Enjoy the Senior Final Synthesis Papers included here.
Senior English
Research Paper
February 17, 2017
Mrs. ThompsonWitches or Saints
After reading my sources I have found some contradiction about whether or not Joan of Arc was a witch or saint. The first source indicates that Joan of Arc would have been considered a witch and probably burned at the stake, while my second source says she was tried as a witch, found guilty and then later found as a saint. Joan of Arc was tried as a witch because she stood up and did manly things, and was successful. The men did not like that so they tried to find her as a witch or heretic. The rest of my paper will be comparing these two sources along with others, to show you that these innocent people were simply found to be witches because of what they believed in or what they did.
I will start off by talking about Joan of Arc, a woman who lived during the hundred year war time. According to http://www.history.com/topics/saint-joan-of-arc Joan was a woman who wanted to be involved with the war and in helping her country be successful. She was not a rich girl, and was considered a pheasant. As she grew into her teenage years she became deeply involved with her mystical life and prayer. Joan claimed that the voices of saints were instructing her to raise the siege of Orleans: capture the Rheims Cathedral and have Charles crowned as King. She also claimed that the saints instructed her to dress as a man while she carried out this work.
According to http://www.history.com/topics/saint-joan-of-arc When Joan left home in 1428 she was tried by a church in Poiters, this cleared her of any suspicious activity of witchcraft or heresy. After the trial she animated Charles and the French troops with the belief that God wished them to be successful in their journey. After all of her successes, she was stripped of her clothes and taken to a cell where she was accused of disobeying the church. On May 30, 1431 the Catholic church condemned Joan of Arc as a witch and then years later on May 31, 1920 they declared her as a saint. Later it is said that Joan was not tried by church in 1429 but instead by a small hostile group misusing the church court for their own political purposes. (para 1)
So after reading the previous paragraphs about Joan of Arc, it really sounds like the people just didn’t want independent women to take part manly duties and they did not want women to be successful. Also, being a Catholic I can say that it was pretty much the catholic way or no way at all. I will now go into my other sources and talk about why people were accused of being witches and the beginning of witchcraft.
When people think of witches they think of old scary women casting spells and making potions. But, back in the medieval times anyone could have been accused of being a witch or heretic. In the middle ages the catholics had lots of wealth and power. They believed that christianity was the only true religion. If you didn’t believe in this you were considered a heretic and would be condemned in hell. In the 11th and 12th centuries more and more people began publicly rejecting the catholic faith. Still, knowing the consequences, many Europeans followed their own religion. The source http://www.skwirk.com/p-c_s-56_u-474_t-1291_c-4961/witches/qld/witches/medieval-and-early-modern-europe/taking-part-in-life states that the beginning of witchcraft goes back as far as ancient times. Witchcraft first evolved from the use of herbs, folk medicine and incantations in healing processes. Some medical practices that doctors performed were even controversial, such as herbal medicines, magical charms, and incantations. Saint Boniface (672-754) supported the Church’s belief that people who thought that witchcraft possessed any power were acting in an unchristian manner, since it suggested that they doubted the supreme power of God. In 785 the Council of Paderborn enacted legislation making it illegal to believe in the existence of witches. Charlemagne, King of the Franks (r. 768-814), also endorsed this law. As the middle ages progressed the belief formed that witches were wilful worshippers of the Devil. Witches were thought to have supernatural powers that they used to influence people and their things, usually in a malicious way. They were thought to destroy social and religious order, and were also blamed for every conceivable calamity. These included sudden deaths, epidemics, natural disasters and failed harvests. Another crazy thing that could get you in trouble for being a witch is delivering a stillborn baby. By the twelfth century the church had become super concerned about witches, and declared all witches to be heretics. The Church believed that witches were worse heretics than pagans, since pagans believed in other gods but witches worshipped the Devil. While the high Middle Ages (1050-1250) marked the beginning of a witch-hunting craze in Europe, this hysteria did not reach its height until the early Modern Period (beginning around the end of the 15th century and lasting to the end of the 18th century).
