Social Work As A Social Worker - 2488 Words

Human services itself describes a multitude of possible agencies and therefore career opportunities. However one of the huge parts of human services is adoption, foster care, and assisting children in general. Being a social worker you can help make sure that children are placed in good, loving homes, where they are going to be taken care of. There has been countless people that have helped to form and shape the way that social workers help children; but by far one of the most influential people would have to have been Charles Loring Brace. Charles Loring Brace has help create the roots for how we today work as social workers and how the system functions as a whole. What is a social worker? This question could mean so many different†¦show more content†¦During this time churches would take care of people that where located locally around them, with tithe money that they collected. Another huge avenue to help the needy at the begging of the development of human services were hospitals. They would provide healthcare, food, and shelter to those in need. As time went on taking care of the poor, orphaned, elderly and sickly, and others in need changed as the world became more industrialized and as a result there where more people who needed help. One way you can see this was in England with the creation of the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601. This was a key turning point for human services as a whole, and it help guide social welfare in England as well as the United States to help and create the system that we have today. The way human services formed in the United States was affected a lot by England (Woodside McClam, 1998). When are country was first forming much of the aid people received came from neighbors and people in the community. We then created our own version of laws that guided how we took care of the needy modeled off of the Elizabethan Poor Law. This lasted for a while until people started to see those in need as just lazy or not taking care of themselves, and that if you aided them it was just encouraging them to do nothing. Social Darwinism and theories like it started to surface with many believing it was like a survival of the fittest and if

Iago’s Manipulation of Othello in Shakespeare’s Othello...

Iago’s Manipulation of Othello in Shakespeare’s Othello Once a seed of suspicion or doubt is planted in a person’s mind, the noxious effect of jealousy is soon to ensue. Jealousy and suspicion are Othello’s flaws hubris throughout the play and foreshadow to the audience his imminent downfall. He believes what Iago tells him so strongly that he compromises his close relationship with his best friend and his love for his wife. Iago manipulates Othello through the use of extortion, literary techniques, and his keen judge of character. His syntax and diction are so simple yet so powerful because he uses the correct rhetorical questions and addresses Othello with respectful terms such as â€Å"my lord.† He allows Othello do most of the talking†¦show more content†¦By using short, choppy sentence structure and weak diction, he seems less of a threat to Othello and his innocence is enhanced through it. Also, by always using rhetorical questions, he never does address what it is Othello is talking about. Iago distort s Othello’s thoughts and gets him to think he knows much more than he is telling him about the entire affair. This becomes especially clear when Othello asks for â€Å"ocular proof† and Iago confirms he has it using statements like â€Å"I should be wise; for honesty’s a fool and looses that it works for,† Act III Scene iii line 378-379, meaning he should not tell Othello what he knows or it would ruin Iago’s reputation. This sets Othello’s suspicions aflame and soon Iago is relaying to him the story about Cassio’s dream about he and Desdemona, and finally, he closes with the handkerchief, the most powerful thing which Othello held as a sacred gift of love to his wife. He is then completely overcome with jealousy and scorn for his former lover and friend, wanting death for the both of them. Throughout this passage, Iago’s main techniques of deception include lies, syntax and diction, and hoodwinking Othello into thinking his way. By quickly averting his conflict with Othello at the start of the scene, he easily avoids confrontationShow MoreRelatedA Malevolent Villain Essay1086 Words   |  5 Pagesvillain in one of William Shakespeare’s greatest tragedies, Othello. In this play Iago sets out to destroy Othello for multiple reasons, most of which are unsubstantiated imaginings. Iago’s role as a malicious villain is evidenced by his misogynist, racist, and manipulative behaviors. The first evidence of Iago’s malicious villainy is his misogyny. Iago hates women and repeatedly debases sex. He is cruel to his wife and does not show her love. Henry L. Warnken discusses Iago’s hatred for women sayingRead MoreDramatic Irony Used for Characterization in Othello by Shakespeare713 Words   |  3 Pagesfull of jealousy and betrayal, the plot of Othello is guided by this playwright’s usage of dramatic irony. Through the use of dramatic irony and characterization Shakespeare creates Iago, the most sinister character in all of literature. William Shakespeare, being born on April 23, 1563, was subject to an early renaissance education. With new ideals, such as humanism, spreading throughout Europe during this time it was inevitable that Shakespeare’s writings would be influenced by this. TheseRead MoreAnalytical Essay Othello1047 Words   |  5 PagesAll these themes are present in Othello. Most dominant, however, are manipulation and jealousy. Jealousy runs the characters’ lives in Othello from the beginning of the play, when Roderigo is jealous of Othello because he wishes to be with Desdemona, and to the end of the play, when Othello is furious with jealousy because he believes Cassio and Desdemona have been engaging in an affair, but manipulation the prominent action that fuels the jealousy within Othello. Some characters’ jealousy is fashionedRead MoreOedipus The King And The Moor Of Venice1294 Words   |  6 PagesOedipus the King was written by Sophocles in 430 B.C, and Othello, the Moor of Venice was written by William Shakespeare in 1604. Both stories involve tragedies that occur to the protagonists. Tragedy’s definition, â€Å". . . presents courageous individuals who confront powerful forces within or outside themselves with a dignity that reveals the breadth and depth of the human spirit in the face of failure, defeat, and even death† (Meyer 1091). Sophocles’ play informs us, the protagonists arrogances andRead MoreOthello, By William Shakespeare1599 Words   |  7 Pages William Shakespeare’s 16th century play Othello is a duplicitous and fraudulent tale set alternatingly between Venice in act 1, and the island of Cyprus thereafter. The play follows the scandalous marriage between protagonist Othello, a Christian moore and the general of the army of Venice, and Desdemona, a respected and intelligent woman who also happens to be the daughter of the Venetian Senator Brabantio. Shakespeare undoubtedly positions the marriage to be viewed as heroic and noble, despiteRead MoreTheme Of Jealousy In Othello1511 Words   |  7 PagesJealousy is not confined to Othello because there are multiple examples in the play that show other characters that portray characteristics of jealousy such as Iago and Roderigo. It is clear that jealousy is not confined to Othello as he is not the only character in the play that shows jealousy in different ways. In the play, ‘Othello’ written by William Shakespeare in 1603 and set in a Venetian society, even though Othello did kill his wife and himself Shakespeares jealousy overcame him mentallyRead MoreIn Shakespeare’s Othello, race is a concept that is only minimally explored. Characters in the play1400 Words   |  6 PagesIn Shakespeare’s Othello, race is a concept that is only minimally explored. Characters in the play assume that, since they are English, they are superior and foreign characters (like Othello the Moor) are inferior. This is not questioned much at all, and in fact it is assumed outright that Othello is indeed a lesser man because of his skin color and the ways in which characters like Iago and Roderigo treat him. While an early modern audience would accept this concept without hesitation, an audienceRead More Racism in William Shakespeares Othello Essay1059 Words   |  5 PagesRacism in William Shakespeares Othello The play, Othello, is certainly, in part, the tragedy of racism. Examples of racism are common throughout the dialog. This racism is directed toward Othello, a brave soldier from Africa and currently supreme commander of the Venetian army. Nearly every character uses a racial slur to insult Othello at one point in the play. Even Emilia sinks to the level of insulting Othello based on the color of his skin. The character that most commonly makes racistRead MoreOthello: Good vs Evil1525 Words   |  7 PagesGood Or Evil: A Critical Analysis of Othello’s Main Characters William Shakespeare’s Othello is a classic depiction of a struggle between good and evil. In the play,, the characters are faced with the choice to either conquer or succumb to the overpowering force of evil. Shakespeare places his characters on a sort of spectrum in which a character’s amount of god or evil can be represented by a shade of color: black representing pure evil, white representing absolute goodness, and a shade of greyRead More Othello, The Moor of Venice Essay examples1319 Words   |  6 PagesOthello, the Moor of Venice is one of the major tragedies written by William Shakespeare that follows the main character, Othello through his trials and tribulations. Othello, the Moor of Venice is similar to William Shakespeare’s other tragedies and follows a set of specific rules of drama. The requirements include, following the definition of a tragedy, definition of tragic hero, containing a reversal of fortune, and a descent from happiness. William Sh akespeare fulfills Aristotle’s requirements

