Emily Booth How far do the sources agree that Captain Nolan was to blame for the disaster of the Charge of the Light Brigade? Source 3 agrees that Captain Nolan was to blame for the disaster of the Charge of the Light Brigade because it says that Nolan was headstrong and critical of the cavalry and its commanders, implying that due to his characteristics it was likely he would have went against orders given to him. This source is quite reliable because it is an extract from a journal meaning it would be an honest as it is self written only for that person to read. However, Source 2 disagrees with this and says that Nolan wasn’t to blame because he was merely aide-de-camp indicating that he was acting as an assistant only carrying on orders from another officer. If Nolan was acting as a military assistant to a more senior officer, he wouldn’t be critical of its commanders as suggested in Source 3, because it would be in his role to follow orders.
Unified Disparities Humans often recognize differences between people; yet, reflecting upon similarities could minimize stereotypes. The protagonists Beowulf from the epic, Beowulf and Everyman from the dramatic literature, Everyman showcase clear differences without clarification of similarities. On the surface, Everyman and Beowulf are polar opposites. Everyman and Beowulf’s physical image and demeanor are dissimilar, yet further investigation exposes parallels between the two. While Everyman doesn’t attain Beowulf’s heroic successes, he becomes a distinctly symbolic hero.
His chief commitment is not to himself, but to someone or something more important, such as God, other persons, or an ethical ideal. Viewed in these terms, Mark Twain's novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn presents a number of characters who are capable of genuine civil disobedience and a number who are not. Huck and Jim, obviously, do possess this capacity; Huck's father, the Duke and the Dauphin, and (more ambiguously) Tom Sawyer do not. The famous scene in which, after much agonizing, Huck decides not to obey the conventional morality of his culture—which would dictate that he report the location of Jim, the runaway slave, to Miss Watson, Jim's owner—but instead decides to obey his own humane impulses (269–71), is a prime example of Huck's capacity for ideal civil disobedience. The Duke and Dauphin, on the other hand, never act from anything other than selfish motives.
Although classical Greek and Roman writers considered the Celts to be violently insane, warfare was not an organized process of territorial conquest” (“European middle ages,” par.6). The society of the Celts was hierarchical and class based; for example, their society was led by a King. The other different groups were the Warrior Aristocracy, the Intellectual class, the Poets, the Jurist, and th citizens. There is no accurate religious forms the Celts had, for the Romans and Greeks wrote their own view of the Celt's religious practices. While the Romans and Greeks thought of them as animals, a later person named Whales wrote his Christian view of the Celts.
Through this we could see that Donatello was coming out of the medieval mindset where the Human Body itself was considered to be evil and something to be ashamed of, never heroic. While he seems to be reacting against this notion by making David nude, his depicted him as a boy who looks downward. On the other hand, Verrocchio’s David looks like a proud and strong boy that is dressed in modern parade clothes. In Verrocchio's David, we see a strong contrast to Donatello's. Although both artists choose to portray David as an adolescent, Verrocchio's brave man "appears somewhat older and excludes pride and self-confidence rather than a dreamy gaze of disbelief" (Fichner-Rathus 334).
Sir Gawain is a member of King Arthur’s court. He is actually Arthur’s nephew. He has a very noble character, and is a very brave honest man. It is insinuated that the un-named knight from “The Wife of Bath” (whom we will now refer to as the Bath knight) was also a knight from King Arthur’s court, although it is never verified. The Bath knight did not have a very noble character; his actions did not prove to be very knightly.
In 1692 it was a Puritan way Salem led a Puritan way of life. Anyone who doesn’t agree with the church, or has a stain on his or her name, is disapproved off. John Proctor didn’t exactly have a ‘puritan’ life. However John was a good man, he wanted to be seen as an honest man, not just a man who lied to protect the town. John didn’t want to be named a liar, he admitted to committing adultery, and the last thing he wanted was his name nailed on the church’s wall because he signed a lie.
Although some of the feats that Beowulf had done were not fully examined in-depth (such as when he told the story of the time he fended off sea monsters while swimming), his greater battles and achievements are explained in far greater detail and depth. An example of this is the battle that was fought with Grendel and the thanes of the Geats: "Now many an earl of Beowulf brandished blade ancestral...The outlaw dire took mortal hurt" (XII, lines 4-5; 25-26) And the text explains the rest of the battle in greater detail as the fight continues. Bit this is only one main example of the
Albeit there is show that the hunt was a way to test loyalty that whomever the King invited would have to prove their worth. This is less common and the more common was a knight trying to prove themselves to a lady, as they did not write poems, or many of them did not write poems. A call upon Sidney’s use of the hunt is very brief and quite shallow in the sense that his is very loose. Sidney did not mean the true hunt or the visage of animals in his writing. Instead he takes the use of the hunt
Characterization Essay Geoffrey Chaucer was a skilled author who wrote The Canterbury Tales. In this story of his, he used a lot of satire which is hard to decipher in text. When a person is sarcastic in speech it is easily detectable, but in text the average person would translate the language literally. In The Canterbury Tales Chaucer used satire to respectfully describe a few of his characters. One character he wrote of was a prioress.