West European Studies

The so-called Greco-Italian War was a conflict between fascist Italy and Greece which lasted from October 1940 to April 1941. The defeat of the Italian army forced Mussolini to ask for Hitlers assistance. In April 1941, Nazi Germany simultaneously invaded Greece and Yugoslavia to prevent British forces from occupying those countries.

Background
By mid-1940, Mussolini became more and more jealous of Hitlers military conquests in Europe. To boost Italian morale, Italy occupied Albania in 1939 and several British strongholds in North Africa. At the same time, Mussolini wanted to reclaim Italian interests in the Balkans. Earlier, Romania and Bulgaria accepted German protection. On the 28th of October 1940, Ioannis Metaxas rejected an Italian ultimatum demanding the military occupation of Greece. As a result, Italian forces invaded Greece from Albania. The Greek army launched a counter offensive and forced the Italians to retreat. After a month, the Greeks occupied a large portion of Albania. Defeated, Mussolini went to Berlin to ask military assistance from Hitler. In April 1941, German forces attack Greece in two directions. After a week of fighting, the Metaxas Line crumbled under heavy German gunfire. The Greek army of Epirus surrendered to the Germans. This marked the end of the Greco-Italian War.

Historical Causes
In the 1910s, relations between Greece and Italy had not been good. Both countries sought to control Albania. Historically, Albania was an Italian protectorate. However, both Albania and Greece claimed Northern Epirus, a region inhabited by a large Greek population. At the same time, Italy occupied the Dodecanese islands, inhabited predominantly by Greeks. Italy promised to return the islands to Greece in the 1919 Venizelos-Tittoni Agreements but later claimed that the islands traditionally belonged to Italy.

After the First World War, Greece occupied Turkish territories in Asia Minor. Italy helped the Turkish nationalists under Mustafa Kemal Attaturk in the war against Greece. Mussolini utilized the murder of an Italian general at the Albanian border to occupy Corfu, one of the major Ionian Islands.

However, from 1929 to 1939 relations between Italy and Greece had normalized. In 1930, Greece and Turkey signed the Friendship Treaty. In 1934, Bulgaria and Greece signed the Balkan Pact, a military and economic agreement. The threat from Greeces traditional enemies  Turkey and Bulgaria  was removed. Yugoslavia was too busy to demand territorial concessions from Greece. The same case can be said of Albania. Only Italy had the intention of harassing Greece both militarily and politically.

Metaxas, the Greek dictator, knew Italys military plans for the Balkans. He laid plans for the restructuring of the countrys armed forces and for the construction of a defensive line along the Greek-Bulgarian borders. After years of reorganization, the army was modernized. About 90 of regular units were technologically upgraded and well-equipped. The Greek government purchased new armaments for the creation of additional three armies. By 1939, the army was stockpiling food and ammunitions in case Greece was pulled into the war.

Italian Ambitions
On the 7th of April 1939, the Italian army occupied the state of Albania, gaining a land border with Greece. As a result, Britain and France guaranteed the territorial integrity of Greece. Metaxas tried to keep Greece out of the war by making small concessions to Germany. But as it turned out, Italian ambitions in the Balkans spoiled Greek efforts to maintain neutrality.

The Italian governor of Albania, Francesco Jacomoni sought the support of Albanians over the issue of Albanian minorities in Greek Epirus. The Albanians were of course indifferent over the issue. Jacomoni, however, repeatedly sent reports to Rome that the Albanians would fully support Italy in case war breaks out between Italy and Greece.

After the defeat of the Italian army in France, Mussolini turned his eyes on Greece. Mussolini informed his generals to create a strategic military plan for the conquest of Greece. Mussolinis decision was not entirely unfounded. From August to September 1940, British patrols over Greek islands intensified. These patrols were sometimes composed of heavy cruisers and battleships. According to German intelligence reports, Britain was planning to occupy Greece in order to force the Italians out of the war. The report was accurate, as Prime Minister Winston Churchill informed the British commanders of his intention to create a foothold in the Balkans. After the Greek rejection of the Italian ultimatum, Italy attacked Greece from Albania.

The Forces
Mussolini ordered the mobilization of about 600 000 men for the Greek campaign. The Italian war plan was divided into three stages. The first stage involved the occupation of Epirus and the Ionian Islands. The second stage involved a thrust into Western Macedonia and towards Thessalonika. The aim was to capture northern Greece. The third and last stage involved subsidiary attacks against the remainder of the country.

The Italian High Command hoped that by cutting Greek forces in Central Greece, victory could be achieved in less than two weeks. This optimism was not without basis. The Italian army in Albania was 200 000 strong, with 400 000 in reserve. However, numbers alone cannot win battles. The Italian army was short in mechanized and artillery units. Air support was barely inadequate to provide cover for army units. Indeed, Mussolini relied heavily on the numerical superiority of the Italian army over the Greek army in achieving a military victory.

The Greek army was small but formidable. Defending Epirus was the 8th Infantry Division under the command of Major General Katsimitros. In Western Macedonia, the Corps Army Section and the Pindus Detachment (under the command of Lt. General Pitsikas) were deployed to harass advancing Italian forces. Greek forces amounted to about 35 000 men strong, reinforced by formations in Southern Greece and Macedonia. The Greek army also had more medium artillery and machine guns than the Italian army. The Hellenic Royal Air Force was small but reinforced by the British Royal Air Force.

The Battle
The 200 000 strong Italian army launched preemptive attacks from Albania. The invasion force included Albanians attached to the Italian army. On October 28 1940, Italian forces pushed the Greek screening forces. The main Italian force struck towards Elaia and secured a bridgehead over the Kalamas River. On October 31, the Italian high Command informed Mussolini that Italian forces had reached Kalamas in five points. On November 1, the Italians captured Konitsa and reached the Greek defensive line. The Italians launched a desperate attack on the Greek defensive line to no avail.

The Italian High Command knew that the offensive had failed. Now, the Greeks began to increase their reserves. The TDSM and the main Greek force were continuously reinforced with units from northern Greece. On the 14th of November 1940, the Greek army launched a ferocious counteroffensive in Korce. The Italians were pushed to Albania. In Western Macedonia, the Greek army launched another offensive (aided by British army and air force units), destroying a number of Italian battalions.

German Intervention and Outcome
Hitler was enraged over Italys inability to wage even a defensive war. He ordered his generals to formulate a military plan (codenamed Operation Marita). In April 1941, German forces smashed through the Metaxas line and cut off the main Greek force in Albania. At the same time, Yugoslavia suffered from continuous German air attacks. Mussolini also launched his mini-offensive two days prior to the German attacks, but met with little success. On the 20th of April 1941, Greek forces surrendered to the Germans, to avoid the impression that Italy defeated Greece. This spelled the end of the Greco-Italian War.

THESIS The history of the rise and fall of the Ancient Rome is like a fictitious story.

Many historians and scholars have written numerous books and journals in a bid to explain the flow of events in ancient Rome up to the 1600s, not all have given relevant information. However great historians like Marvin Perry, Margaret Jacob, Von Laue and Myrna Chase have done exemplary work and written educative and informative articles and books on the same.

In this paper, the main focus will be to explain the reflections on the flow of history from fall of ancient Rome to the 1600s. The paper will also explain the different stages that were involved and the impact it had on the modern era. Finally, a brief comparison of the events during these eras will also be given.

To be able to understand this, a brief insight and observation will be given on the following stages
Dark ages
Middle ages
Renaissance
Reformation

The rise of modern European states
It will be important also for us to compare and contrast some of these stages in order to fully comprehend the area of focus.

Flow of History from the fall of Ancient Rome to the 1600s
Observations and Insights

The fall of the Ancient Roman didnt happen at once but rather in stages. There were revolutions that resulted into the decline and fall of the empire.

The first revolution was witnessed in the Age of Trojan and the Antonines. This occurred after the empire had reached its peak and friction started between different factions in the kingdom. The revolution came to an end the beginning of the sixth century subjected the kingdom to the Gothic conqueror, (Milman and Gibson xxvi). The second phase of decline began during the reign of King Justinian, although it didnt last long.

The last phase that was the longest, it lasted for six and a half centuries. The revolution began during the revival of the western empire until the time when the Turks took over the Constantinople (Modern Istanbul) in AD 1453 (Milman and Gibson xxv  xxvii). Other reasons that led to the collapse of the empire are religion, economic and hoarding factors.

Stages (Ages) of the fall of the ancient Rome
Dark Age The dark stage came about after the fall of the Roman Empire. This period was characterized by cultural and economic decline in most parts of Western Europe. The Roman Catholic replaced the imperial Rome and this helped to unify the whole of Europe (Grimassi 12).

Middle age After the Dark Age, came in the middle period characterized by turmoil and suffering.
During the middle period, people never believed in individualism but rather grouped themselves in tribes, religion and race. This was put to an end by the renaissance period (Gramassi 12).