China †the aims and effects of the one child policy Free Essays

A variety of social policies aimed at controlling population change have been established around the world. But in this answer I will be evaluating a very controversial example of a policy that aimed to tackle rapid population growth by reducing fertility rate (also known as anti-natalist) – China’s One-Child Policy. During the second half of the twentieth century, the Chinese government became concerned about the population growth; this is mainly due to the philosophy of the government under Chairman Mao, in the mid-twentieth century, which was that ‘a large population gives a strong nation’ and so the government encouraged people to have more and more children. We will write a custom essay sample on China – the aims and effects of the one child policy or any similar topic only for you Order Now This consequently led to an increase in population of 55 million every year and a famine in 1962 which caused nearly 30 million deaths. This massive growth in population forced a policy change in 1974, in order to avoid a Malthusian-type disaster in the future (The theory that population increases more rapidly than the food supply leading to famine and, inevitably, death). It encouraged the country to reduce the birth rate by the slogan ‘wan-xi-shao’ which called for later marriages, longer gaps between children and fewer children. However, this policy was not effective enough, and the population continued increasing and did not follow the pattern of the DTM (demographic transition model). This then led the government to introduce the one-child policy in 1979, which set strict limits on the number of children that a couple were allowed to have. In order to further enforce this policy; strong pressure was put on women to use contraceptives (e.g. contraceptive pills) which were more widely available. Special family planners and ‘granny police’ were introduced in order to make sure that women were practising contraception and were instructed to report any pregnancies. The government also introduce incentives like; free healthcare and education for one child and then fines for more than one child. Also, more controversially, enforced late abortions and sterilisation became common, which mainly human rights activist heavily criticised and opposed. However, the policy had very negative effects on the country. Firstly, it led to female infanticide; where couples preferred sons, and baby girls were killed so they could have another chance of getting a boy. This occurred more often in rural areas, where there was less control from the government, and also where traditions were most important. This was mainly because male descendents were preferred as they can carry on the family name from generation to generation. This male dominance led to an imbalance in male to female sex ratio, where the number of men far exceeded that of men. This then further lowered fertility rates as there weren’t enough women ‘to go round’. As well as an imbalance in the sex ratio, where was also an imbalance in the age ratio, as the policy vastly increased the dependency ratio and the country suffered from an ageing population. This was mainly due to the ‘4-2-1’ situation, which meant that ‘1’ child had to look after their ‘2’ parents and ‘4’ grandparents all at the same time and because of the increasing life expectancy. The policy also led to social implications on the child itself, such as the spoilt ‘little emperor’ syndrome where the attention of the family fell on one child. It is also suggested that it had a negative effect on the child’s social skills, as they grew up with no other siblings, therefore found it harder to integrate into society and led to poor communication skills. However, from 1990 onwards, the policy was slightly relaxed in order to combat some of the problems. For example, only-child couples were allowed to have two children, in order to relieve some of dependency on the children and also because they were concerned about the economic implications of an ageing population. In addition, the policy became harder to enforce for reasons such as the revolution in global communication and socialisation, which opened up the country to much greater social influence from the west. However, in more remote parts of the country, the policy is still encouraged. For example, the authorities in Guangdong (state capital) order 20,000 abortions and sterilisations by the end of 2001. Despite all of the negative implications, the decrease in overall population growth has had some positive effects, such as the positive economic growth. This was mainly due to the major decrease in demand for resources to support the needs of the population, which in turn led to a reduction in the stress placed upon the environment. There was also a drop in unemployment due to labour surplus and more disposable being available due to less money being spent on children. In conclusion, I believe that the one-child policy was a very brutal policy that disregarded the basic human rights of people and that a more gentle approach should have been taken. However, there is no argument that population management was inevitable in order to maintain a high standard of living, and that the one-child policy has avoided a Malthusian-type disaster (e.g. famine and war) and has better stabilised the population of China. This is because 400 million births were prevented and the annual growth rate had fallen to 0.6% as well. It is also clear that the policy is evolving for the better, as by 2006 the Chinese government moved towards a more health-orientated policy and committed itself to implement international agreements, promoting mother and child welfare. How to cite China – the aims and effects of the one child policy, Papers

Alice Walker Everyday Use Essay Example For Students

Alice Walker Everyday Use Essay This short story first articulates the metaphor of quilting to represent the creative legacy that African Americans have inherited from their maternal ancestors. The central theme of the story concerns the way in which an individual understands his present life in relation to the traditions of his people and culture. Dee tells her mother and Maggie that they do not understand their â€Å"heritage,† because they plan to put â€Å"priceless† heirloom quilts to â€Å"everyday use. † The story makes clear that Dee is equally confused about the nature of her inheritance both from her immediate family and from the larger black tradition. The matter of Dee s name provides a good example of this confusion. Evidently, Dee has chosen her new name (†Wangero Leewanika Kemanjo†) to express solidarity with her African ancestors and to reject the oppression implied by the taking on of American names by black slaves. To her mother, the name â€Å"Dee† is symbolic of family unity; after all, she can trace it back to the time of the Civil War. To the mother, these names are significant because they belong to particular beloved individuals. Dee s confusion about the meaning of her heritage also emerges in her attitude toward the quilts and other household items. While she now rejects the names of her immediate ancestors, she eagerly values their old handmade goods, such as the hand-carved benches made for the table when the family could not afford to buy chairs. To Dee, artifacts such as the benches or the quilts are strictly aesthetic objects. It never occurs to her that they, too, are symbols of oppression: Her family made these things because they could not afford to buy them. Her admiration for them now seems to reflect a cultural trend toward valuing handmade objects, rather than any sincere interest in her â€Å"heritage. After all, when she was offered a quilt before she went away to college, she rejected it as â€Å"old-fashioned, out of style. † Yet a careful reading of the story will show that Dee is not the only one confused about the heritage of the black woman in the rural South. Although the mother and Maggie are skeptical of Dee, they recognize the limitations of their own lives. The mother has only a second-grade education and admits that she cannot imagine looking a strange white man in the eye. Maggie â€Å"knows she is not bright† and walks with a sidelong shuffle. Although their dispositions lead them to make the best of their lives, they admire Dee s fierce pride even as they feel the force of her scorn. Taken as a whole, while the story clearly endorses the commonsense perspective of Dee s mother over Dee s affectations, it does not disdain Dee s struggle to move beyond the limited world of her youth. Clearly, however, she has not yet arrived at a stage of self-understanding. Her mother and sister are ahead of her in that respect. The thematic richness of â€Å"Everyday Use† is made possible by the flexible, perceptive voice of the first-person narrator. It is the mother s point of view which permits the reader s understanding of both Dee and Maggie. Seen from a greater distance, both young women might seem stereotypical one a smart but ruthless college girl, the other a sweet but ineffectual homebody. The mother s close scrutiny redeems Dee and Maggie, as characters, from banality. For example, Maggie s shyness is explained in terms of the terrible fire she survived: â€Å"Sometimes I can still hear the flames and feel Maggie s arms sticking to me, her hair smoking and her dress falling off her in little black papery flakes. .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .postImageUrl , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:hover , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:visited , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:active { border:0!important; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:active , .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u2f215df225f6e68c276a329896cab81b:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Wuthering Heights And Power Of Love; EssayHer eyes seemed stretched open, blazed open by the flames reflected in them. † Ever since, â€Å"she has been like this, chin on chest, eyes on ground, feet in shuffle. † In Dee s case, the reader learns that, as she was growing up the high demands she made of others tended to drive people away. She had few friends, and her one boyfriend â€Å"flew to marry a cheap city girl from a family of ignorant flashy people† after Dee â€Å"turned all her faultfinding power on him. Her drive for a better life has cost Dee dearly, and her mother commentary reveals that Dee, too, has scars, though they are less visible tha n Maggie s. In addition to the skillful use of point of view, â€Å"Everyday Use† is enriched by Alice Walker s development of symbols. In particular, the contested quilts become symbolic of the story s theme; in a sense, they represent the past of the women in the family. Worked on by two generations, they contain bits of fabric from even earlier eras, including a scrap of a Civil War uniform worn by Great Grandpa Ezra. The debate over how the quilts should be treated sed or hung on the wall summarizes the black woman s dilemma about how to face the future. Can her life be seen as continuous with that of her ancestors For Maggie, the answer is yes. Not only will she use the quilts, but also she will go on making more she has learned the skill from Grandma Dee. For Dee, at least for the present, the answer is no. She would frame the quilts and hang them on the wall, distancing them from her present life and aspirations; to put them to everyday use would be to admit her status as a member of her old-fashioned family.

