell Honors English, 3rd period December 2, 2010 King James and the Great Chain of Being in Macbeth Upon the death of
beloved Queen Elizabeth in England, her cousin James I was announced the new king of England. As a Catholic from the rival nation Scotland, King
James I was inherently distrusted by his Anglican subjects, and his guarded, haughty personality only further decreased his popularity (Matthew). King
James was also known for his strong belief in the Divine Right of Kings, in which the king is second only to God (Matthew). However, his greatest
disadvantage was that he was previously Catholic; the English were never truly confident in his conversion to the Anglican Church (Matthew).
Skeptical,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
She was the character that finally convinced Macbeth to kill Duncan in his own castle, proclaiming "O, never shall sun that morrow see!" (1.6.71–72).
She encouraged such betraying behavior as a reaction to Macbeth's letter about being predicted as the next king of Scotland. Eager to become
queen, Lady Macbeth completely disregarded the inner politics of Scotland, her and Macbeth's morals, the sacred Great Chain of Being, and the
Divine Right of Kings. She continues to violate the Chain as she reverses gender roles with Macbeth, verbally abusing him as only a man was
allowed to do to a woman (so it was believed then). She consistently degrades Macbeth by calling him a woman, comparing his explanations to "a
woman's story at a winter's fire, authorized by her grandma" (3.4.78–79). The common belief in 17th century England was that women were far below
men on the social ranking scale, so Lady Macbeth's numerous insults are completely out of line. Eventually she is punished for her interruption in the
Great Chain of Being as she becomes insane from guilt. At last, the murder of Duncan comes back to haunt her, causing her to imagine blood on her
hands and cry "Out, damned, spot, out, I say!" (5.1.37). In the end, all of her past actions catch up with her and she commits suicide as she wrestles
with the burning question, "What, will these hands ne'er be clean?" (5.1.45). Shakespeare justly writes in her demise as she is

Explain James Vi's Notion Of Witchcraft
James VI's notions of witchcraft are conditioned by his ideas about kingship to a certain extent, however, it can be stated that James VI's notions of
witchcraft are also fueled by other factors and not just his ideas of kingship. James VI (1566–1625) held the Scottish throne for most of his life
1567–1625 and also the thrones of England and Ireland from 1603–1625. Whilst holding the Scottish throne James wrote arguably his most famous
work the ''Daemonologie''. It was in this work he tackled the issue of witchcraft and dark magic, showing that he had an in–depth interest with they
particular topic, even much so that he considered himself an expert on the subject. This essay will argue that James Vi's notions of witchcraft are
mainly conditioned by his ideas of kingship, however, James did also have a interest in the subject and his fear of a violent ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This is the ideology that God places all monarchs in their position of power and that only he and no earthly force can judge them. This ideology
fueled James' interest and eventual significant involvement in the North Berwick situation and also played a part when James became a force in the
Witch trials, all of which added to the eventual politicalization of Scottish witchcraft. It can be stated that James ideas of the Divine Right of Kings and
his notions of witchcraft are indefinitely connected. This can be clearly seen in this statement '' ideology goes the Scottish witch–hunt coincided
exactly with the period spanned by the doctrines of the divine right of kings'' . This statement shows that at this period of time the witch hunts and the
political idea of the divine right of kings were intertwined in James' notions of witchcraft. James belief was that as practicing Withcraft was
considered a satanic ritual this was an incredibly serious issue. The belief within the ideology of the Divine Right of Kings is that an attack on the
king is also an attack on

Absolutism Essay 9
"God is holiness itself, goodness itself, and the power itself. In these things lies the majesty of God. In the image of these things lies the majesty of the
prince."
The thesis statement above by Jacques–Benigne Bossuet clearly illustrates the concept or theory of the В‘Divine Right of Kings' which basically
argues that certain kings ruled because they were chosen (by God) to do so and that these kings were accountable to no person except God respecting
only the fundamental laws. Because the monarch ruled with "absolute" or unshared power, the term В‘absolutism' came about. These kings are said
to rule absolutely by the will of God. To oppose the king was equivalent to a rebellion against God. The king therefore was not to be... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
We have learned from the mistakes and put to memory and into practice the lessons obtained. With regards to the statement "God is holiness itself,
goodness itself, and the power itself. In these things lies the majesty of God. In the image of these things lies the majesty of the prince", I believe
that its essence is in great part true. It's embodiment in the theory of the divine right of kings in absolutism however is in many ways as stated in the
body of this paper is a subject for scrutiny and abuse. And so let it be our aim, our unending quest to continue to strive and achieve to attain a
semblance of what it is to be truly in the image of