Renaissance period The fourteenth century signified the end of the middle age when Italy led the rest of
Europe out of this age. By the fifteenth century, France, Netherlands, Spain and England had all been embraced into this period. This period witnessed unity in Europe through arts and literature materials (Gramassi 12). It was like a rebirth and restoration of Europe

Reformation The period between 1640 and 1660 saw the reemergence of radical reformation  movements that had been thought to be dead in the late sixteenth century. Most parts of Europe witnessed this apart from England (Perry et al 334).

The rise of modern European states The rise of modern European states was pioneered by kings and queens. It is the kings  queens who delegated duties of what was to be done by the subjects and no one was to question orders from the king  queen. Just like modern countries are headed by presidents, most of the European states were divided into kingdoms and each kingdom had its king or queen, for example, England, Spain and France. Most of this kingdoms still exist up do date (Perry et al 373).
Comparison of the Eras

Dark  Middle Age Vs Renaissance Period
The happenings of during the Dark and Middle Ages are similar since they mostly included trouble and suffering after the fall of ancient Rome. However, it is the renaissance period that ushered in a new era in Europe and it is during this period that most states in Europe were rebuilt. The lifestyle of people during these ages also changed drastically.

The concept of individualism was natured during the renaissance period and this led to many people venturing out into individual entrepreneurship unlike before when everything was done communally.
Renaissance Period Vs Modern Era

The events that happened after the fall of Ancient Rome to the 1600s played a major role in defining the social and political events of the modern era (Perry et al 374).

In the modern world, nations are experiencing cold wars, economic meltdown, coups and in some countries there is resistance against the government of the day. The early 1900s also witnessed first and second world wars.  These are the same things that happened during the Dark Age, Middle Age, renaissance period and the reformation periods.

The style of governance is however different. Before, most states were ruled by kings and queens, most of who were tyrants and held the throne till they died. The modern style of a countrys leadership is rested on presidents and prime ministers who follow a constitution to carry out their duties. Most states also have governors who represent the interest of the people. They are allowed to hold power for a specific period of time after which elections are conducted to elect other representatives.

There is a great difference in terms of lifestyle and technology between the modern era and the other eras. Modern era is more advanced in terms of technology and service delivery.

The French Revolution was fueled by the political, social, and economic inequalities that existed under the rule of King Louis XVI. Enlightenment thinkers like Locke, Rousseau, Montesquieu and Voltaire discussed the natural rights of man that could not be infringed upon.  These Enlightenment ideals and examples of the English Bill of Rights and the American Declaration of Independence led the French citizens to fight for their liberty, equality, and brotherhood in France.
         
The despotic rule of King Louis XVI fueled many crises in France.  The Estates General in France was comprised of three estates the first estate was the clergy which included 1 of the population,  the second estate were the nobles which included 2 of the population and the third estate were the peasants and bourgeoisie that made up 97 of the population.  Each estate was given one vote in the Estates General, which caused great political inequality in France.  The Third Estate were carried the burden of excessive taxes which were imposed by the government to offset the debts that were accrued by engaging in foreign wars and the extravagant spending of King Louis XVI while the other estates had optional taxes. The members of the Third Estate suffered from widespread poverty and starvation.
           
The citizens of France were inspired by the Declaration of Independence which had been drafted 13 years before by the American colonists to make a similar declaration called the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.  Both declarations were inspired by the English Bill of Rights.  Each of the three documents demanded protection of the natural rights of man such as life, liberty, and property.  King Louis XVI ignored the demands of the French people which prompted them to rise up in rebellion to fight for the   liberty, equality, and brotherhood among all the citizens of France.

Culture wars, (or cultural struggles) in the United States can be traced back to the 1960s and have taken dynamic forms since. They reflect on conflicting cultural values, specifically depicting a clash between conservative (traditional) and liberal (progressive) values. The re-alignment of American politics is best described by the phrase culture war (Claerbout). This paper will reflect on American politics in relation to the culture wars and the issues around it.

In literal terms, radical means roots. Radicalism is a political term which, according to Royle, dates back to the mid-nineteenth century, and was used by people who felt they were not included in the operations of political system and power as well as the traditional society. In general, radicalism advocates for political reforms and change in the social order either through violent or non-violent means (Claerbout).

Traditionally, liberalism is about openness to new ideas. It leans towards equality, liberty, and justice. It means each member of the society enjoys equal claims socially in the form of rights, liberty and so on. The idea is that every individual should enjoy equal rights and liberty just like any other, and on top of that, inequalities, both socially and economically, should be in such a manner that they favor all and sundry (Tomasi 108).

Reactionaryism is the opposite of liberalism. Reactionaries, also known as extreme conservatives, advocate for the status quo. A reactionarys political values are based backwards they vouch for the old order, parallel to liberals (Sartre).

Conservatism emphasizes on the preservation of traditional institutions and culture of a society. Conservatives argue that for a society to be stable, it must uphold past values and refrain from adopting new ideas foreign to its history. Further, they argue that a societys values should not be manipulated at will rather it should be nourished by cultural values (Sartre).
   
Lifestyle is dynamic it is bound to change at one time or another. Based on the four ideologies, liberalism is better owing to its liberal perspective towards life.

Liberals, irrespective of the religious background they are affiliated to, argue that morality should revolve around facts and the day to day life experiences. They believe that truth is what you perceive it to be and that morality is based on the times we live. Conservatives, on the other hand, irrespective of their religious affiliations argue that morality is defined within a framework, is unchanging and is transcendent just like it is explained in the bible, as opposed to morality defined by mortals.

According to a research by Gallup, Democrats are a liberal lot their support on issues like equal opportunity to all, same sex marriage, gun control and so on, just shows how liberal their ideologies are. Republicans on the other hand are made up of conservatives this is clearly depicted in their political stands and ideologies. The research indicates that 72 of Republicans are of the opinion that they are conservatives, while Democrats are almost the evenly split between liberals and moderates. Conservatism is more dominant among Republicans. This is clearly shown in the diagram below.

Source Saad
In the American political set-up, conservative Democrats and moderate or liberal Republicans are scarce (Newport). Views on critical policy issues clearly depict the differences of ideologies between the two parties. For instance, on abortion, Republicans feel that abortion is tantamount to murder and that no one has the right to murder. On the contrary, Democrats are of the opinion that fetus is not human life and that the government should keep off this issue, because it is a matter of personal choice, it is a womans decision regarding her own body.

On affirmative action, Republicans feel that race should not be used as a factor in employment considerations instead, employment should be based on ones ability. Democrats disagree on this their argument being that due to racial prejudice in the past, the minorities were under privileged with respect to education and employment opportunities. Based on this argument, Democrats support affirmative action on the belief that America is still a racist society. The arguments go on, from economy, to environment, to gun control, to health care, to same sex marriage, to war on terrorism and so on.

The decline of the Ottoman Turks Empire despite the interventions to save it has always attracted the attention of historians. The decline which started in the second half of the 19th century is believed to have been as a result of conflicting political and social aspect in the empire as well as the economic situation of the empire. This led to the dismissal of the ottoman rulers by the Europeans as competent rulers who could lead the empire to modernization. The empire was faced with rebellions from the people, corruption of the administrators, economic difficulties and military deterioration, and was as a result called the sick man of Europe.

Although there are a few recorded primary sources of data that can be used to explain the causes of the declining Ottoman Empire, historians have suggested that political, economic and social factors led to the decline. The political changes that took place in the leadership of the empire where intelligent and able dynasty of rulers was replaced by incompetent and misfit political and religious leaders led to the collapse of the government apparatus in the empire. The political and religious institutions became inefficient and lost their integrity. The most striking effect of the government collapse was the declining military power of the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman army lost the morale as well as courage which resulted into series of defeats. Since the 16th century, the army had become weak and the expansion of the empire was limited by Persian Empire and the Portuguese to the east and the Russian on the other side. The deteriorating military could not confront the armies of these monarchies which used unfamiliar techniques as opposed to the tradition Muslim war against the infidels (Lewis, p 112).

As opposed to the early political development in the Ottoman Empire, the change of leadership resulted into conservatism in the 19th century which led to stagnation as the rest of the European monarchies were advancing rapidly in terms of military, agriculture and economy. The incompetent and weak rulers led to poor leadership, corruption, unhealthy bureaucracies and in the long run decline in the empire.