Training Session Report for Expatriates

The Innocence of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots

The Innocence of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots Free Online Research Papers Fotheringhay Castle, located seventy-five miles outside of London in Northhamptonshire, has been the location of some of the greatest historical events in European history. It was the birthplace of Richard III, a special gift to Catherine of Aragon by her husband Henry VIII and the site where Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots lost her head to an executioner’s axe. On the morning of February 8, 1587, Sir Thomas Andrews, Sheriff of Northhamptonshire, appeared outside the chamber door for the room of Mary Stuart. The forty-four year old queen arose from her prayers and followed Andrews into another room to say her final farewell to her servants. The once beautiful queen of France and Scotland lost her elegance to â€Å"premature aging† as a result of her captivity. Mary proceeded to the great hall with two of her maidens, Jane Kennedy and Elizabeth Curle, by her side. In front of one-hundred spectators, Mary walked onto a wooden stage where she noticed two men standing next to an axe. She slowly began to realize that these men dressed in black gowns would cause her demise. Robert Beale recited the execution orders to the crowd as Mary sat listening to them without any emotion. Once Beale finished reading the orders, the Dean of Peterborough rose to give the last rites. As he began, Mary interrupted him when she annunciated her prayers in Latin. The bull knelt beside Mary and asked her forgiveness for the task placed before him. Mary replied, â€Å"I forgive you with all my heart, for now, I hope, you shall make an end of all my troubles.† When the executioner undressed Mary and revealed a red velvet petticoat, an overwhelming sense of shock appeared on the faces of the crowd. As Jane Kennedy placed the blindfold over Mary’s eyes, she told her maidens not to cry for her. Mary knelt before the block and positioned her head for a perfect fit. The bull proceeded with a swift strike only to land the axe in the back of Mary’s head. Eyewitness accounts have two different stories about Mary’s expression when this accident happened. Some have claimed that Mary whimpered silently and others believed they heard her scream in agony. The executioner proceeded with a second strike of the axe and successfully severed the head from her body. As the executioner lifted Mary’s head, her curly wig detached and the head fell back to the ground. God Save the Queen! Protestants celebrated in victory throughout England and Scotland when they heard the news about the death of Mary, Queen of Scots. For years the queen has been at the center of many conspiracies against the life of Elizabeth I of England. In addition, she suffered continuous investigations in Scotland and England for the murder of her second husband, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. Mary maintained her innocence throughout various inquiries and trials to determine her guilt. She blamed the ambitions of zealous Catholic servants who sought to further the Catholic cause for her benefit as well as their own. Many nineteenth century European historians agreed that Mary was a victim and examined hundreds of documents, such as the State Papers, to prove their claim. However, most modern-day historians believe in Mary’s guilt and claim that Elizabeth I and Lord Darnley died at her hands. In The True Life of Mary Stuart Queen of Scots, John Guy wants to break away from modern traditions o f relying heavily on secondary sources because they distort the truth. Guy studied many primary source documents to reveal that Mary’s crimes were not significant enough to cause her death. In Guy’s book he examines the plots against the life of Elizabeth I, the murder of Lord Darnley as well as correspondence between Mary and the conspirators. His conclusion shows Mary did not have any knowledge about her husband’s murder nor did she intend to murder Elizabeth. Mary never received the fair chance to defend herself and Elizabeth’s Privy Council had their mind made set about her guilt. This study will examine the pressures faced by Mary on issues of marriage and participating in Catholic plots to place her on the English throne. In addition, Mary’s innocence in the murder of Lord Darnley and the Babington conspiracy against Elizabeth’s life is revealed. This study will serve as an extension to Guy’s work in an effort to show a pattern of inconsistencies in the evidence used to implicate Mary in these crimes. These inconsistencies are found in letters written by Mary and then translated into fabricated copies by the English and S cottish governments to prove her guilt. The primary goal of these two governments was to stop the threat of a Catholic heir to the Protestant throne in England at all costs. In order to understand the hostility faced by Mary Stuart, it is necessary to examine her claim to the English throne. After the death of Edward VI, the only son of Henry VIII by Jane Seymour, Mary Tudor, his eldest sister, became Mary I of England. Mary was the daughter of Henry VIII and his first wife, the Catholic queen Catherine of Aragon. She married Philip II of Spain and failed in her attempts to produce an heir to the English throne. On November 6, 1558, Mary finally acknowledged Elizabeth as the rightful heir to the English throne. When she died eleven days later, Nicholas Heath, Archbishop of York and Lord Chancellor, announced Elizabeth as Mary’s successor during the Parliamentary session of that year. Elizabeth’s ascendancy to the throne of England was a victory for all Protestants throughout England. Catholics did not share in the sentiments felt by Protestants in Elizabeth’s ascendancy to the throne. They believed that Elizabeth was the illegitimate daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. When Henry married Anne Boleyn, his divorce from Catherine of Aragon had not been recognized by the Catholic Church because she was still alive. Furthermore, when Henry divorced and executed Anne in 1536, the Act of Parliament declaring Elizabeth as illegitimate had never been repealed. Since Elizabeth’s illegitimacy continued to remain an issue, Mary Stuart, the only daughter of James V of Scotland and Mary of Guise, appeared the rightful heir because she was the granddaughter of Henry VII of England. The Guise family of France maintained Mary Stuart’s right to the English throne based on Mary Tudor’s decree to return England to the embrace of the Catholic Church. However, when Pope Paul IV refused to declare Elizabeth illegitimate, all hopes for the English throne by Mary Stuart and the Guise family diminished. Paul did not want offend Philip II of Spain, who sought Elizabeth’s hand in marriage after the death of his wife Mary Tudor. Although Elizabeth was not declared illegitimate by the Pope, Mary continued to believe that she deserved the title Mary II of England. Her greatest betrayal came when Philip II of Spain joined forces with Catherine de Medici to stop the Guise power structure in France. In 1561, both powers signed the Treaty of Edinburgh. The agreement acknowledged Elizabeth as the rightful heir to the English throne. Conyers Read suggests France came to an agreement easily with Spain because their exhaustion from half of a century of fighting with the Hapsburgs. At this point, Catherine de Medici wanted to assert her power on the French throne. Elizabeth’s ascendancy to the English throne received a stroke of good luck because the powers of France and Spain, along with the papacy, did not combine forces against her. Mary could not bring herself to ratify this treaty because she felt it was an insult to her honor as the rightful queen of England. Elizabeth maintained her respect for Mary since she was another female sovereign. The Queen of England wanted to resolve any misunderstandings about the Treaty of Edinburgh, but Mary feared that any agreement made might decrease her chances in succeeding Elizabeth to the throne. The Scots Lords advised Mary to come to terms with Elizabeth in exchange that she recognized her as â€Å"heiress presumptive.† Mary sent her secretary, William Maitland, to England to persuade Elizabeth in revising the terms of the Treaty of Edinburgh to include her as Elizabeth’s successor. Elizabeth’s response only assured Mary that she would win the love of the English people to regard her as the rightful heiress. Mary was not pleased with this news and sent Maitland back to England to warn Elizabeth about amending the treaty or action maybe taken to acquire the English throne. Maitland also advised Elizabeth that Mary requested an audience with her soon. Elizabeth could not approve any requests to meet with Mary with the religious war between the Catholics and Huguenots in France. She did not want to strengthen the position of the Guise family that may bring potential suffering to the French Protestants. Elizabeth agreed to meet with Mary around September 20, 1562 when the religious war was projected to end. Maitland returned to Scotland to relay Elizabeth’s message to Mary. In his absence, Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, advisor to Elizabeth, sent the queen an urgent letter advising of another religious war in France. Elizabeth wanted to assist the Huguenots and recognized that Mary’s Catholic associations might overthrow them. Elizabeth postponed the meeting for the remainder of the year and sent her messenger, Sir Henry Sidney, to Scotland to advise Mary of her plans. On January 12, 1563, Elizabeth’s Second Parliament met in order to settle the question on the succession. Parliament urged Elizabeth to marry but she refused to adhere to their suggestions. In order to deter them away from the issue, Elizabeth replied that she would one day marry and have children. In regard to the issue of Mary’s succession, Parliament recommended a marriage proposal between her and Elizabeth’s dearest friend, Robert Dudley, the first Earl of Leicester. Elizabeth trusted Dudley was the best candidate to promote the welfare of England in the North by ending the threat of foreign invasion from Scotland. Dudley was Protestant and an acceptable choice to the Calvinist lords who wanted Scottish Catholic powers to remain in check. Maitland met with Mary to discuss the marriage proposal and realized this would secure Mary as an heiress to the English and Scottish thrones. Elizabeth’s Secretary of State, William Cecil, also approved of the plan t o bring peace on the issue of succession. When Maitland returned to Scotland, he did not tell Mary of the news upon his arrival. However, the marriage plan did get back to King Philip of Spain. Maitland kept the marriage proposal a secret because Dudley’s family heritage consisted of traitors. Elizabeth granted Dudley the Kenilworth Castle at Warwickshire in an effort to make him more appealing to Mary. Mary’s true interest lied with the son of Philip II, Don Carlos, who began to fall ill. Elizabeth sent Thomas Randolph as a confidential agent to discuss the marriage plans with Mary. She gave him instructions to keep the name of Dudley a secret when discussing the plans. Once he arrived, Mary’s councilors pressed Randolph to reveal the name of the suitor. When he told Mary that the suitor was Dudley, she instantly rejected the marriage plans because of Dudley family’s reputation as a traitor. After Parliament received this news, Cecil offered Mary the promise of English secession with the approva l of Parliament. In addition, Elizabeth elevated Dudley’s status to the title of the Earl of Leicester. Mary continued to refuse the marriage proposal and began to steer in the direction of Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley. Mary granted him titles such as the Earl of Ross and the Duke of Albany. They married on July 29, 1565 at the Holyrood Palace in Edinburgh. With this marriage, Mary wanted to rule Scotland without interruption, restore the Catholic faith and pursue the rebellious lords of England. As the marriage progressed, Darnley became lazy, unpleasant, arrogant and a habitual drinker. Maitland began to notice Mary’s discontent with him and wanted to rid her of her troubles. On November 20, 1566, Maitland, accompanied by other Scottish lords, followed Mary to Craigmillar Castle in Edinburgh to solve the problem with Darnley. Without Mary’s knowledge or consent, Maitland schemed different ways for Mary to become free of Darnley once and for all. Initially he pushed for a divorce and wanted the Earl of Moray, Mary’s half-brother, to consent to the plan. According to Frank Meline, the Scottish Lords only pushed for the divorce in order to protect their land grants, which Darnley stood to inherit upon Mary’s twenty-fifth birthday. Moray did not agree to the divorce plans because Darnley was still free to cause further mischief. At the encouragement of the Scottish Lords, James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, decided to join the plans for Mary’s divorce from Darnley. According to Meline, the lords selected Bothwell as Mary’s new husband because they believed he would protect their land grant interests. Bothwell arrived at the decision to encourage Mary to divorce Darnley because of his desire to elevate his political status. Mary considered Bothwell as a close friend during her troubled marriage with Darnley, although it is not clear whether or not an affair took place between them. Romantic historians, such as Antonia Fraser, believed it was Bothwell’s love for Mary that inspired him to join the divorce plot. Meline and Read insisted that Mary’s love for Bothwell encouraged him to seek a divorce from his wife and marry her. Guy’s position on the entire love affair is that Bothwell never possessed any passion or for the Scottish Queen. He wanted to use Mary sexually as well as experience the feeling of ruling beside her as king. Bothwell and Maitland suggested the idea of divorcing Darnley to Mary, but she feared that her son would become an illegitimate heir to the English throne. After continued mental exhaustion in her marriage, Mary agreed to the divorce plans. Mary did not realize that eventually these divorce plans would escalate to a murder plot, which forced her to abdicate the Scottish throne. James Douglas, Earl of Morton, wanted to take the plans further than divorce. Morton’s anger against Darnley still boiled from the Rizzio Plot. Bothwell’s ambitions for a chance to reign as king beside Mary encouraged him to join the plot to murder Darnley. On February 8, 1567, Mary visited Darnley, who suffered from syphilis, at the Kirk O’ Field house in Glasgow. Bothwell wanted Mary to persuade Darnley to join her in returning to Edinburgh where the other Scottish lords awaited him. Bothwell deceitfully encourage Mary to believe that Darnley wanted to kidnap James VI and become his regent. When she approached Darnley about this accusation, he denied any knowledge of it and Mary returned to Edinburgh. Two days after her departure, there was an explosion at Darnley’s house and he was killed. Bothwell married Mary on May 15, 1567. The marriage to Bothwell proved disastrous for Mary’s reputation in Europe and caused the collapse of her reign as Queen in Scotland. Bothwell had a terrible temper and became very jealous of Mary. On June 15, The Scottish lords were united against Mary because they declared Bothwell guilty of Darnley’s murder and wanted complete hegemony over Edinburgh. After Mary and Bothwell arrived at Edinburgh Castle, Morton and his troops gathered at Carbury Hill. Mary surrendered and was taken prisoner to Lochleven Castle in Edinburgh for eleven months. According to Guy, Mary stood behind her husband because he was her only protector. Instead, Bothwell escaped and Mary never saw him again. Elizabeth sent Sir Thomas Throckmorton to Scotland to appear before the Lords of the Congregation. He advised them of Elizabeth’s plan to take action against them if Mary remained a prisoner. They did not heed her orders because Mary had abdicated the throne and gave the lords consent to her son’s coronation. Moray accepted the appointment as regent to Prince James without any concern of Elizabeth’s threats. Throckmorton knew there was no reason to remain in Scotland and returned to England. Mary escaped Lochleven on May 22, 1568 with the help of the Laird of Lochleven’s brother, George Douglass. She sent word to Elizabeth requesting that she receive her upon her arrival and provide her with supplies. Elizabeth’s Privy Council did not accept the news of her arrival and Cecil raised concerns on the threats she posed to England. Cecil believed that Mary would assemble her friends to assist her in proclaiming her rights to the English throne. Furthermore, Cecil assumed that Mary would try to gain the support of Scotland while she sought refuge in England. Upon Mary’s arrival to England, Cecil held an inquiry at Westminster to determine if Mary had a role in the murder of Lord Darnley. Mary consented to the inquiry as long as she was restored to the Scottish throne upon a favorable verdict. The Earl of Moray, who offered his assistance in the plot on Darnley’s life, turned his back on his sister. His apparent deceit may have been to exonerate his name and separate himself from the conspiracy. Moray produced evidence against Mary by submitting a silver casket containing eight letters found under Bothwell’s bed after he escaped. The Casket Letters were letters written by Mary to Bothwell out of her love for him. Meline offered valid points to prove the Casket Letters produced by Moray were forged. When Bothwell escaped, he had enough time to pack all of his belongings before his flight. It is highly unlikely that he would forget to take letters such as these. Secondly, the silver casket was found by a former attendant of Bothwell who knew what was contained inside of it. In an effort to incriminate Mary, Moray may have forged these letters based on assumptions of what may have been discussed in them. None of the letters contained Mary’s signature or her seal. Finally, all of the letters were translated from French into Scotch. The original French version never surfaced, which suggests that Bothwell took the letters with him. Agnes Strickland proves one last pi ece to the puzzle to prove Mary’s innocence in the murder of Darnley. Strickland provides a letter written by Bothwell on his deathbed confessing that he devised the plot to kill Darnley along with Moray and Morton. Bothwell stated that Mary did not have any knowledge that Darnley was murdered. The commissioners ignored this confession as well as Parliament when the issue resurfaced during Mary’s trial at Fotheringhay. During the trial, Moray produced a letter written by Mary of her desire to murder Bothwell. Mary denied this letter and claimed that it had been forged. Throughout the inquiry, Mary persistently requested to see the original letters for which she was accused of writing. The English commissioners, which consisted of the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Sussex and Sir Ralph Sadler, denied her access to them and stated that they were not convinced of Mary’s innocence. They agreed that the letters contained too much information that Mary could only know. Jane Dunn gives a romantic twist to the story when she claimed that the Duke of Norfolk began to in fall in love with Mary and was more sympathetic to her plight. Dunn states that Norfolk believed that Elizabeth only wanted to keep Mary as a prisoner and Moray wanted to stain the name of his sister. The inquiry ruled that Mary remained Titular Queen of Scotland from her permanent residence in England. Mary was removed to Tutbury Castl e in Staffordshire under the guard of George Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury. During this time, Mary held regular communications with Guerau de Spes, a Spanish ambassador sent to England by Philip II. His orders from Philip were to rise against Elizabeth through disgruntled English Catholics, establish Mary on the throne and restore Catholicism as the national faith. This became the central theme in future plots involving ambitious Catholics who wanted to escalate Mary’s power. De Spes believed that the Duke of Norfolk would serve as a good husband for Mary. Norfolk expressed his plans to marry Mary and dispose of William Cecil from the Council. Mary favored this idea because she wanted to reclaim the Scottish throne and gain her freedom. In May, 1569, Mary received a formal proposal of marriage from Norfolk. All those who were involved in the marriage plot wanted to keep it a secret until Elizabeth was persuaded of the advantages from such a