Tartuffe, a Comedy by Molier
Tartuffe is one of the most famous comedies written by the French playwright MoliГЁre. The play tells the story of a wealthy Frenchman named
Orgon who takes in Tartuffe, a man who presents himself to be religious and passionate but actually turns out to be a hypocrite. Despite his family's
warnings, Orgon completely turns his back on his family in order to protect Tartuffe, who betrays him. During that time the play was first written and
performed, many people, along with King Louis XIV himself, enjoyed the play. However, to others it was seen as being critical of religion and the
church, which then lead to it being banned. In a political sense, Tartuffe serves as both an endorsement and critique of the ideas of absolutism, divine
right,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In those times, religion was hard to separate from politics and other aspects. Tartuffe was able to fool people by claiming to be a devout man of God.
If this were to happen with the King's advisors, it could cause corruption throughout many parts of the kingdom. MoliГЁre does believe that the King
should seek advice from others, but he warns that he should listen to many opinions and think carefully before making a final decision.
The divine right theory claims that the monarchs are specially selected by God to rule the kingdom. Consequently, the King is responsible for his
own actions and decisions. However, God is the only one who can make judgments. So even if the King rules unfairly, that does not permit the
citizens to rebel against his rule. Rather, it is up to God to handle it. In Tartuffe, MoliГЁre seems to praise the King for his fairness and mercy by
pardoning Orgon in the end. Due to his previous loyalty to the throne, he returned Orgon's property to him and forgave him for hiding the papers. The
wise King also saw through Tartuffe's deception and hypocrisy and had him arrested. These events in the story definitely show MoliГЁre's support for
King Louis XIV, as he knew that abolitionism and divine right were honest intentions to rule the kingdom fairly.
Also during this time period, an emphasis was placed on patriarchal family. God has ultimate authority over all, as He is the true

Allusions In Macbeth
By the divine right of kings, monarchs with blessed blood hold the right to complete reverence and subservience from their subjects. In the time of
William Shakespeare, and for hundreds of years before, European monarchs justified their absolutist rules by reasoning God placed their bloodline on
the throne. Encyclopedia Britannica states that, in 1603, the art–loving James VI of Scotland succeeded to the English throne (Mathew); according to
Shakespeare Online, he brought Shakespeare's acting troupe, the Chamberlain's Men, under his patronage and renamed them the King's men (Mabillar
2000). Three years later in 1606, Shakespeare's tragedy, Macbeth, released. Macbeth takes place in Shakespeare's version of monarchical eleventh
century Scotland. In the play, a war–hero thane–the titular Macbeth–hears a prophecy from three witches that he will assume the crown of the good
king Duncan. This spark ignites his ambition and drives him to regicide, insanity,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Macbeth's murders weigh heavily on his conscience and begin to manifest as delusions and paranoia. After Macbeth sees the ghost of his late friend
Banquo, who he recently orchestrated the murder of, he seeks out the witches for more information. When the witches show Macbeth the future
kings of Scotland, Macbeth notes, "some I see / That twofold balls and treble scepters carry" (IV.i.129). The "twofold balls" and treble scepters are a
reference to James I, who at the time reigned over both Great Britain and Scotland. The two balls symbolize how James I rules over both Scotland and
England; the three scepters represent his kingship of the three independent states: Scotland, England, and Ireland. The lineage of monarchs that reclaim
the throne from the tyrant Macbeth includes James I. This succession therefore implies James I is a rightful heir–unlike Macbeth–and allows
Shakespeare to express his support for the controversial

What Is The Divine Right Of Kings
Divine right theory, or the divine right of kings, is a religio–political doctrine that validated the sovereign rule of various monarchs, primarily European,
from the late sixteenth century up until the late eighteenth century. According to the theory, the monarch derives their legitimacy and right to rule
solely from their birth–such authority is transmitted to a ruler from their ancestors, who claimed their power was appointed directly to their lineage by
God. This theory asserts that because the right to rule is divinely sanctioned, the monarch is subject to no other authority besides that of God, and
therefore not subject to any earthly rule. This also ensured the unquestionable obedience of the monarch's subjects, because to actively

Machiavelli's Influence On The Government
more reserved to extend their range of influence over their own people and other neighboring countries. The prevalence of capitalism, as Machiavelli
argued for in the prince, changed the public interest in public pursuit of power to private and self seeking interests, and allowed governments to
acquire more power from the voluntarily forfeited liberties of its citizens. Finally, the rise of the "Rational Central Administration" marked a beginning
of bureaucracy in the modern era. Code law was valued over case law, allowing for uniformity and efficiency in the state's executive powers; the
collection of military nobles into the residence of nobility drew focus away from other courts, and encouraged competition in dress and etiquette to
impress the royalty, further... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Instead, Hume proposes sociological evolution of Natural Law. Since the world changes, and so too do the people and groups living on it, it is only
fitting that one looks to history for an understanding of government's authority. Thus, through sociology, which Hume helped to pioneer, one can more
fully understand the right to govern where an incomplete understanding of God or incomprehensive survey of consent fall