Economic factors also played a major role in the decline of the empire. Initially, the empire benefited from the strategic location where merchant ships from other parts of Europe in the Red Sea ports. However, the situation changed when new economic powers, the Dutch and British emerged in the seventeen century. The change of trade routes to Asia as a result was a big blow to the economy of the empire. The increased voyages by the Europeans to discover more lands and trade route impacted on the empire negatively. The monetary systems were negatively affected by the low supply of precious metals. The increased supply of precious metals in Europe from the New World had devastating effect on the empire which was ruled by Sultans with limited financial knowledge. The economic crisis as a result of the increased supply of gold and silver from the newly discovered lands in America and Africa and technical backwardness led to the empire decline. The economic problem was made worse by the change in the agrarian systems which resulted in declining agricultural productivity (Lewis, p 120). The empire lacked behind in terms of technology where they were kicked out of the market by the fast developing European nations in the production of textile and importation of species from Asia. The incompetent leaders fell back to their conservative Islamic beliefs and lost the control of the empire periphery by the end of the 19th century (Johnson, p 2).

The rebellions that faced the Ottoman Empire in the 18th century changed the military orientation of the empire. Although there were attempts by Sultan Selim to revive the weak military, the Ottoman military was unable to resist the attack by the Egyptians. The attempt by the nationalist sultan to modernize the military to fit the western style was faced with opposition from the conservative Islam clergy which led to the Balkan uprisings. One of the major reasons that caused the fall of the empire is conservativism as opposed to nationalism (Jaschke, p 12). While the then flourishing European nations had embraced the idea of a nation state, the Balkans had no idea of its benefit. The resulting uprisings as the Serbs revolted against the mistreatment by the traditional military and political class and fought for their autonomy in the early 19th century, the empire became weak as other European societies developed. This was followed by the defeat by the Egyptians and the Russian (Johnson, p 3).

Towards the mid 19th century, the main cause of the problem had already been revealed and mechanisms were put in place by the new rulers to save the empire. The internally developed social, political and military changes which were imported from the other European countries by default led to the establishment of the New Ottomans. However, interventions were too late and the new empire depended on the support of European powers (Johnson, p 4).  

There is no single and concrete definition of the Enlightenment largely due to the fact that it was not an aspect confined to one region. Yet, the Enlightenment has often been defined as a movement that swept the Western nations between the 1670s and 1790s affecting the major Protestant nations of Europe, the United Provinces and England and then spread into neighboring countries.  The movement then spread into France where, headed by Voltaire and Montesquieu, the French onwards took the leading position in the movement. During the Enlightenment, most of Europe experienced a vast social and political transformation that was unlike any other ever witnessed on the continent. The foundations of European autocratic authority were greatly shaken and during the 18th Century, a kind of intellectual environment came into being in which man developed a new-found confidence in his ability to have a clear understanding of the past that would help to improve the present and establish an outline for his future. One of the Enlightenment leaders was the English philosopher John Locke.

John Locke
John Locke was a renowned Enlightenment philosopher who made tremendous contributions to the fields of religion, politics, government and psychology. He is largely known as a political scientist and psychologist and through the Enlightenment, he and others provided Europe and the world with a new view of live that was based on a unified desire for progress or controlled changes. In the midst of his intellectual environment, John Locke promoted the power of human reason to an exceptional level, helped to do away with emotion and mystery and provided a good foundation for a new generation that was more than willing to completely do away with the unnecessary burden that a theological view of the world provided. In modern society, John Locke is hailed for the liberal political philosophy that he formulated and advocated for as well as for drawing out a theory of knowledge which paid great significance to the importance of a proper learning environment or atmosphere in the learning process. In broader terms, Locke continues to be classified as one of the fathers of the 18th Century Age of Enlightenment, a period during which the Western experience about individual male self-respect and dominance were greatly advanced in such spheres as religion, politics, economic life, social organization and education. He is also recognized for his remarkable variety of interests which ranged from political theory and the study of knowledge to colonial administration, biblical commentary, medicine, botany and economics. During his age, professional competence was quite rare but Locke exhibited a very varied and remarkable professional aptitude.

The philosopher John Locke was born in 1632 in the small English village of Wrington in Somerset County to John Locke Sr. and his wife Anne Locke. The senior John Locke was an attorney as well as small landowner and John Lockes family was classified as moderately comfortable by the standards of that time. The family lands that his father had acquired later proved very helpful for John Locke as they helped him to maintain a private source of income even if he never became wealthy. At the time of Lockes birth, King Charles I of the house of Stuart ruled both England and Scotland and English politics had begun to go through an unstable period a situation that prevailed until close to Lockes death in 1704. England was going through a lot of significant upheavals one of which was the challenge to the official churchs continued position as the official spiritual and temporal authority and its replacement by a secular-modern nation-state. John Locke lived during the Thirty Years War which had wiped out thirty percent of Central Europes population and although there was no prediction about his life, Locke was to play a very important role in the political developments of England. He especially grew deeply concerned about the expanding power of the state and the implications that such expansion had on the genuineness of the religious life of an individual.

During his early life, John Locke studied at the prestigious Westminster School and was in school when King Charles I was beheaded in nearby Whitehall in 1649 although the students were kept away from the event. Locke studied Greek and Latin in a very harsh environment characterized by regular beatings and severe punishments. Nevertheless, he was a very industrious student of Westminster School and was able to secure a scholarship at the Christ Church College in Oxford where he became a student. Locke maintained academic excellence and in 1656, he attained a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Oxford University for his study on ancient languages and the literature associated with them. He remained at Oxford, working as an administrator and teacher but also studying philosophy and theology during his free time. Locke also developed interests in the study of medicine and he attained an MB degree in 1674. The young Locke had also inherited a very strong Protestant faith from his parents which played a very influential role upon his future intellectual advancement as well as the political choices that he would make in life. It was the political allegiances that he maintained that led to his expulsion from Christ Church College and his subsequent escape to exile between 1683 and 1689. The period that Locke spent in exile however proved to be the most productive season of his life as he gradually turned into a very remarkable philosopher of his time. His name has gone down in history for three great works that he wrote during his stay I exile namely the Second Treatise of Government, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, and A Letter on Toleration all which were first printed in 1689.

John Lockes fame as an Enlightenment philosopher revolved around the human mind and its ability to know the world. In his works the Essay Concerning Human Understanding, a human mind is born completely blank and knowledge of the world comes through experiences, helped by the five senses. Sensation and reflection according to Locke helped human beings to arrive at such ideas as infinity, space and time.  Lockes philosophy also addresses the field of ethics and his theories were based upon the belief that humanity was naturally good and that when conducted reasonably, the pursuit for pleasure and happiness ultimately leads to cooperation and eventually contributes to the general welfare. Locke suggested that private pleasures must not undermine the ultimate good of the wider community or even the afterlife and that religion can only be passed on through persuasion and not force. He also argued that religious differences could not be solved by way of war and the state must never interfere with the religious matters of its citizens. Yet, although he advocated broad religious freedom, Locke felt that legislation should be made against Roman Catholicism and atheism as hostile doctrines to religion and the state. Some of Lockes religious writings included The Reasonableness of Christianity and the Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul published in 1695 and 1705-7 respectively. His ideas have continued to influence the field of philosophy for a long time. But perhaps his greatest fame as a philosopher arose from his political theory. Locke believed that reason, tolerance and happiness were characteristics of the original state of nature and that in such state, all people were not only independent and equal but also had no right to cause harm to one anothers life, liberty, health or even possessions. According to Locke, social contract formed the base of the state and natural law was the best guide for the state. Locke believed that every human being deserved a right to what his or her labor has produced and his policy of checks and balances within the government greatly influenced the laying down of the Constitution of the United States.

In 1666, John Locke established friendship with Anthony Ashley Cooper who later became the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury. Locke served as both doctor and personal adviser to Cooper for quite some time. Such a friendship also helped Locke to secure various civil and diplomatic posts until the time Shaftesbury lost his office in 1675. While in government service, he closely observed the leadership and soon became political advisor to such leaders as Edward Clarke, Sir William Younge, Lord Monmouth, Earl of Pembroke and Solicitor-General John Somers among others. Locke maintained a very active political life and due to his contributions as well as those of other philosophers, the modern state was carved out of Enlightenment Europe within a political background that was different from the ruling monarchs. There was separation of powers whereby the articles defining an office and the person holding it became two separate entities. People no longer held political office because of their social ranking in society but because they professionally qualified to hold such office. Although religious conflict continued between Catholics and Protestants, political-economic issues between states were established and overseas commerce blossomed.