During the 16th and 17th centuries witchcraft hunting became a lucrative industry, according to http://www.skwirk.com/p-c_s-56_u-474_t-1291_c-4961/witches/qld/witches/medieval-and-early-modern-europe/taking-part-in-life. The church was responsible for identifying the witches and prosecuting them. The Pope established a series of formal proclamations, called the Medieval Inquisitions, which were used to discover the witches. The prosecution’s used to see if a person was a witch or not was followed by a set course of action. These trials usually began with a town meeting, in which the possibly heretics were promised less punishment if they turned themselves in (para 4). Some people were on trial just because a jealous person accused them of heresy out of jealousy or revenge, while others were on trial for suspicious activity. If you were an old woman who lived alone, a midwife, or a single mother, you were also more than likely on trial (para 6). Since there were no trials back in these days, the suspects had to prove their own innocence. If the heretics were found guilty they were tortured by either thumbscrews, which broke the bones in the hands, or the strappado, which was where the woman was tied up and dropped so her joints would dislocate (para 7). In later medieval times the torture turned into execution. The accused were either burned at the stake, or if they last minute confessed they were strangled. The people thought if the witches were burned it would diminish their evil souls (para 7).
Although I do not agree with how the women were treated, I can sort of see the reasons why some people would of accused women of being witches. This topic gets into a little bit of feminism. These women were being independent and trying to do things that men didn’t like. That is not right, but in today’s society I believe that role has changed.British Lit: Senior English Synthesis Papers
Peyton Flack
Mrs. Thompson
College English
Anglo-Saxon Synthesis Paper
2-23-17
Roles of Anglo-Saxon Women
The role women play in society has always been a topic of controversy, and women have been fighting for their rights for quite some time. Looking back through history, most women have been in charge of cooking, cleaning, and being stay-at-home moms. They weren’t allowed to get what was considered a man’s job and they couldn’t speak their minds and be independent. A woman’s role hasn’t always been this way. Women in Anglo-Saxon societies were considered equal to men until 1066 when the Norman Conquest came and the Church of England took over. Anglo Saxon Women and the Church: Sharing a Common Fate by Stephanie Hollis states that the church is responsible for the decline of women’s responsibility (1). Poetry from the Anglo-Saxon times show otherwise. The Wife’s Lament shows evidence that women were not treated equal to men and didn’t have a choice in what they did. The Wife’s Lament states “ to find his retainers, that man’s kinsmen began to think in secret that they would separate us” and “My lord commanded me to live with him here” (lines 10-12, 15). These lines from the poem show that this women had to be married as a peace weaver and that she was treated unfairly by the people of her kingdom. This woman’s husband was plotting against her and she was exiled by him. There are many different interpretations of this poem according to gradesaver.com.
Evidence shows that women were allowed to do men’s work, have choice in who they marry, and were considered equal in everything they did. Women’s roles were based upon their marital status and their role in the community. Marriages were often arranged to keep peace between neighbouring clans and countries, but according to csis.pace.edu women had the right to refuse or agree to any marriage proposal and could choose who they wanted to marry (para 2). Women in the Anglo-Saxon societies were allowed to own land and work, but only through their husbands, fathers, or brothers. Once the family members were deceased the woman could keep the land and it became her property. Land was often offered to women as a bribe for marriage. When a woman turned a certain age she was allowed to find her own place to live and was considered her own person before the law. All of this changed when the Norman Conquest came in.
When the English Church came in and took over the Anglo-Saxon societies, the way women were looked at changed. Women who took vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience were considered equal in the church and could be given authority positions in the church by a man. Women who did not take these vows were looked down upon and considered sinners. Feudalism became popular as well and controlled who was allowed to own land and work. The role of women in the Anglo-Saxon time period was based on equality, but that was soon changed by the English Church. Were women really considered equal in Anglo-Saxon societies or did the church change they way women were treated forever?
Anglo-Saxon women had many occupations and were considered equal to their husbands and brothers. According to wikipedia.org women in those times could be entertainers, comedians, and singers that could be hired to travel in groups to perform. It was more traditional for men to cook in the households and the women to bake or serve drinks. Serving drinks was done by all women in the community, not just the peasant women. Women did the jobs that needed done at the time and were not restricted to certain work. Women were dairy maids, cheese makers, weavers, and seamstresses along with other work they chose to do (para 2). According to research.uvu.edu women were only allowed to work through their fathers or husbands until they died. Once the fathers or husbands died the women could have the freedom to do the types of work they preferred. Many women enjoyed painting, making pottery, doing embroidery, and composing music. Women also played very important roles in times of war. They were expected to learn how to fight so that they could help protect their homes, towns, and castles. Some armies were solely made up of women. If a woman did not have a brother she was allowed to participate in seeking revenge for the death of a family member. A woman could be treated as the male heir and would be in charge of the respect of paying and receiving the wergild and possibly if there was no agreement of the wergild to retaliate with a feud (para 9-19). Other sources would disagree and say that women were not treated equal to the men of their communities.
