Source A suggests Churchill had a poor relationship with his generals. Sir Alan Brooke describes the situation as difficult, saying he “finds it hard to remain civil”. He also writes “with him England has been on the verge of disaster time and time again”. These two points suggest that Churchill was little help, and was more of a hindrance rather than an aid towards the military and its tactics. However, he doesn’t say he has no respect or admiration for Churchill, writing “never have I admired and despised a man simultaneously to the same extent.
Sadly, it fails to do so, mostly it is Allan Blooms views on the education process in American Universities/Colleges. If someone was to write a book called The Girl in the Pink Dress and it’s actually about a boy in a blue coveralls it wouldn’t be that good of a story. That’s how I feel about Nelson’s essay, almost like I have been tricked. Nelson’s only paragraph about Canadian education is way more than halfway through his essay. Neilson made a mistake by putting (North) in the title because that would suggest that the essays main topic is the North American education
Benjamin Banneker, the son of former slaves, was a farmer, astronomer, mathematician, surveyor, and author. In1791 he wrote to Thomas Jefferson, framer of the Declaration of Independence and secretary of state to President George Washington. Read the following excerpt from the letter and write an essay that analyzes how Banneker uses rhetorical strategies to argue against slavery. Banneker, the son of former slaves, was a farmer, astronomer, mathematician, surveyor and author. Applying Pathos, repetition, aphorism and logos to his letter, Banneker comes off strong and emotive about the topic at hand.
How far do the sources suggest that Wolsey’s efforts to secure the annulment were half-hearted? (20 marks) Although sources 1, 2 and 3 make suggestions towards Wolsey’s lack of effort in gaining an annulment for Henry, they all generally agree in the fact that his ability and determination to fill Henry with the hope that he would succeed in obtaining the annulment showed that Wolsey made gaining the annulment his main priority which he did try to achieve whole heartedly. Firstly, sources 1 and 2 both agree that Wolsey was wasteful with his resources he had art his disposal and that he did not make an efficient use of not only this, but also his situation. Source 2 states that “Wolsey has marvelous contacts” and “…yet has not made use of this”. It can be implied from this that Wolsey had the ability to obtain Henry’s annulment, but failed due to his lack of effort and his half-hearted approach.
Another example of Adelard’s bias is the quote, “For why not fill up sheets of paper, and why not write on the back too, when you usually have such readers today who require no rational explanation and put their trust only in the ancient name of a title?” In this quote, it is clear that Adelard was beginning to defend Aristotle’s teachings and slightly turn his back against the “God’s Will” approach. Natural Questions was recorded somewhere around the early 1100’s to about 1130, but the true completion date is unknown. Between these times in history, quite a few historical events happened. In 1107, Alexander I became King
The relationship between the American colonies and their mother country, England, has been a debate amongst historians for many years. Prior to 1740, the Anglo-American relations were not very prevalent, they were rather distant and England seemed to pay no mind into the affairs of the Americans, except perhaps in the later year of the 1730’s when various trade acts and laws were being introduced. However, after 1740 and up until 1763, a number of events and causations changed this situation, and all of a sudden the British and American relationship was put under the spot light. These events were no doubt the French-Indian wars, and the thriving economy and trade triangle. These events caused what appears to be a strengthened Anglo-American relationship, and made it appear as ‘peaceful and harmonious’ however, there are other factors which must be considered by historians in order to solve this question.
William Clarke Quantrill The Civil War was filled with heroes and people who were praised. What you don’t often hear about, is the villains or people who are praised by some, but not for good deeds. When you do hear about these people you don’t really hear about their past, you just hear about their gang, there evil deeds, and sometimes, why they did these things. After researching and learning about these people most say they are not heroes. William Clarke Quantrill was one of these people.
Source one acknowledges that ‘blame was hastily attached to Captain Nolan’ and also acknowledges that the charges of the light brigade was a ‘disastrous charge’ but it also shifts the blame to that of Lord Raglan’s as it says that Nolan was ‘instructed’ to deliver an order to Lord Lucan, the source furthermore doubts that Nolan was to blame by saying that ‘the charge by the light brigade was so opposed to his own published theories on tactics that he could never have suggested it’. The reliability of the source is debatable as although it was written on the 25th November 1854, which was just a month after the charge which would have stopped the source from changing with time, it was written as an obituary so it would have tried to portray Captain Nolan in a good light. When source two is contrasted with source one it also says that Nolan was not to blame and says that he was ‘merely aide-de-camp’ and shifts the blame to Lord Lucan saying that ‘A commanding officer is supposed to possess sufficient self-command and certain discretionary powers’, although this source
We've all noticed that portraits of Henry VII capture him as a very serious, timid and weak old creepy man who didn't really look as though he could take on the role of king in those times. However, after learning about how he claimed the throne, consolidated power and left a safe throne for his son my opinion seems to have changed. Over centuries Henry VII has been associated with the words 'cold, materialistic, miserly and rapacious', he may have spent money ruthlessly, but for someone who united the warring houses of York and Lancaster I find these words quite harsh. Whilst his marriage to Elizabeth of York could have be seen as an act of selfishness, it clearly showed wisdom and more importantly the fact that Henry envisaged peace. This was the perfect time and platform to use propaganda and create a godlike image for himself as it provided security for the country and reassured the people.
Geertz believed that English limited his abilities and instead majored in philosophy. He then attended graduate school at Harvard University and earned his Ph.D. in Anthropology from the Department of Social Relations in 1956. Clifford Geertz was greatly influenced by two thinkers, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Max Weber. This led to his theory of understanding of others’ understandings and his methodology examining public meanings, and symbols. Max Weber’s use of culture, religion and ideals to explain modernization was strongly present in Clifford Geertz’s earliest anthropological work such as Agricultural Involution and Peddlers and Princes (Geertz).