Although Locke had a good number of female friends, he never married and therefore raised no children of his own. He was however very fond of children and displayed a great influence in promoting more coherent and humane feelings towards their upbringing as well as education. Such an attitude towards children was influenced by the harsh environment he had experienced at Westminster School. Some Thoughts Concerning Education is one of his published works towards this cause. According to Henry, Locke is said to have stated in one such works that, Those that intend ever to govern their children should begin it whilst they are very little, and look that they perfectly comply with the will of their parents  Most of Lockes works were published anonymously. Locke also wrote extensively on economic, monetary, political and public affairs. To a lesser extent, John Locke published literary criticisms a good example being his criticism of Nicholas Ma lebrance, the French philosopher who proposed that all power revolved around God. He also replied in writing to several criticisms made towards his work

Conclusion
Until his death in 1704, John Locke enjoyed tremendous loyal favor and public esteem, besides the great fame that surrounded his works, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. He also served in a number of official duties the most notable one being a Commissioner of the Board of Trade whose role was to oversee the affairs of the American colonies. Although Locke enjoyed public office especially because of the good salary it attracted and had also acquired some sort of international fame, his desire remained very much bent towards the pursuit of intellectual and scholarly interests especially towards the last years of his life. Prevailing poor health took away the life of this great philosopher at the age of 72 but even at the time of his death, John Locke is said to have had a very composed mind.

Millions of love stories have been narrated over time, and each one describes the joys and complexities of love. But what makes a love story sell and stand out What elements does one story have to possess to capture the hearts of many Definitely, a love story should have a well-defined plot supported by a touch of passion, devotion, struggles, and tragedy. The Letters of Abelard and Hloise has it all, and the fact that it is a real-life love story makes it more interesting. The story has drawn millions of readers to sink their teeth into the pathos and passion of these two lovers. However, the story speaks more than just the typical facets of romance. If we would read critically, the love story has so much to tell about religion, society, and gender in the medieval era.

French philosopher Peter Abelard was known for his sharp ideologies and philosophies. In his Historia Calamitatum (Stories of His Misfortunes), he discloses a handful of details of his life as a student, a philosopher, and a lover to Heloise. Reading through his letters, we can assume that Abelards status as a nobleman and the most sought-after logician of his time swelled his self-pride. When he moved to Paris to advance his education, he was disappointed with his teacher Champeaux whom he considered intellectually inferior to him. He resented and provoked him into arguments. Abelard admits in his Historia Calamitum that his resentment towards Champeaux was the start of his misfortunes (4). When he met Heloise, he thought it would be easy to make her yield to his advances. He states I... was confident that I should have an easy success for at that time I had youth and exceptional good looks as well as my great reputation to recommend me and feared no rebuff from any woman who I might choose to honor with my love (10) Heloise, on the other hand, was a meek young woman who was under her uncles ward. Her uncle tried everything he can to advance her nieces education. She was her uncles pride for her education and intelligence was said to be superior over other women in Paris. In Historia, Abelard tells that Heloises knowledge has made her most renowned throughout the realm of France (10). This proves that Abelard and Heloise were both intellectually gifted and shared the same interest in literary knowledge.

The twelfth century is noted as a patriarchal period in history, a time when Abelard and Heloise were supposed to have lived. In their relationship, we can observe that Abelard was the dominant one. Abelards decisions about their relationship were the ones that were executed. After a long time of murmurs about the clandestine affair, Heloises uncle took time to prove it for himself. He was enraged at finding out the truth. He kept them apart by banishing Abelard from his house and by appointing a guard to look after Heloise. However, they still found a way to correspond with each other.

When Heloise learned that she was pregnant, she sought her lovers opinion on what to do. She agreed at Abelards idea of elopement. He took her way to Brittany at his sisters house and there he brought up the subject of marriage which Heloise strongly refused. She thought that if they marry, it would be like robbing a shining ember from its midst. The world will curse her for the the loss of the church and the grief of the philosophers (Heloise 13). She points out in her letter that her uncles rage would not be pacified by their matrimony and Abelards reputation would surely suffer. Marriage would only be a suffering and a burden to both of them. Apart from this, one of her minor reasons of arguing against matrimony was that she was not sure that the man she loved would continue adoring her throughout their marriage. The title of mistress was what she preferred instead of being called his hidden wife. In her first letter to Abelard she states

The name of wife may seem more sacred or more binding, but sweeter for me will always be the word mistress, or, if you will permit me, that of concubine or whore. I believed that the more l humbled myself on your account, the more gratitude I should win from you... (Heloise 51)

However, Heloise soon gave in and agreed to be secretly married to Abelard. When she gave birth to their son, they left him under the care of Abelards sister. Abelard decided to lead the life of a monk and bid Hlose to do the counterpart  to join the nunnery. It is a life that centers on abstinence and devotion to God. This was the way he believed he could vanquish the guilt of what he had done. Heloise, although very young to consider becoming a nun, submitted to her husbands request in order to be equal with him in terms of suffering, unconcerned about the fact that she could still live a full life for she was only in her youth or that she could raise their son Astrolabe.

In her letters to Abelard, she declares that men are superior to women and their protection is needed by them (Gans). Expressing her pride to have attracted a man who seems irresistible to women, she also speaks highly of her teacher and lover. With these, we can infer that Heloise was obedient to the demands of the patriarch or the masculine. She gives us a vivid picture of the status of women in those times the inequality between the sexes and the oppression of women. Abelard, on the other hand, states his thought about the opposite gender that womens prayers are more readily heard by God than that of men. Their correspondence by the means of letters also reflects their views on religion. We can observe that Abelard often quotes biblical passages from the New Testament while Heloise mostly quotes the Old.

The following incidents after the marriage dramatically changed the fate of these two lovers. Canon Fulbert, who was Heloises uncle, concludes that Abelard cast off his niece by urging her into becoming a nun in Arguentil. He plots a vengeance against the man to whom he entrusted his beloved niece before.  They came without warning one night while the man was sleeping in his room. They bribed Abelards servant to execute their vengeful acts that is to remove Abelards manhood. Castration, at that time, was the punishment for men who were discovered committing adultery and non-marital sexual union in some areas in Europe (Irvine). It only implies that the practice of sexual union outside the bonds of matrimony is condemned by the church and their followers in the twelfth century. Abelards loss of manhood made him undergo a long enduring pain and public humiliation.

It is safe to say that in those moments, Abelard has lost everything he used to have his love, prestige, and self-esteem. His lengthy narrative of his emasculation in his letter to a friend speaks of his remorse towards the letter of the law stating that being a eunuch is an abomination to the Lord, and that no man whose testicles have been crushed or whose organ has been severed shall become a member of the assembly of the Lord (Abelard 18). Through Abelards letter, we can also observe his rage towards that bitter incidentthat losing his manhood is equivalent to losing power in a society led by the masculine. He also admits that his confusion induced by his remorse and misery led him to seek solace in the monastery of St. Denis while Heloise also devoted herself in a religious habit because of her obedient will. Their resolve to accept the religious vows marked the end of their affair until their correspondence after ten years.

So the couple went on their lives as servants of the Lord, devoting each day in repentance of their past. When Abelards letter to his monk friend landed on the hands of Heloise, it opened an access to the memories of their past and an opportunity to divulge what they repressed for too long a time. In their exchange of letters, their quotes and allusions are based mostly in the Bible or the Christian doctrines, a shift from their early philosophical years. Their history of a passionate yet elicit love affair in the period where they treated Christian doctrines as law, had a stronger inclination to philosophy than theology, and Heloise opposed marriage could be the basis to accuse them of being irreligious. However, in the latter part of their lives, they emphasized that God is the most influential force in their livesthat their parting was their way of repenting their sins and turning to the one who is above all else, the omnipotent God. With that, both of them transformed a strong physical love into a love which is beyond all bounds based on what Heloise calls as the chastity of spirit (50).

Abelard and Heloise were two lovers united by their similaritiestheir love of knowledge and learning and a love ever so passionate. But it seems like their love was beyond their time. Back then, a teacher-student relationship was viewed as improper. A non-marital union was considered as filthy as any crime. To have a child out of wedlock was immoral. It was the kind of love that broke all the rules and in consequence, they had to go through a series of misfortunes. Although many people still frown upon these things, they have been accepted as a choice everyone is free to make. Their differences, however, are additional factors of the ruin of their relationship. Heloise opposed marriage and described the implications it will have on both of them, but Abelard was insistent on his idea of what should be. The marriage stipulated the following misfortunes they encountered. Heloises obedience and submission to her master and lover, Abelard, prevented her from defending what she believed in. Abelards pride and selfishness, however, won him many enemies. But altogether, they were able to endure a life full of regret and misery through the courage that came from their loveknowing that they have each other, though they were denied by each others presence. Their striving love might have not succeeded in the end, but their letters have stood the tests of time. In the hearts of many, they are rejoiced simply because they serve as a reflection and inspiration to their lives.