union. When Moray heard of the marriage plan through courtly gossip, he sent a letter to Elizabeth to warn her o f the plan. Elizabeth summoned Norfolk to confess his marriage plans, but he refused to answer her. She continued to give the duke chances to confess, but he denied the marriage plans even as they moved forward. Elizabeth ordered Norfolk to appear before the English Court because of his unwillingness to cooperate. He fled to Kenninghall in Norfolk as Cecil and other members of council urged him not to escape. Norfolk was arrested while en route to Windsor and placed in the Tower. The Queen wanted to try him for treason and if convicted, she would take the law into her hands. Cecil advised against this because it might portray her as a tyrant. After Norfolk was released from the Tower, Roberto Ridolfi, an Italian Catholic, went to London as a business agent. After being unsuccessful in the rebellion of the northern earls in November, 1569, he decided that any revolt used to cede foreign powers was necessary. He showed his plans to place Mary on the English throne to Pope Pius V on February 25, 1570. Pius approved of his plans and published a Bull of Excommunication for Elizabeth and all her subjects. Mary wrote to Norfolk on February 8, 1571 outlying Ridolfi’s plan and invited him to join. Norfolk initially resisted until Mary’s agent in London, John Leslie, the Bishop of Ross, encouraged him to support Ridolfi. At the same time, Parliament assembled in May, 1571 to pass three acts on High Treason. These Acts stated that an act of treason was committed when anyone denounced Elizabeth as the rightful queen, any form of literature contained elements of heresy or any papal bull was passed into England. When the Bishop of Ross was threatened with the rack, his confession revealed that Norfolk participated in the plot to free Mary. The Duke was arrested on charges of High Treason and, once again, sentenced to the Tower. Elizabeth placed a watchful eye on Mary and decided to never again bring up the issue of restoring her to the Scottish throne. Mary denied any evidence of the plot brought before her including any knowledge of being acquainted with Ridolfi. Parliament was divided on the type of punishment for Mary. Most of the members came to an agreement that execution was the correct punishment for Mary, while others believed that barring her from the English secession was sufficient. Cecil never received enough evidence to charge Mary with involvement in the Ridolfi Plot. Elizabeth did not entertain any discussions of her execution and decided to spare Mary. On May 31, the Queen signed Norfolk’s death warrant. Since Cecil could not arrest Mary, he decided to strip away her diplomatic relations in France. He sent Thomas Smith, a member of the Privy Council, to France to encourage Catherine de Medici to disassociate herself from Mary. He created the illusion of an immediate threat posed by Spain to England in defense of Mary’s cause. Cecil published copies of the Casket Letters and distributed them in Scotland to dissuade people from assisting Mary in reclaiming the Scottish throne. Upon Norfolk’s execution, Parliament wanted to obtain a bill of attainder, which bypassed the need to accumulate evidence or give Mary the right to a trial. Read suggests that Walsingham wanted Mary’s execution more than Cecil because her presence in England posed a threat to Elizabeth. Walsingham wanted to use Mary’s severed head as a message to other conspirators seeking to plot against the Queen. Elizabeth did not approve of these efforts and maintained that she could not move again st a God-anointed queen. In November 1583, Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth’s new Secretary of State, captured Francis Throckmorton, the nephew of Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, who worked on behalf of Mary as her agent. Walsingham’s spies discovered his communications with the Duke of Guise and the Jesuits. Walsingham also intercepted letters written by Mary to Castlenau, an ambassador at the French embassy. Mary hoped to make Scotland independent, with the protection of France, and restore her reign as Queen. Throckmorton confessed that the conspiracy’s aim was to prepare Philip’s Enterprise of England for Mary to acquire the throne. He added that Mary and Bernardino de Mendoza, a Spanish ambassador, participated in the conspiracy. Elizabeth wanted Throckmorton executed and Mendoza expelled in disgrace. For the remainder of Elizabeth’s reign, Spain was not allowed to send another ambassador to England. Walsingham began to tighten security in August, 1584, and, with the approach of 1585, Mary was sent back to Tutbury Castle. Elizabeth ceased any further discussions of restoring Elizabeth to the Scottish throne. In October, 1584, with the assassination of William the Silent, Prince of Orange, Walsingham and Cecil formed the Bond of Association on behalf of Elizabeth. This measure began as a method to destroy the Queen of Scots if she became involved in another conspiracy. James was exempt from this order unless he participated in any plots involving an attempt on Elizabeth. When Cecil informed Mary of this, she held steadfast in her claim of being unaware of any conspiracies against Elizabeth. Nevertheless, she signed the Bond to show her cooperation and innocence in any of the conspiracies. James sent his mother a letter stating that he would continue to acknowledge her as Queen Mother, but he could not approve a â€Å"joint rule or restore her to the throne in Scotland.† James signed a separate treaty with England one year later to show his allegiance to Elizabeth. After Mary signed the bond, she received word that a new jailer, Sir Amias Poulet, a Puritan, was set to arrive at Tutb ury to increase surveillance. Mary heavily contested this because she believed that their religious practices would clash. He did not allow her to have any visitors, confiscated her mail, and only permitted her to leave the castle with a parade of armed soldiers. On Christmas Eve, 1585, Mary was removed from Tutbury to Chartley, which was a fortified house of the Earl of Essex. Paulet’s fear of Elizabeth’s security was confirmed after the arrest of Gilbert Gifford, a Catholic refugee, at Rye on his arrival from France. He appeared before Walsingham and confessed that Mary’s friends in Scotland sent him to re-establish contact with her. Now that his plans were known, Gifford worked for Walsingham as a spy. His task consisted of passing all incoming correspondence to Mary directly to Walsingham. Gifford had to intercept any letters that Mary sent as outgoing mail and give them directly to Walsingham. Mary sent numerous letters to her Catholic agent, Chateauneuf, to advise him to beware of spies among his secretaries. She had no idea that Chateauneuf’s secretaries were not the real threat. Walsingham passed the letters to his secretary, Thomas Phelippes, an expert in ciphers. Phelippes decoded, copied and resealed the letters to send them to their destination. The issue with Phelippes letters was that he added postscripts to all of Mary’s letters without her knowledge to extract more information from the conspirators. Walsingham also gave Gifford the order to advise Mary that he knew of a secret route to smuggle the letters in and out of Chartley. Gifford introduced himself in a letter he sent to Mary and described a secret channel which she might communicate with her friends overseas. Walsingham made arrangements with a local brewer, Master Burton, in Buxton, to supply Mary’s house with regular supplies of beer in large barrels. Burton received a monetary bribe to transport Mary’s letters in a waterproof wooden box. In order to slip through the bung-hole of the barrel, a small box was needed. The brewer had been duped into believing his assistance helped Mary, but when the truth revealed itself it was too late to do anything. Mary never suspected that a trap had been set by Gifford and Walsingham. In May, 1586, Gifford intercepted two damaging letters from Mary to Mendoza and Charles Paget, a Catholic co-conspirator, which assured her support for a Spanish invasion by Philip II. When Paget responded to Mary’s letter, he informed her about a Catholic priest, John Ballard, who arrived from France in order to construct the Catholic rebellion against Elizabeth. The invasion was going to coincide with the Spanish invasion expected that summer. Ballard visited Anthony Babington, a rich Catholic supporter of Mary, to discuss the murder plot of the Queen. His first task was to transfer five packets of letters, written by Thomas Morgan, a co-conspirator, to Mary. Mendoza also joined the plot because he lost his political status as a Spanish Ambassador. He wanted to plan a religious war involving Catholic invasion of England. Babington agreed to the murder plot and advised that he had thirteen supporters who were anxious to join the plan. Gifford, working as a spy for Walsingham, joined Babington and Ballard in the murder plot. Babington sent a letter to Mary on July 6 to outline the plan for Elizabeth’s murder and asked for her blessings in executing the plot. In the letter to Mary, Babington stated that of the thirteen men he recruited, six of them were going to take Elizabeth’s life. When Mary sent her support for the plan, she did not formally give her approval for Elizabeth’s assassination. However, she acknowledged that action was needed in securing her freedom from Elizabeth. Mary advised Babington to turn to Mendoza for assistance because he was the ambassador to Philip II of Spain. Gifford intercepted the letter and turned it into Walsingham, who decided to let the plot continue. Walsingham waited for this moment and believed that any approval given by Mary endorsed the murde r of his Queen. Walsingham sent Phelippes to Chartley in order to intercept Babington’s letter to Mary. After he decoded the letter, he sent it back to Chartley to wait for Mary’s response. Mary’s secretaries assisted her in translating the letter into French and English. Nau was responsible for drafting the letter in French so that Mary could approve it before it was translated into English by Curle. The English version of the letter was not written by Mary’s hand and it is not clear as to the accuracy of Mary’s words in that letter. Phelippes decoded the letter because Gifford intercepted the cipher sent by Mary to Chateauneuf. Walsingham believed that this was enough evidence to accuse Mary of her written consent for Elizabeth’s assassination and foreign invasion. Ballard was arrested and sent to the Tower on the grounds of being a Catholic priest. Babington decided to flee England and Elizabeth issued a proclamation condemning the conspiracy. Copies of paintings were distributed throughout England to show the identity of the conspirators. While Mary was away hunting, chests full of letters were confiscated and sent to Walsingham. Walsingham arrested Mary and captured Babington sending him to the Tower on the next day. Elizabeth isolated Mary from her servant in the hopes that she would die of loneliness. Babington confessed to the plot to assassinate Elizabeth and implicated Mary as the centermost conspirator. Babington, Ballard and five other men were tried and sentenced to die at St. Giles Fields at Holborn. On September 25, Elizabeth’s Privy Council sent Mary to Fotheringhay Castle in Northhamptonshire. A total of forty commissioners, consisting of lords, privy councilors and judges, were selected to preside over Mary’s trial. Cecil guided the trial and his objective was to convince Mary’s supporters of her guilt. The trial commenced on October 11, but Mary refused to participate on the grounds that she was a God-anointed Queen. Walsingham sent for Sir Christopher Hatton, acting Lord Chancellor, to advise Mary that her attendance was mandatory, but she still did not move. Elizabeth decided to send a letter to Mary, which contributed to Mary’s decision to participate in the trial. Guy states that Mary’s change of heart came after she realized that the committee may find her guilty without her testimony. When the trial commenced on October 14, Mary was charged with â€Å"treasonable conspiracy against the Queen’s life.† Mary was not allowed the defense of counsel nor did she see any of the evidence against her. She believed that commission delegated had a guilty verdict planned in their minds before her trial began. Mary told the commission that she only wanted to discuss her words and not Babington’s letters. She denied any knowledge of the Babington Plot and claimed that the letters had been forged. Furthermore, she stated that she never intended for the conspirators to murder Elizabeth on her behalf. Mary was unaware that her letters had been intercepted by Walsingham while en route to Babington. In addition, the commissioners never advised her that the letters sent to Babington were translated by Walsingham’s spy, Thomas Phelippes. According to Pollen, Nau, who translated Mary’s letter in to French, may have been misguided by Cecil as to how many letters were confiscated in Mary’s chamber. His testimony may contain fallacies because he was under extreme pressure by Walsingham to confess. Curle’s translation was taken from Nau’s draft and placed into an English cipher. Phelippes version of Curle’s letter is not authentic because it is a copy of the original document. Furthermore, the postscript he added to these letters contributed to a major flaw in the accuracy of these letters. Elizabeth’s Council did not want to turn these letters in as evidence because Phelippes translated these copies. When Babington confessed to these letters, he was shown other copies with additional postscripts. Members of Council deceitfully told Babington that these letters were from the other conspirators in order to extract a confession. Babington, Nau and Curle were forced to rewrite these same altered letters when they confessed to them. Phelippes postscripts added the informal request for the name of the six conspirators and the method of instructions given once their names were revealed. If Babington had noticed Phelippes’ postscript before he signed the letter, Mary’s fate may have turned in a different direction. Walsingham and Cecil were not convinced by Mary’s testimony of her innocence. After reviewing the evidence against Mary, the commissioners reached a verdict of guilty in her absence. When Parliament approached Elizabeth with verdict and the execution sentence, Elizabeth replied with an â€Å"answer, answerless.† Two days before Parliament reconvened, Mary’s son, James VI of Scotland, sent an envoy to Elizabeth to plea for mercy on his mother’s life. Elizabeth and her Council believed this attempt was not out of concern for his mother’s life, but to verify the security of his succession to the English throne. Parliament assembled on October 16 to declare Mary’s sentence-execution by the axe. On November 25, the commissioners reassembled in the Star Chamber at Westminster to formally condemn Mary to death. Elizabeth continued to delay the signing of the execution warrant drafted by Walsingham. She was afraid of a Catholic rebellion and further attempts on her life by Catholic conspirators. Elizabeth sent for Sir William Davison, Walsingham’s secretary, to advise the Council that she wanted the execution to take place in the Great Hall of Fotheringhay Castle. She instructed Davison to go to Sir Christopher Hatton to attach the Great Seal of England on the warrant. Davison showed the warrant to Cecil before bringing it to Hatton. When Elizabeth told Davison to hold the warrant until she spoke with Hatton once more, Davison replied that it was too late. Hatton and Davison went to Cecil to call an emergency council meeting. This meeting concluded to continue the plans to dispatch warrant without further permission from the queen. Cecil drafted an order for the presentation of the warrant to Mary at Fotheringhay Castle. Elizabeth demanded to hear no more of Mary’s execution until after the deed was done. The rest is history! In 1585, an Act of Parliament decreed that anyone conspiring on behalf of Mary Stuart can cause her death even if she does not have any knowledge of the crime. Plots continued to soar after Mary escaped Lochleven Castle in Edinburgh to England. The Scottish Queen did not accept the invitation by her mother-in-law, Catherine de Medici, to return to France because she believed that Elizabeth had her best interest at heart. Cecil and Walsingham used many tactics to link Mary with the conspiracies of ambitious Catholics seeking to promote the Catholic cause as well as their own. In the case of the Babington Plot, the conspirators were threatened with extreme methods of torture to extract confessions. Mary’s secretaries, Nau and Curle, were promised gracious favors as well as threats of punishment by Walsingham. The truth of Mary’s guilt or innocence will never surface because of the methods implored by Council to obtain confessions. The evidence produced by the conspirators was not valid enough to execute a case against Mary. Walsingham may have fabricated a plot against Mary because of the lack of evidence against her. He wanted to rid England of her at all costs, no matter if his methods created injustice to all who were involved. Mary’s fate was already determined at the onset of trial in the Babington case. The commissioners who passed her sentence were allowed to see the evidence against her before the trial commenced. Her death sentence was passed after the second examination of the evidence against her. In November 25, 1586, Mary was charged with directing Babington to consult with Bernardino de Mendoza because of his experience and giving her consent to the six conspirators who agreed to perform the assassinaton on Elizabeth’s life. Bede, Cuthbert. Fotheringhay and Mary Queen of Scots: Being an Account, Historical and Descriptive†¦London: Simpkin, Marshall and Company, 1886. Also available online at archive.org/details/fotheringhaymary00bederich. Dunn, Jane. Elizabeth and Mary: Cousins, Rivals, Queens. New York: Vintage Press, 2003. Erickson, Carolly. The First Elizabeth. New York: Summit Books, 1983. Fraser, Antonia. Mary, Queen of Scots. New York: Delacorte Press, 1969. Guy, John. The True Life of Mary Stuart. New York: Mariner Books, 2005. Hibbert, Christopher. The Virgin Queen: Elizabeth I, Genius of the Golden Age. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1991. Hume, Martin. Two English Queens and Philip. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908. Lindsey, Karen. Divorced, Beheaded, Survived: A Feminist Reinterpretation of the wives of Henry VIII. Massachusetts: Perseus Books, 1995. Meline, James F. Mary Queen of Scots and Her Latest English Historian. New York: The Catholic Publication Society, 1871. Also available online at http://www/archive.org/details/maryqueenofscotsa00frougoog. Morris, John, ed. The Letters-Books of Sir Amias Poulet: Keeper of Mary, Queen of Scots. London: Burns and Oates, 1874. Also available online at archive.org/details/letterbooksofsir00pouluoft. Mumby, Frank Arthur. Elizabeth and Mary Stuart: The Beginning of the Feud. London: Constable and Company, Ltd., 1914. Neale, J.E. Elizabeth I and Her Parliaments, 1559-1581. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1958. Pollen, John Hungerford, ed. Mary Queen of Scots and the Babington Plot. Vol. 3. Scottish Historical Society Third Series. Edinburgh: T. and A. Constable, Ltd., 1922. Also available at http://ww.archive.org/details/maryqueenofscots00polluoft. Read, Conyers, ed. The Bardon Papers: Documents Relating to the Imprisonment and the Trial of Mary Queen of Scots. Vol. 17. Camden Third Series. London: Offices of the Society, 1909. Mr. Secretary Cecil and Queen Elizabeth. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1955. Lord Burghley and Queen Elizabeth. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961. â€Å"Walsingham and Burghley in Queen Elizabeth’s Privy Council.† The English Historical Review 28, no. 109 (1913): 34-58. Starkey, David. Elizabeth: The Struggle for the Throne. New York: Harpers Collins Publishers, 2001. Strickland, Agnes, ed. Letters of Mary Queen of Scots and Documents Connected with Her Personal History. 3 vols. London: Henry Colburn, 1845. Weir, Alison. The Life of Elizabeth I. New York: Ballatine Books, 1998. Research Papers on The Innocence of Mary Stuart, Queen of ScotsThe Hockey GameBringing Democracy to AfricaThe Masque of the Red Death Room meaningsBook Review on The Autobiography of Malcolm XMind TravelHonest Iagos Truth through Deception19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraThe Fifth HorsemanQuebec and CanadaHarry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Essay