Versute Power In Thomas Paine's Common Sense By Thomas Paine
What gives a person the right to have absolute power in a country? How does the leader ensure they are not opposed and that the people are fine
with them having all of the power? The answer to both of these questions is complex, but it can be summed up to two words, total control. When
given the power to lead a country, a leader, or governmental figure, is faced with the problem that in order to actually lead they have to get the
population they are ruling to listen. Different leaders use different strategies to ensure the people follow the laws that they have established, some use
force, beliefs, or even popularity to their advantage. In the book, Common Sense by Thomas Paine, we learn about how the British king used different
types of... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When the belief regarding the Divine Right of Kings started to wane, the British king used loyalty as an incentive to follow commands. Since a lot of
the American colonists originally hailed from Great Britain, many settlers felt loyal to their home country and its government. Great Britain further
strengthened this feeling of loyalty by providing the colonies with protection against enemy countries. By using the colonist's loyalty to get them to
adhere to the laws set forth by the crown, the king was able to ensure that he had total control over the American settlers, at least for a while.
Eventually the settlers began to question the king's power over the colonies, due to unfair taxes, and once again the king began to use a different
strategy to maintain control over America, fear. Great Britain was a very powerful country with a large army and since the settlers were resisting the
king's rule, war broke out. Even though war definitely instilled fear into the settlers, it also created discourse and uncertainty about whether the
colonies should succeed from Great Britain or simply fight for fairer laws. In Common Sense, Thomas Paine depicts some of these insecurities,
"Jealousies will be always arising; insurrections will be constantly happening; and who will go forth to quell them? Who will venture his life to reduce
his own countrymen to a foreign

Inventing The People Morgan Analysis
In Inventing the People, Morgan initially makes a radical claim that the entire foundation upon which American democracy was built, is a fiction. What
follows is a three–hundred–page analysis of what Morgan calls political fictions. These fictions have been developed throughout our history, most
notably, the fictions of the divine right of kings and the sovereignty of the people. Systematically, Morgan breaks down these fictions to their root,
unveiling the shaky basis upon which they lie, and then revealing all of the pitfalls inherent in their actual realization, to indicate the modified form of
these political fictions that we know today. Morgan argues that the problem with political fictions is that they have become so ingrained in societal
thought that we are... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Thus, he begins with an example he claims Americans today can all understand as an obvious fiction, the political fiction developed during the reign of
James I (1603–1625): the divine right of kings. While it may seem clear to Americans today that such an idea was not entirely sound, English
citizens at the time fell victim to the classic logic inherent in political fictions, the idea that, the fiction has always been real and is simply a part of
society as we know it. However, our ability to discern fact from fiction in the case of the divine right of kings serves Morgan's point that a political
fiction is also present today, yet we are now the ones falling victim to the fiction. In the transition from the fiction of divine right to that of popular
sovereignty, one

The Bible : The Links Between The Bible And Macbeth
There are many links between the Bible, and the story 'Macbeth' by William Shakespeare. The two strongest ones are seen in Genesis, with Adam and
Eve, and also in 1 Samuel, with the Divine right of kings shown with King Saul and David. In Genesis, the story of Adam and Eve lines up right next
the characters of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, they have the same roles, which end up playing out in the same order. In 1 Samuel, it shows the
origins of the Divine right of kings and how no one can go against the King, and in Macbeth is shows what does happen when Macbeth kill the King,
and bring darkness to himself. Both the Bible and 'Macbeth' have many links to each other which show that Shakespeare wrote his plays to please his
King, King James who wrote the King James version of the Bible.
There is a very strong relationship between the characters Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, and from Genesis, Adam and Eve. Both stories are about a man
and a woman, who are in high positions or with high up people, and get offered something better, but it would mean for them to do something of
dire consequence. Lady Macbeth convinces Macbeth to kill their king by threatening him. She says, "How tender tis to love the babe that milks me:
I would, while it was smiling in my face, Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums, and dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you have done
to this". Lady Macbeth is saying that if Macbeth does not commit the murder, she will smash her baby's brains on the wall.

The Roman Empire

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Renee Reed

More from Renee Reed (15)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Roman Empire