The popes dominant and supreme position within the modern Roman Catholic Church, in addition to the extraordinarily independent state-like status accorded to the Vatican in institutions such as the United Nations where it holds membership, can in many ways be traced to the Early Middle Ages and the actions and advocacy of Pope Gregory the First.  Historically, Western Europe was in decline, the Byzantine Empire was increasingly formidable, and Romes early Christian institutions faced a number of threats to their very survival.  First, in terms of spiritual authority, the patriarch from Constantinople was attempting to merge both spiritual and secular authority in a way that directly challenged the legitimacy and the supremacy of the papal institution in Rome.  Second, at basically the same time that Gregory was compelled by the Lombards attacks on Rome to deal with the potential physical destruction of Rome he was also struggling to secure spiritual authority from the imperial leaders in Constantinople.  His main cultural achievements were creating the intellectual framework for the independence of the Roman Catholic Church in Rome, for vesting spiritual supremacy in the papal position of pope, for insulating spiritual matters and the clergy from the outside secular world, for exporting Christianity to England, and for attempting to connect a healthy type of spiritual life to a healthy type of human psychology.  Because of the constraints of this paper, this discussion will be limited to Pope Gregorys most substantial cultural achievement which was setting the framework for the independence of the Roman Catholic Church and for papal supremacy.

It is important to acknowledge, in the first instance, that many of Pope Gregorys cultural achievements would not have been possible absent what is known in the academic literature as the debate or the dispute over the use of an ecumenical title between Pope Gregory in Rome and the patriarch of Constantinople indeed, it has been noted in this respect that even with respect to modern schisms between Christian religious schools of thought and institutions, that  Nearly every observor of the Eastern OrthodoxRoman Catholic dialogue recognizes that the most significant obstacle to reunion is ecclesiological in nature, namely, the role of the Roman pontiff with respect to the broader church.  This obstacle originated with Pope Gregory when he refused to acknowledge that bishops possessed any independent or universal spiritual authority and when he simultaneously refused to concede the legitimacy of the patriarch of Constantinoples use of an ecumenical title.  Gregory believed and argued that supremacy was vested in the papal institution, that spiritual supremacy resided in Rome and could not be merged with imperial authority in Constantinople, and he tirelessly engaged in a letter-writing campaign in an effort to persuade Constantinople of his position.  His advocacy was consistently rejected and it was actually another special historical circumstance that helped Pope Gregory to prevail in asserting the spiritual supremacy of the papal institution and its independence from the secular world.  More specifically, Rome was at the time being attached by the Lombards and despite pleas for assistance from the imperial powers in Constantinople there was no help forthcoming.

Rome was in danger of being destroyed and Pope Gregory made the decision to engage in independent discussions with the attackers.  This assertion of independence enraged the imperial power it has been noted in this respect that  When he managed to negotiate an armistice with the invaders early in 595, the Byzantine Exarch in Ravenna summarily accused him of treason, and the emperor subsequently characterized him as a diplomatic fool HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5032809056(Demacopoulos 601).

Ultimately, however, Pope Gregory had saved Rome from destruction while simultaneously asserting papal independence and authority.  Though many of the spiritual goals he envisioned did not take place in his lifetime, Pope Gregory created the intellectual and religious foundations for the independence of the Roman Catholic Church, the absolute supremacy of the pope, and the insulation of the clergy from the outside secular world.

In the final analysis, confronted by a number of different types of threats, Pope Gregory managed to engage in a series of dangerous diplomatic efforts through which he saved Rome from destruction by the Lombards, asserted spiritual supremacy over the frequently angered imperial powers in Constantinople, and initiated a cultural and spiritual debate about religious authority which remains to this very day in terms of papal supremacy.  Pope Gregory changed the way people thought about early Christianity and his ideas remain influential more than 1,500 years later.  

In the year 1936, King-Emperor Edward the VIII desire of marrying Mrs. Simpson an American socialite who had been divorced twice brought about a crisis in the Empires constitution. The proposed marriage between the two was greatly opposed by the governments of the king in the UK and also the Dominions that were autonomous of the Commonwealth. Political, legal, moral, and religious objections were raised from all corners of the British Empire. Those opposed to this marriage perceived Mrs. Simpson as a consort who was not suitable for the king because of her previous two marriages which had failed. She was also perceived to be an individual who was driven more not for the kings love but the love of position and money. However, despite the strong opposition, King Edward eventually declared that he was in love with her and he would go ahead and marry Mrs. Simpson with or without the governments approval.

King Edwards abdication and conspiracy theories
The extensive unwillingness of accepting Mrs. Simpson to be married to King Edward and the refusal by the king to give up in his ambition of marrying her eventually led to his abdication in 1936. As a result of his resignation, King Edward remains as the only king of the British Monarch who has ever given up the throne voluntarily. Following his resignation in order to follow his hearts desire, Edward became the Duke of Windsor after earning the title of His Royal Highness. In the following year, Edward went ahead and married the love of his life, Mrs. Simpson whom he lived with for the next thirty five years of his life before he eventually died.

King Edwards marriage to Mrs. Simpson was opposed on societal, religious, legal, moral, political and nationalistic grounds. However, it is not only his marriage to the twice divorced woman that led to his abdication. On the societal grounds of his abdication, Edwards desire of modernizing the British monarchy and making it much more accessible, despite the fact that it was a popular thought among many people, it was severely feared by virtually the whole of the British establishment. The aristocracy was upset by Edward after he treated their ceremonies and traditions with disdain, several people felt offended by Edwards abandonment of highly accepted social mores and norms. Edwards deviation from the norm of the British society made him to lack a lot of support when he intended to pursue the love of Mrs. Simpson and was thus easy for him to resign.

In terms of religion, there was no other king of the British monarchy before him who had ever proposed to marry a woman after she had been divorced or divorced his wife in order to marry another woman, and thus Edwards quest to marry a woman who had divorced twice was completely outrageous. Even though Henry VIII notoriously separated the England church from Rome so that he could obtain a cancellation of his original marriage, Henry VIII, never divorced he only had his marriages annulled. The England church did not permit persons who were divorcees to remarry especially if the other spouse was not yet dead. This led to the consensus perspective that, it was impossible for King Edward to continue retaining supreme governor office in the England church and marry Mrs. Simpson who was a divorcee with two ex-husbands who were both alive.

Legally, Mrs. Simpson who was first divorced in US on emotional incompatibility grounds could not be recognised under the England church and in fact if challenged under the courts of England, she might also not have been accepted under the English law. During this era, both the English law and the church considered that divorce could only be allowed on the grounds of adultery. Consequently, going by this particular argument, the second and the third marriages of Mrs. Simpson were invalid and bigamous. Therefore, the marriage of Edward to Mrs. Simpson was not acceptable to the church and to the laws that governed the land.

On morality grounds, the ministers of the king found out that the behaviour and background of Mrs. Simpson were unacceptable especially for a future queen. There were innuendo and rumours that circulated all over the British society about her. Edwards mother was told that Edwards future wife controlled her son sexually as Mrs. Simpson had released Edward from sexual dysfunction that was undefined via practices she had learnt from a Chinese brothel. Dr. Don Campbell also held the same view, he in fact wrote to that effect suggesting that he suspected that Edward was abnormal sexually, which might have made it easy for the divorcee to have a strong hold on him. Furthermore, Phillip Ziegler, the official biographer of the king noted that there was some form of sadomachistic association between the two, as the king relished the bullying and the contempt that was bestowed on him by her. Again, the police detectives who had been following the former divorcee reported that while Mrs. Simpson was involved with the king, she also had another sexual association, with Guy Trundle who was a car salesman and mechanic and was in fact a married man. However, Edward either did not know all these allegations or simply opted to ignore them all together. The sexual behaviour of Mrs. Simpson was completely unacceptable for a queen and thus the king had to resign from his position.

Politically, when the king visited the mining villages which were depressed in the Wales, made a comment that something needed to be done. This immediately led to a lot of concerns especially among the politicians who were elected as the statement implied that the king would interfere with matters that were political, which traditionally had been avoided by the previous constitutional monarchs. As the Wales Prince, Edward had in several instances referred to the politicians in the left wing as cranks he also made several speeches aimed at countering the governments policy. During Edwards reign as the king of the Empire, he greatly interfered with political matters. He declined to accept advice from his ministers Edward opposed the move of imposing various sanctions on the Italians after they invaded Ethiopia he declined to receive the Ethiopias emperor who had been disposed and he also refused to support the nations of the league. Even though most of his comments made him to be very popular in the Wales, Edward became exceptionally unpopular especially in Scotland after he refused to open the Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, which was a new wing, since he claimed that he was still mourning for his late father. However, on that day, Edward was reported in the newspapers to be on a cavorting holiday Edward had actually turned down the Scotland public accession in order to meet Mrs. Simpson.  Thus when calls started coming pushing for the kings resignation, the public of Scotland could not support him, and since he had greatly interfered with political issues, the politicians also favoured his resignation.