Character analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Character analysis - Essay Example He wishes to do so through his son, Biff who had shown great promise in his early life. Willy’s ambition finds an outlet through his son, whom he hopes would become something more than just what he was, a salesman. This desire of his, however, stifles his son and he is not able to rise to his potential. He however, is able to see that he is like his father and this gives the reader an insight into the character of Willy. I am not a leader of men, Willy, and neither are you. You were never anything but a hard-working drummer who landed in the ash can like all the rest of them! I’m one dollar an hour, Willy I tried seven states and couldn’t raise it. A buck an hour! (Miller, 98). This outburst of Biff enables one to understand the reason behind the play’s importance. The play talks about the character of a common citizen who is unable to accept his own circumstances in life. The life of the very ordinary Willy is deemed fit to be shown on stage and this, in a sense, satirizes the notion of the ‘Great American Dream’. The ordinariness of Willy can also be a negative aspect as it makes him prone to what may be perceived as mistakes. His rendezvous with a young woman in a hotel is an example of this. This provokes the decline of his son, Biff, who no longer finds his father to be a role model for himself and loses direction in his life. This can be said to be similar to the life of Willy, who had to live his life without his father. The question of whether this affected his life is one that the playwright leaves unanswered. The character of Willy thus also symbolises the breakdown of the family as a social unit in the United States of America. The history of his family over three generations is able to exemplify this. The ordinariness of the character is something that Miller introduces so as to burst the bubble of American greatness that had emerged after the Second World War. Most of the positives and