The British government members became more disgusted by the proposed marriage, when they discovered that Mrs. Simpson was a Nazi agent during the period of Holocaust. The foreign office received some leaked dispatches emanating from Joachim von Ribbentrop, the German ambassador to UK. These dispatches made some revelations that Mrs. Simpson was associated with the horrific events that took place under the Nazis and her marriage to a British king would imply that Britain was in favour of the Holocaust that took place in Germany. There were also rumours going round suggesting that Mrs. Simpson had accessed some confidential papers belonging to the government, which Edward had left unguarded. While the king was abdicating, the protection officers who were guarding his future wife sent some reports indicating that there was a possibility of her flying to Germany from France. Moreover, files that were received from the FBI of US, which were written after the kings abdication revealed a series of several other allegations. Among the several allegations that were put forward by the FBI, the most damaging one is the one that indicated that Mrs. Simpson had a sexual relationship with Ambassador Ribbentrop. The FBI claimed that the ambassador could send seventeen carnations daily, each representing each time the two had a sexual intercourse. The kings abdication was thus supported by other nations such as Germany who felt that having a queen in the British monarch with love affairs with its ambassadors could spoil the diplomatic relations between her and Britain.

Conspiracy theories
By 5th December, 1936 it was already known by the individuals in the higher circles of the monarch that King Edward had already decided to abdicate. But this particular announcement reached the general public five days later and was accompanied by the first statement the king had issued on the same issue. This led to the conspiracy theory that the king did not abdicate voluntarily as it was reported but was actually forced by bigger forces with the leadership of the empire. In fact, the conspiracy theories further suggest that the king was not actually forced to resign from the throne because of his proposed marriage to Mrs. Simpson, but due to his firm political stand and his frequent interference with the political issues of the empire which was a role believed to be only handled by the elected leaders and not kings and queens. Therefore according to this conspiracy theory, Mrs. Simpson had nothing to do with Edwards abdication but the marriage was only used as an excuse of removing the king from the throne. It was quite evident that most political forces in the country greatly feared the leadership of Edward as a king since they would have most of their duties interfered with and would thus never enjoy fully their political freedom. The conspiracy theory thus explains that the politicians had to look for ways and means of ensuring that the king was removed from office as soon as possible.

The crisis that was facing the British Monarch was eventually resolved following the abdication instruments passage. However, the speed at which the new king was sworn in raises several questions indicating that Edwards removal had been planned by some people for quite some time. There are also queries concerning whether crisis that was facing the monarch was as easy as the times made the general public believe. Was the decision that was made by Edward simply a threefold decision, either accepting the advice he was being given by his ministers, engaging parliament into a conflict that was largely a private matter, or abdicating voluntarily Or is the political conspiracy theory right in its explanation that there were strong political strengths that were working, which had an effect that was profound on the opinion of the public, despite the fact that the public did not know anything concerning the strong political forces acting against their king.

A close comparison of all the individual accounts to this particular incidence that can be considered to be among the most highly publicised incidents of the twentieth century indicates that there were several factors which were employed that eventually led to the final decision by the king to resign. To comprehend how both the local and international press became very much involved in this matter, it is important to first comprehend the manner in which the government first became involved. At the time when King Edward inherited the British monarchs throne, the new king also inherited the old fashioned or conservative court left behind by George V. the court was mainly comprised of individuals who not only disapproved the new king but also mistrusted him. Some conspiracy theories propose that this distrust did not emanate from the love affair between Edward and Mrs. Simpson, but it resulted from the fact that the new king was an energetic and a youthful man who inherited the throne with great passion of reforming several aspects of the British society.

These conspiracy theories thus suggest that the conservative individuals, who were the majority in the court, were not ready for any reforms and had to make sure that no reforms were undertaken not only by the new king, but also by any other king who inherits the throne while they are still in the court. They therefore capitalised on the weak point of the new king which was his proposed marriage to kick him out of the throne.

Conclusion
Even though the opponents of King Edward looked for reasonable grounds to compel him to abdicate, his abdication remains highly controversial to date. It is not only controversial since he is the only king of the British Empire who has ever resigned voluntarily, but because the real intentions of those who pushed for his resignation are believed to have only used the proposed marriage as an excuse but they had their own reasons which they could not disclose. As the conspiracy theories indicate, there is a possibility that the king did not resign voluntarily as alleged but was actually forced to give up the throne by great political forces that were surrounding him. The reforms and comments of Edward before and after he became king had made him popular among the public, there was therefore need for those who were opposed to his policies and reform agenda to look for ways of tainting his name and they succeeded in doing so through the press, which made this incident to be highly publicised.

Throughout the course of history, stories of witchcraft controversies have been scattered in different parts of the world. The practice of witchcraft was feared and condemned in history because the practice was believed to be equal to making an overt or tacit agreement with the Devil, which would mean renouncing the baptismal vows and religious affiliation of the people who participate in it (Homza 153). Also, many of the extraordinary and harmful events in the past were attributed to magical results of witchcraft or sorcery. Belief in supernatural powers, the extraordinary role of causing events not normally within the province of human determination, and the participation in unorthodox rituals are some of the very foundations of witchcraft (Kors and Peters 1). These reasons served as basis for certain individuals to be hunted and punished either by religious institutions, because of their heretical affairs that opposed the teachings of the Church, or by the state government, because of the secular crimes like causing harm to other people or disrupting peace in a community. The belief and fear in the existence of witches can probably be characterized more as a result of cultural realities which were highly influenced by the prejudices of the more dominant religious beliefs in the past.

In some documents that have been gathered for this paper, a couple of previous cases of witchcraft that have been recorded in history are analyzed and attempted to be objectively explained based on their historical context and relation to reality. These documents intend to explain whether the witchcraft controversies were real or they were only a by-product of the cultural formation of the past that involved fear of the extraordinary. The first document that was explored is about the mass trial and conviction of several women believed to be practicing witchcraft in the year 1526. The document presented in Lu Ann Homzas book is entitled Deliberations on the Reality and Heresy of Witchcraft, 1526, and it presents a narrative deliberation about the decision of the Spanish Inquisition on the prosecution of the accused women. The people who were part of a group of Spanish consultants that reviewed the case of the prosecution and execution of witches in Navarre were composed of Dr. Arcilla, the Bishop of Guadix, the Bishop-elect of Granada, Dr. Luis Coronel, Master Arrieta, Dr. May, the Bishop of Mondonedo, Licentiate Polaneo, Dr. Guevara, and Licentiate Valdes. These men were mostly doctors of theology, leaders of the Church, or prominent religious servants of the community. Their analyses were mostly based on theological perspective that takes into highest consideration the truths of their religious beliefs before making conclusions on the situations of the women believed to be engaged in witchcraft.

The document explored is composed of significant opinions by influential people in the religious sector. It is actually a discussion that highlights how the occurrence of witchcraft effects was analyzed through the canon laws of the Church. Because witchcraft in early modern Europe involved explicit or implicit pacts with demons, and magic that was intended to harm, the document rightfully emphasizes the significance of the Spanish consultants in the deliberation of the witchcraft incidences (Homza 153). The strong detestation of the religious sectors towards witchcraft also helped to cement the idea that witchcraft is indeed real, existing, and powerful.

There were several doubts that were raised and hoped to be resolved by the consultants in this document. Most of the doubts are focused on the question of whether the persecuted women were indeed really witches and if there was legality on the punishments towards their execution. The first doubt questions whether the witches that were reviewed had indeed committed the crimes they had confessed or if they were only fooled (Homza 154). The Spaniards had a divided opinion on this. Half believed that the witches really committed the crimes, and that they indeed flew during their rituals, while the other half believed that their imagination had great influence on this. Even from the very first doubt that was raised, the role of imagination has already been mentioned. All throughout the document, the effect of imagination seems to have intensified the controversy on whether the impact of witchcraft was real or if their supernatural effects were only fictional and were only perceived to be real by the greater population. Indeed, there were several objects in the past that could have affected the imagination of the people such as hallucinogens. Other literary works suggest that evil-doers practice and accomplish their nefarious arts with the help of drugs, poisons, and medications (Weyer 283). This implies that there are several other factors that could have resulted in hallucinations of supernatural acts and contributed to the distortion of peoples imaginations. The deliberation document of the Spanish consultants shows how imagination makes confessions become less weighty when there are no proofs.

Another concern that was raised for the Spanish consultants was whether the knowledge of evil deeds and the punishment for this should concern the inquisitors of heresy. The deliberation document is actually intended for the people who held or will hold the trials for the accused witches. The prosecution of witchcraft tended to involve Spanish Inquisition in conflicts over jurisdiction and debates over process and penalties (Homza153). This part of the document reveals the influence of the religious leaders in the concerns of the secular government because their opinion mattered on when they are asked about the amount of prying that the Inquisition should involve themselves in. All of the men agreed on Dr. Arcillas statement that inquisitors should be informed about the crimes that the witches were accused of since they were regarded as infidelity to God (Homza 159).

The responses in some parts of the document say that the condemned witches should be punished but the consultants did not all agree to what extent should the women be punished and for what crimes (Homza 156). This significantly reflects the kind of mindset that the people who wrote the document must have. They reflect the truth that there are unresolved debates in determining the innocence of the women persecuted.

The document was intended to help the Spanish Inquisitors on the legality of their decision to execute those who were condemned for committing abnormal actions. Also, the document notes several remedies for the plague of the witches so it was also written to help society ease their problems regarding their fear and anger towards the accused witches. Dr. Arcilla recommended for these women to be re-instructed by teaching and example about faith.

Most of the men believe that reformation is the answer to cure the problem. Preachers and Bishops should be sent to the places that have witchcraft problems so that they could perform pontifical acts and administer sacrament of confirmation (Homza 163). This reflects the social concern that witches were as real as the intention of the religious sectors to cleanse them because the consultants recognize that the controversy was receiving too much attention that priests are pushed to do more converting and reforming.

The second document explored in this paper is Martha Fews On Her Deathbed, Maria de la Candelaria Accuses Michaela de Molina of  Casting Spells which historically examines an event in Guatemala in 1696 that was blamed to witchcraft magic and sorcery. In the document that contains testimonies from witnesses, Guatemalan commissioner Dr. don Joseph de Banos y Sotomayor acted upon the rumors that Michaela de Molina, a candy seller, had cast a harmful spell on Maria de la Candelaria, an Indian servant. The spell that Michaela was accused of causing made Maria extremely ill and expel and vomit numerous items from her body (Few 166). The incident was related to the strong accuses against people involved in witchcraft that they were very likely to hurt the people who caused harm to them. During the height of witchcraft beliefs, every negative and harmful incidence in a community was blamed to the person that citizens believed to be involved in sorcery. This was a cultural practice that projected a more terrifying image of witches because of the projected motivation that they had that empowered them when they caused destruction or inflict pain to people.

The document is probably intended for the people who wanted to also investigate the different effects of witchcraft in the old times. The document rightfully tackles whether what happened to Maria was really related to the destructive witchcraft practices. Maria experienced a different kind of sickness which had symptoms of nausea, fainting spells, and body swellings plus extraordinary symptoms, including the expulsion of various items through her nose and mouth such as blood, rocks, pieces of charcoal, locks of hair, and even rags (Few 166). Mythical powers of curse and dark magical rituals that were linked to witchcraft are blamed for this strange and unnatural event. The document recorded confessions of eyewitnesses that could prove to all people that the events were not only part of Marias imagination, for there were religious people who were also present when she was vomiting strange things.

Michaela was blamed for what was happening to Maria for several reasons. First, the two women had been involved in public disagreements that ended harshly. The idea of revenge by the means of harmful acts was a cultural stigma that was very powerful in the old times. Many of the reported cases of witchcraft attacks in history were linked to themes of vengeance or anger by one party to another. Michaela and Marias disputes had the necessary elements that could make people conclude that the accused wanted Maria to be harmed.

Also, another significant reason for Michaela to be the prime suspect of Marias hardship was the fact that one of Michaelas friends, Teresa, who was living with her during that time, was a known witch who was formerly jailed in a town near their town for the crime of murder. Dona Juana, the mistress of Maria, presumed that Michaela got help from the Teresa to do evil to her servant because they were both angry at her (Few 171).

The intended audience of the document was the people who wanted to seek justice as payment for the harmful actions of witchcraft. Michaela was tried and convicted of sorcery and the authorities seized her properties then imprisoned her in the public jail until May of the following year (Few 167). Michaela was fully convicted because the witnesses of the trial proved that she and her friends had deep grudges against Maria and that they wished her evil. The document reveals the truth that people saw anger as the strongest motivation that would force people to intentionally wish someone else to experience such horrible things. Because the illness was out of the ordinary, only the power of witchcraft could be blamed and used to explain how the extraordinary and harsh event occurred.

Both documents essentially describe what caused the heightened aberration against anything related to witchcraft and sorcery. The belief is muddled with accusations of harmful actions and is constantly linked to the works of the Devil. The documents that explore the trials and granting of punishments for women who were believed to engage in supernatural practices also reflect the religious and ideological values that were most dominant in the past. The controversies of witchcraft practices are not always treated to be historical and fact-based accounts. Rather, they would fall under cultural and anthropological issues that people could use to evaluate and analyze the mindset that was prevalent in the past.

The documents also reveal how people thought, behaved, and decided legal matters in the past. The controversies on witchcraft practices may not explain the realities of society wholly, but they reflect subjectivity of the past religious ideologies. Belief in the existence of witchcraft was heightened by the fear of what damaging and uncontrollable things the supernatural rituals could produce. The perception that they were real also strengthened the religious faith of more population because it was deemed as the only defense and weapon against whatever evilness witches can impose to people.

The term Renaissance refers to a period in human history when a series of diverse cultural developments took place in various parts of the European continent over a period of several hundred years between the Medieval or Middle Age and the Early Modern Period. Spanning between the 14th and 17th Centuries, this cultural transformation brought together various thinkers and artists and modern society can be traced back to the major breakthroughs in philosophy, political thought, science, technology and economics that were born from these great men in history. The Renaissance brought about great changes in learning, religion, politics and art and during this period, Europe experienced great intellectual, social and economic growth.

During the Middle Ages, civilization was intertwined with Christianity and Latin was the language for intellectuals while Rome served as the spiritual capital of European civilization. Christianity became an integrating Middle Age principle and the Church reigned as the most dominant institution. As the Late Roman Empire decayed and lost its grip on society, the church obtained most of the political functions previously occupied by the Roman State and became the only tool that was deemed capable of reconstructing the dying civilized life. Political leadership and the papacy became intertwined in delivery of various functions of society and the church played a great role in the election of political leaders who in turn became agents of the church and representatives of Christianity.  Christianity was taught to the German tribes whose customs had for a long time influenced the social and legal relationships of European society and for those living during the Middle Ages, a great drama of salvation was unfolding with Christians as the main participants. Gods revelation to the human race became the only accepted truth and the church the only avenue to heaven. To the minds of medieval people, the craving for a better after-life turned the church into an institution that society could not do without and church membership replaced the membership in a universal empire (Perry et al., 209-217).

Feudal law replaced Roman law and land became the property of Lords while the peasants became the serfs or slaves who worked on these lands. Agricultural land deteriorated from lack of fertilizers which the serfs could not afford. All aspects of peasant life including the choice of marriage partners were supervised by their Lords. The serfs worked but the Lords had the upper hand in everything while the clergy prayed and allowed all the discrimination to go on. Women were viewed as agents of the devil because of their sexual influence over men and wife beating became a common occurrence. With time, the church was so involved in the power politics of European societies that it gradually neglected its spiritual and moral responsibilities. Yet, as all this decay continued to take place, many Christians longed for the original piety and began to question the church as the institution of morality (Perry et al, 221-241, 280, 316).

The Renaissance created a new kind of human awareness and religion, which for some time had tightly controlled peoples lives, began to lose its grip upon society.  As a result, the church split, giving rise to a new protestant reformation. The Renaissance had given birth to skepticism and human beings began to question religion, tradition and authority. People changed their way of reasoning as they acquired a new kind of awareness of the world in which they lived a world in which every human being had a special role to play. Church leaders were replaced on the rank of power by wealthy merchants and bankers. Poverty lost respect and was replaced by honor and reputation. Individuals got freed from the bondage of tradition and authority and liberal rationalism was born. Liberal political philosophers such as Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, Bacon, Hume, Rousseau and Machiavelli introduced changes in political reality and also introduced the study of politics. They introduced a new perspective of power in which politics was not only a tool for the application of force, domination and selfishness but could also be used for the provision of peace and order in society through the state. These political thinkers no longer wrote in the popular Latin but in their own languages which their people would understand (Perry et al. 291-298, 306, 421-430).

During the Renaissance, classical learning was revived and writers and artists who greatly appreciated the Greek and Roman cultural forms introduced a new secular attitude towards the literal arts. Renaissance arts were developed to include Roman and Greek mythology which were developed in harmony and balance with Christianity. The elite in society revived a new kind of freedom, wealth and love for arts and a worldly life. People now believed that life in the present world was more valuable than the after-life and had to be enjoyed. Great artists such as Francesco Petrarca and Shakespeare greatly contributed to the development of the secular world. Various humanists such as Valla and Pico della Mirandola introduced a new school of thought that had a different approach to religion, magic and spirituality in general. Sex could now be expressed more openly and was considered as a form of spiritual bond similar to the relationship between people and God. Sexual traits such as homosexuality could now be defined. Human beings replaced God as agents of change in society (Perry et al 291-410).   The

Renaissance also led to a completely new understanding of science. New scientific explanations, innovations and methods came into being each claiming real knowledge and certainty. Human beings developed a new urge to gain more knowledge about the natural surroundings and master them. Leonardo da Vinci, for example was a famous artist and scientist who wrote great notes on architecture, engineering and science. He is also famous for the famous painting, Mona Lisa. Another famous Renaissance artist was the sculptor Brunelleschi who made great contributions to the discipline of architecture and together with others like van Eyck and Masaccio developed the moveable type writer. After 1450, the discovery of the printing press and growing prosperity among the masses helped to accelerate the growth of the Renaissance to other regions.  Galileo, the father of modern astronomy was the first person to use the telescope and invented the thermometer and first pump. The Renaissance had given people a new commitment towards shaping their destinies (Perry et al, 291-410).