Literature Review Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Literature Review - Essay Example The public sector commercial banks are again divided into three groups – the State Bank group, other nationalized banks and the regional rural banks. As competition in the Indian banking sector has increased due to deregulation and dilution of government ownership in PSBs, opening up of the banking sector to the private banks and foreign banks, competition has intensified. The banking sector is no more limited to accepting deposits from the public and giving out to loans to public. They now provide innovative service with innovative style. ATMs, credit cards and internet banking have changed the way banks offer services. Banks have added other services such as bankassurances, money transfers, and NRI services (Mittal & Mittal, 2009) The marketing of services is different from marketing of products because services are intangible, heterogeneous, perishable and inseparable. Services cannot be patented, displayed or communicated (Zeithami & Bitner, 2000). Customer satisfaction in the services industry depends on employees’ actions (Douglas & Connor, 2003). How the service is delivered and how the service delivery process is perceived, holds importance in services marketing. The physical evidence in the service setting is extremely important, as according to Kotler, the place where service is bought is one of the most significant features (Hightower, Brady and Baker, 2002). Hence, intangible cues like the physical environment, the design, the landscape, the surroundings, the layout, the dà ©cor and the parking facilities – all create an impression on the five senses and determine how the service is perceived (Brunswick, n.d). In a bank setting, these act as interaction facilitator, thereby increasing performance. Thus, in services marketing the 4 Ps extend to seven Ps to include people, process and the physical evidence. When the service exceeds customer expectations,

Righteous Dopefiend by Philippe Bourgois and Jeffrey Schonberg Essay

Righteous Dopefiend by Philippe Bourgois and Jeffrey Schonberg - Essay Example TIn addition to being homeless, the individuals have to face the structural forces that govern their miserable lives. The book tries to give profiles of various homeless people residing on the encampment. This is crucial in understanding the reasons that lead to homelessness. In addition, there is need to learn and appreciate the problems faced by these homeless individuals. This information is crucial in formulating strategies to reach out and help these people. The gruesome dependence on drugs is highlighted in the paper. The homeless addicts are dirty and some urinate on themselves. They steal, beg and engage in prostitution in exchange for drugs. The book concentrates on approximately 10 people in the Bernal heights a popular area in San Francisco (Elsa 178). It is evident that the majority of the writing assesses the method through which the dynamics of race, gender and class affect the lives of the homeless and drug addicts. The themes that stand out in this book include race, sexuality, suffering, trauma and inequality in the society. The authors writing style includes the use of flashback in the lives of the ten individuals depicted in the book to make the book more realistic. The author writes about the love stories, family trauma and embodied suffering in most situations to highlight the plight of these individuals. The use of pictures and flash back creates an actual scenario as described. This makes an individual to understand the inequality and the facts highlighted in the book effortlessly. This powerful book makes the reader to fully integrate into the world of drug addiction, extreme poverty and homelessness in the most developed country, the United States of America (Bourgois & Schonberg 214). Photographs in this book include the scars brought about by addiction, social closeness among romantic pairs and partners who are on the run because of drugs, and the homeless people covered in the book (Angela 200). They are pictures of homeless people who reside in shacks on the encampment. These shacks are off the street and they comfortably rest on their beddings, and take drugs. The most intriguing pictures are of Tina and Carter (a homeless couple that is deeply in love). One cannot help but admire this couple. They may be poor, but they are happy as they have each other. They are oblivious of their surroundings and happily hug and show affection to each other. Through the pictures, it is evident that most of the homeless people are drug addicts. It seems that the homeless people use the drugs to counteract feelings of desperation, anxiety and fear. The commonly abused drug is heroine and intoxication of the drug elicits feelings of euphoria. The homeless on the encampment derive great solace from drug abuse. This is a true picture also in the society, and individuals should avoid drugs such as heroin and crack. The pictures were ethical since a writer has authority to utilize any style of writing which includes pictures and other literature. A writer should be able to pass the informa tion to the reader effortlessly. This style of including pictures is acceptable and ethical since it gives emphasis on the texts in the book. The pictures are not pornographic in nature neither do they discriminate both gender, and race they are appropriate and relevant to the book (Elsa 178). Substance abuse