Conclusion
The Renaissance was a cultural movement that completely changed peoples way of thinking and reasoning. Human beings developed a new desire for knowledge that led to many great discoveries that have developed into modern science and technology. But in the midst of such developments was a worse diversion from morality than had been experienced in the Middle Ages. As people became more broadminded, Christianity gradually lost meaning and skepticism gave rise to classicism, humanism and finally secularism. Even as some people sought piety through the Protestant Reformation, the church had lost its place as the moral guardian of society. Human beings gradually replaced God as agents of change in society. Society was indeed being modernized but at the expense of religion.

Group 1

Hans Holbein the Youngers portrait of George Gisze captures the mysterious stare of the subject while seated in his workroom. His surroundings suggest that he is a businessman or merchant going about his daily work, and at his midst are various objects that suggest not only his profession but his state in life  his age, his view of the world (assumed to be symbolized by the scales), his relationships (the flowers, letter in hand, seal on the desk). The lighting also implies that the time of the day this painting was captured, or at least envisioned by Holbein, was at around sunset. Being acquainted with a few of Holbeins other works such as the one of Thomas More and Henry VIII, George Gisze is comparatively almost monochromatic, only mainly disrupted by the sharp rose red color of his garment, and the there more than several elements at play in the frame.

Holbein, who is one of the most demanded portraitists of the period, was clearly objectifying the subject by depicting him as realistically as he could and using the young merchant as the main thematic. This is starkly different from paintings in the Middle Ages where a single human element is seldom painted, and rarer if the subject is not of a religious one.

In Holbeins piece, we, as spectators are given a glimpse on how Gisze lives and his personality, in reference to this world (Perry, Jacob and Chase), unlike in Medieval paintings where the spiritual world is almost always conveyed.

We can even see the young merchants tools of trade that we could picture his life outside the painting, pointing to the humanism that is much valued in the Renaissance era. His humanity is perfectly conveyed through form and realistic bodily proportion, that even the cracks on his face are captured  all in contrast with flat Medieval renderings,

Having to look at this work by Holbein, I cannot help admire the man more and more. There is clearly masterful skill in portraying the persona whose stare is towards an object that is outside the frame, much like the style used in St. Thomas Mores portrait. As already mentioned, I sense a life in this painting, and that despite the stillness of the elements involved in the picture. It reminds me of todays animated films that look as if they were live action sequences. I am also particularly arrested by the detail of his red garment that one could even make out the kind of fabric used and the reflection of light is perfect that it is so easy to look at and straightforward enough to believe.

Group 2

Sandro Botticellis high contrast work, Primavera, was completed 1482. It is stylized and rich, depicting classical deities. They are almost naked, slender and in action, and the narrative is not very much linear but varies per scene or individual and it works more like a vignette that as a whole they are only unified by space and shared characteristics. Although it works together in symbolism, it is possible that it does not have a structured narrative. There is not much perspective, since the background and the foreground meet in nearness, and the characters in the painting appear almost lined up from right to left without much variation in distance and spacing.

The depiction of mythological beings is a departure from the primarily Christian-spiritual composition of medieval artworks. Primavera is harmonious and balanced, with almost equal wait on the right and left sides, similar to many works in the middle Ages, with the difference being the execution. Botticelli achieves an almost melodic imagery, where characters appear to be dancing. This contrasts largely with the stiff proportion and harmony achieved by Duccios Maesta. Another strikingly Renaissance characteristic in Primavera is the various counterposes of the characters that make them appear more like they are moving. Not one of them, in fact, is in an upright, single-perspective pose typical of medieval art subjects.

It is rich and full of life, and it is perfectly justifiable why this is one of Botticellis finest pieces. The poses of the subjects who are all mythic characters and the graceful style reminds me of high quality linen flowing with the wind. Gracefulness  this, I think is the best word to describe the painting. It looks like a parade of divinity and attractiveness, with each one playing their own assigned roles. Venus or Aphrodite has rich garments, true to her position as the goddess of love and beauty. The symbolism Botticelli employed is unfortunately something beyond me, and I believe it takes one to have a rich knowledge of the spectrum and culture of the Renaissance period to be able to interpret it.

Group 3

It is almost a modern painting with its geometric shapes, strong parallel lines and perspective. The Story of St. Nicholas by early Renaissance painter Fra Angelico makes use of gradients and variations of green, red and yellow, making the paintings palette high in contrast and bright in mood. It is, undoubtedly, a scene in a Renaissance town where architecture is of highly mathematical proportion. The figure slightly right of center is a bishop atop a platform, giving blessings to the peasants who all have their backs from the spectators view, making the bishop the only character with larger movements. But more than the characters, it is really the buildings in the painting that are striking and distinct. Why the friar put too much emphasis on the walls and the doorways, and why St. Nicholas, a boy standing in the center of the frame does not draw attention, we can only guess

As already been mentioned, this is probably because of the Renaissance fascination with proportion and scientific perspective (Perry, Jacob and Chase). Paintings during the Middle Ages, in contrast, are usually rendered flat and outlined. Fra Angelicos uncommon painting composition and juxtaposition of elements and objects against perspectival space and structures makes him a true Renaissance artist  the kind of uniqueness and individuality in artists rarely observed in medieval art (Jensen). And space, that is what is most striking about Fra Angelicos painting. It is not just about his use of space in an outdoor setting, but the open archway and doorway also provide views of indoor space. It is crude and experimental but triumphs in execution and aesthetic, something not very familiar for those who are used to the representation of space in medieval times when only two-dimensional space was made use.

This painting particularly reminds me of cubism, a certain piece by Giorgio di Chirico, and the Russian suprematist movement. It is even wise to believe that this work by the friar was the inspiration for the development of those modern art movements and auteur styles. The narrow road that continue at an angle in the near distance and the images of the people trapped inside the buildings capture my attention at first site that I was not too keen on looking for the supposed main subject of the painting, St. Nicholas. Perhaps that was really the intention, not to make the Saint the main figure of the work. What puzzles me is how he depicts and distinguishes a poor and rich households in just one picture, and the role of the saintly figure with the halo is that of passivity.

Group 4

Lorenzo Ghibertis bronze relief Isaac Sends Esau to Hunt sculpted on a giant door shows a story from the Old Testament where Isaac is giving directions to young Esau whose hunting dogs stand in anticipation by his feet. Behind this central scene of the father and son is a figure of a woman in her bed, who is probably Esaus mother Rebekah. The hallway was drawn using the technique of providing space through parallel lines running towards a vanishing point, except that in this panel, the supposed point is disrupted by a horizontal line the signify the distance and scope of the house the characters are in. At the left side are some women talking, wearing rich robes and appear to be reviewing the days affairs.

Ghiberti used linear perspective which is characteristic of the Renaissance, and its use is particularly effective in a narrative portrayal of characters from the Scriptures. In medieval sculpture, especially seen in marvelous Gothic and Romanesque cathedrals, this reference to space and distance is not much employed. The naturalistic details of the characters garments is also what is admirable about Ghibertis work, since it helps create a sense of movement, and even age and status. Although this is not a distinguishably Renaissance technique and had been utilized in medieval work (such as the magi in Chartres cathedral), Ghibertis style is the much developed, meticulous form that emphasizes movement. The human beings are also depicted in their natural form and standing, with realistic proportions and anatomy (Perry, Jacob and Chase), decidedly different from impersonal forms of 13 to 15th centuries.

I feel like Ghibertis work is almost a painting, and this is achieved without the use of color to distinguish lines and forms, but are rendered into a bronze panel which made a narrative even harder to achieve. The relief could also have been otherwise flat without the employment of the theory of scientific perspective, that the viewer from outside could easily tell that the main characters are standing at the corner of the hallway and by some kind of stairs. The technique even made it possible for more details at the background where we see a boy running and columns that stand in line, framing the picture. These are those details about Renaissance sculpture, particularly this panel on the boy Esau and father Isaac by Ghiberti, who was likely at the height of his powers as a sculptor and storyteller judging from the masterful use of theory and foregrounding.