Effect Customers Perception Brand Image Of Fmcg Companies Marketing Essay

Effect Customers Perception Brand Image Of Fmcg Companies Marketing Essay In the midst of rapid globalisation and increasing access to information, companies are acknowledging the importance of being socially responsible. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) broadly includes social, ethical and environmental responsibilities towards the society (Polonsky and Jevons, 2009). It refers to the triple bottom line, referring to expanding the traditional meaning of organisational success to accommodate ecological and social performance. Research shows pursuing a socially responsible mindset leads to numerous benefits (Butler, 2006; Burke Logsdon, 1996). CSR also increasingly plays an important role in consumer attitudes towards the company and brand as a whole. The brand of a company plays an essential role in building an identity, differentiating the value offering, and more importantly, drawing a larger customer base. The brand image of a company refers to a customers perception of its brand in totality. In the past couple of years, social responsibility has been incorporated with the entrepreneurial characteristics of an organisation, leading to the conceptualisation of a new term called Corporate Social Entrepreneurship (CSE). It is a relatively new phenomenon related to integrating social considerations into a companys business operations. CSE is a process aimed at enabling business to develop more advanced and powerful forms of CSR (Austin and Reficco, 2009). Multinational Companies (MNCs) producing Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) have been particularly active in displaying CSE in order to uplift the rural sections of the developing society. Being a relatively new concept, the specific impact of Corporate Social Entrepreneurship on the consumer outlook towards the corporate and product brand has yet to be researched in detail. This research attempts to explore this relationship and gain a better understanding of CSE. Adapting the theoretical framework used by Poolthong and Mandhachitara (2009), explained under the literature review, a quantitative study will be conducted to examine the effect of an MNCs CSE activities on its brand image. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES To gain insight into the impact of CSE on customers perception of the companys brand and their brand associations, taking Multinational Companies (MNCs) in the FMCG sector as an example. LITERATURE REVIEW Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has gained a lot of importance among stakeholders and in the corporate world in the past few years. Modern literature on the concept can be traced back to the 1950s (Bowen, 1953; Eells, 1956; Heald, 1957), while formal definitions came about from the 1970s (Johnson, 1971; Carroll, 1979; Epstein, 1987). The most popular and widely accepted definition of CSR was given by Archie Carroll in 1979: The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time (Carroll, 1979, p.500). From a business perspective, this definition forms the basis of CSR, termed as the Triple P Concept of People, Planet and Profit. In todays global nature of the corporate environment, firms are increasingly recognising CSR more as a core activity rather than a peripheral one. This growing importance of CSR can be attributed to changing societal expectations, growing affluence of consumers and rapid globalisation (Werther Chandler, 2005). BRAND IMAGE The term brand can be defined as a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or combination of them which is intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competitors (Kotler, 1991, p.442). Brand Image is considered to be an important aspect of marketing and was the first consumer brand perception recognised in marketing literature (Gardner Levy, 1955). It is defined as the perceptions about a brand as reflected by the brand associations held in consumer memory (Keller, 1993, p.3). These brand associations refer to perceptions of brand quality and attitudes. The brand image is considered independent of the functional product offering; it gives the product a human element. The Branding Law of CSR Recent literature identifies how a company can differentiate itself and can gain a competitive advantage by linking the brand to CSR (Brammer Millington, 2006; Du et al., 2007). The brand image of a company is greatly affected by the degree of social responsibility it shows. CSR helps a company establish social legitimacy in the eyes of the customer. In their paper, Werther and Chandler explored strategic CSR as a means of achieving global brand insurance. A CSR driven approach of a firm increases the brand-user bond and reduces the brands weakness to other organisational shortcomings (Werther Chandler, 2005). This relationship between the brand value of a firm and the importance on CSR to it can be represented as The Branding Law of Corporate Social Responsibility: The importance of CSR to any organization is directly related, and rises in proportion, to the value of the firms global brand (Werther Chandler, 2005, p.321). CORPORATE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP (CSE) Until recently, an organisations involvement in CSR was limited to being certified by social and environmental standards, having a well-established community welfare programme and so on. However, increasing global awareness has led companies to take their social responsibility to the next level. Organisations will have to explore the imagination and initiative of individual employees; and this had led to the emergence of a revolutionary concept that would enable firms to accelerate and develop their CSR initiatives. This term is called Corporate Social Entrepreneurship (CSE). CSE draws from the key concepts of corporate entrepreneurship, and social entrepreneurship. Corporate entrepreneurship refers to identifying and utilizing new business opportunities through innovative use of resources and strategies. Simultaneously, social entrepreneurship was defined by J. Gregory Dees as an innovative activity with a social purpose in either the private or nonprofit sector, or across both (Dee s, 1998). However, unlike either of these terms, CSE involves mobilizing organizational resources as well as creating social and economic value. It can be defined as the process of extending the firms domain of competence and corresponding opportunity set through innovative leveraging of resources, both within and outside its direct control, aimed at the simultaneous creation of economic and social value (Austin et al., 2005). The Multinational Companies are today recognizing the bottom of developing markets, termed as the base of the pyramid as having a higher potential than the saturated developed markets through disruptive innovation (Hart Christensen, 2002). This forms the basis of CSE, aiming at targeting new sections of the market for economic benefit through social upliftment. Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) Companies and CSE Multinational Companies (MNCs) in the FMCG Industry have been active in CSE initiatives in relation to the rest of the corporate world. Saroja Subrahmanyan and J. Tomas Gomez-Arias, in their paper in 2008, identify the efforts made by FMCG companies to target consumers at the bottom of the pyramid. Hindustan Unilever in India was one of the first companies to introduce products in smaller sizes to the rural section of the country. A network of women from rural backgrounds was formed and they were directed to sell Unilever products in sachets door-to-door. Also, Kissan, owned by Hindustan Unilever, buys farm produce as raw material for its products. Danone, the French company partnered with a number of Non Government Organisations (NGOs) to sell yogurt in Bangladesh and South Africa (Subrahmanyan Gomez-Arias, 2008). CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK In their paper in 2009, Yaowalak Poolthong and Rujirutana Mandhachitara studied the effect CSR activities had on perceived service quality and brand effect, and the role of trust in establishing a link between perceived service quality and brand effect in the Thai retail banking sector. Garcia de los Salmones et al. (2005) found a direct relationship between a companys CSR behavior and the customers perception of service quality. In turn, the study by Poolthong and Mandhachitara (2009) displayed a positive relationship between perceived service quality and trust in the company, thus leading to a positive brand effect. Simultaneously, a considerable number of studies have found a direct relation between CSR and customers attitudes towards the company (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003; Brown and Dacin, 1997), thus representing a positive effect of CSR on brand effect. Based on this framework, the proposed research study will attempt to gain an understanding of the effect of Corporate Social Entrepreneurship (CSE) on the brand image of an FMCG company (Figure 1). Adapted from: Poolthong, Y., and Mandhachitara, R. (2009). Customer expectations of CSR, perceived service quality and brand effect in Thai retail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27 (6), 408-427. Evident from the corresponding literature, research exploring the concept of CSE is relatively new and has been gradually picking up pace. The specific effect of CSE on the company from the customers point of view is yet to be looked into in detail and this study makes an effort to understand the same, giving valuable insight into using strategic CSR and CSE as a marketing tool. Using the framework given above, this study will try to answer the following research questions: Do CSE activities of a company have a positive relationship with the customers perception of company brand image? How significant is CSE to develop a favourable brand image for an FMCG company from the customers point of view? METHODOLOGY Luck and Rubin (1987) state that a good rule in all research is parsimony; using only meaningful data. This study aims to explore and evaluate the effect CSE activities has on customers perception of brand image, taking the FMCG sector as an example. This research will first use secondary sources of information to gain insight into role played by MNCs in the FMCG sector with respect to social responsibility. Secondary data plays an important role in establishing a background to primary research (Newson-Smith, 1988). Appropriate journals, articles and other publications will be used to understand previous studies conducted analysing the relationship between social responsibility and brand associations made by consumers. Through this source, a pre-existing questionnaire will be adapted in order to gather primary data. Being a quantitative study, a survey method will be used by means of a questionnaire. According to John Webb (2003), survey research is appropriate for gathering data on attitudes, opinions, respondent knowledge and awareness etc. After looking for an appropriate questionnaire linking CSR and brand image, it will be adapted to devise an appropriate questionnaire analysing customers attitude towards an FMCG companys CSE initiatives. The possible options available to use questionnaires are personal interviews, telephone interviews, mail questionnaires, and e-questionnaires. Given the time and cost constraints, using an e-questionnaire is the most effective and appropriate method of data collection. Emailing questionnaires to respondents has become an increasingly popular method of data collection. In this proposed research study, questionnaires will be emailed to the sample population. Alternatively, online survey software like www.kwiksurveys.com or www.freeonlinesurveys.com may be used to create convenient and hassle-free questionnaires. In this case, using an e-questionnaire is the most appropriate due to advantages of instantaneous delivery, quick responses and convenience for the respondent Kumar et al., 1999). Apart from this, increasing global access to the internet enables easy reach to the targeted respondents. However, using this method poses the limitation of respondents interpreting questions differently along with a high risk of not responding. With regard to the sample size of the study, a total of at least 100 filled questionnaires is aimed at, to minimize the sampling error. Using a judgement sampling technique, consumers of FMCG products on a global level will be identified to fill the questionnaire. Additional respondents will be reached through the snowball sampling, where one respondent may lead the researcher to other potential respondents (Marshall, 1996). The reason behind selecting FMCG consumers for this study is simply based on the high degree of activity of FMCG companies with regard to CSE and the fact that a large number of common people use some variety of an FMCG. This is ensures ease in reaching these consumers, leading to more reliable results. Based on the data collected, the data analysis software called Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) will be used to organise and interpret the information. Factor Analysis will be used to reduce the number of variables to a few constructs. Following this, cluster analysis will be used to identify clusters of relevant scales for the proposed research. Regression analysis will then be used to establish the nature and strength of the relationship between CSE and brand image. Ethical considerations will be made in the process of gathering data. A section describing the key aspects and primary motivation to carry out the research will be put in before the questionnaire. Additionally, complete anonymity of the respondents will be maintained throughout this study. Supported by the framework proposed by Poolthong and Mandhachitara (2009) and related literature about CSE and brand image of a company, this research proposes to find a positive effect of a CSE mindset of a company on the customers perception of the brand in totality. It will enable researchers further explore the nature of Corporate Social Entrepreneurship from the point of view of a customer. Also, FMCG marketers will be able to evaluate the significance of CSE in marketing communications. GANTT CHART The following chart outlines the schedule of activities in conducting this masters thesis. The dissertation period begins in the month of June with the submission of the final dissertation on September 6th 2010. TASK Background Reading Preparation of Literature Review Desk Research Collecting Data Analysing Data Writing Data Analysis Preparing Background Information Writing Research Methodology Writing Discussion Writing Conclusion Revision of Chapters Completing First Draft Final Changes and Improvements Binding   WEEKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Jun Jul Aug

Hard times :: essays research papers

Hard Time To be young is to be mischievous. There has probably never been a time in history when young people did not occasionally steal, damage property, runaway from home or school, assault other people, or act disrespectful to adults. Within the past three decades, judicial decisions, legislative amendments, and administrative changes have transformed the juvenile court from a nominally rehabilitative social welfare agency into a scaled-down-class criminal court for young people. Webster’s Dictionary describes juvenile delinquency as juvenile conduct â€Å"characterized by antisocial behavior that is beyond parental control and therefore subject to legal action.† (Grinney 14) Delinquent behavior in teens existed way back in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. This definition shows that 19th- century American society had determined it was suitable to take legal action against intolerable youthful behavior. What the definition does not disclose is that thoughts about what that legal action should be were changing quickly. By 1900, 36 states had separate restraining facilities for juvenile offenders. In the beginning, these facilities were built for a dual purpose. They were developed as a way to take away difficult children from society while keeping them away from adult prisoners who were likely to persuade them even more negatively. The courts also hoped that such facilities would help children find the formation and the ethical guidance they needed to improve there ways. However, these institutions were actually better than prisons. Moreover, youngsters were often immediately taken to them-without an official trial-by the courts, the police, their parents, or their guardians. When these types of facilities were not accessible, children were sent to adult jails and prisons for every kind of offence, from common disruptiveness to assault with a lethal weapon. In 1870, Boston began having separate hearings for offenders under age 16, and New York City soon followed. In 1899, Illinois became the first state to create a juvenile court system. Other states rapidly did the same. Supporters of the juvenile court system did not want young people to associate with adult criminals in institutions. One of the major goals of the juvenile court system was to keep young offenders out of institutions. This system promoted the term juvenile delinquent in order to differentiate between an adult criminal and a mischievous child who may of may not be guilty of criminal behavior. According to James S. Coleman, the juvenile court system introduced a totally new purpose. Its purpose was to revitalize the child rather than to discipline him or her.