Marriage played an important part in women’s roles in Anglo-Saxon times. According to csis.pace.edu, women had the possibility to marry anyone they chose and were occasionally put into arranged marriages, but they had the right to refuse. The women who were in the arranged marriages were called peace-weavers. It was believed that if a woman had the child of a man from another tribe, their blood would mix and that would keep the peace between the tribes. Land could be owned by anyone in that era, so it was used to bribe women into marriage. If a man was rich, he often offered land, cattle, horses, slaves, and estate. Marriage contracts were signed to show that everything was shared equally between the couple (para 1-2). When the English church came in women’s status changed drastically.
The English church settled after the Norman Conquest and the roles of women were dropped. Women could not own land unless it was through their husband or father, they were not allowed to have as many responsibilities, and they had to do everything through the church. According to wikipedia.com women had to take vows of chastity, poverty, and obedience and could be given authority positions by males in the church. Through the church, women were not allowed to teach, take an oath, be a judge, or a witness because they believed that married women had no authority and had to stand under the lordship of a man. The Church set strict rules about virginity as a virtue and faithful monogamy. This was said to lower an individual’s chances of acquiring status (para 2-4). Many sources say that the church was the reason for women’s loss of responsibility, but some sources would disagree and say that women were never treated equal, even before the English Church came.
The poem the “Wife’s Lament” is a famous poem written about an Anglo-Saxon woman. There are many analyses’ of this poem, but the one most credited talks about how an Anglo-Saxon woman was used as a peace-weaver and then her husband commits a murder and leaves her. Gradesaver.com states that she is very upset about being forced into a marriage and the fact that her husband abandons her. She is very upset and angry that women were supposed to hide their pain and heartache behind a smile. Scholars have analysed the poem and believe that the peace-weaver was married into a violent tribe who forced her to cut all ties with her family or that her husband had imprisoned her (para 2-10). Either way the poem hints that women who were married as peace-weavers did not have a choice in the marriage and were not treated equal to men.
In my personal opinion, based on the facts shown above, women were treated equal to men until the English Church came in after the Norman Conquest. Evidence shows that women could own land, agree or disagree to marriages, choose their occupation, and live equally to the men of the community. Sources also show that when the church came in they made strict rules about how women were supposed to act, that they were not allowed to have authority positions in the community, and that they were not allowed to choose their occupation or choice in husband, while the men of the community were allowed to do whatever they pleased. I do not believe that the evidence shown in “The Wife’s Lament” is strong enough to show that women were always treated this way. The poem was also analyzed multiple times and showed many other opinions about what the poem is actually about.
“Early English Laws Project.” Early English Laws: Women and law in the Anglo-Saxon period. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2017.
SEIDENBERG SCHOOL OF CSIS. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
“Anglo-Saxon Women.” Anglo-Saxon Women. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2017.
“Legal rights of women in history.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 21 Mar. 2017. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
“Women in Anglo-Saxon society.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 21 Mar. 2017. Web. 13 Mar. 2017.
“Women in Anglo-Saxon England.” Women Anglo. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Book, Anonymous – Exeter, Asked ByCrysthal C #624769Answered ByAslanon 3/16/2017 8:03 PM, Crysthal C. #624769, Asked ByCrysthal C #624769Answered ByAslanon 3/16/2017 4:49 PM, and Asked ByCrysthal C #624769Answered ByAslanon 3/16/2017 4:48 PM. “Exeter Book “The Wife’s Lament” Summary and Analysis.” GradeSaver: Getting you the grade. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2017.
Hollis, Stephanie. Anglo-Saxon women and the church: sharing a common fate. Woodbridge,: Boydell Press, 1998. Print.
“The history of medieval crime and punishment is filled with harsh punishments. The punishments were harsh because the overall system was influenced by the Church and such punishments were given in order to create fear in the hearts of the people and to keep them from committing crimes. Punishments were mostly given through trials by ordeal in which the innocent and guilty both had to go through tough ordeals. In the 13th century AD trial by ordeal was replaced by trial by jury.”
With the first judges being church leaders and ministers, the system seemed rigged in its own way. Many victims had felt that there was no chance of getting a fair trial, and that their fate was sealed with the crime committed. The Church made it clear that the crimes would be punishable by shame, mutilation, or even death. Yet, there were still many people stealing, cheating, and committing small crimes in order to survive or for their own vain needs.
My opinion? Yes, it was very cruel, but did it work? With most punishments being severe for even the slightest offense made the margin for error that much smaller. If stealing a loaf of bread was the same as murdering 20 people today, do you think there would be that many thefts as there are in today’s society? Someone knowing they could be tried for a stealing a loaf of bread and may end up being sentenced to death may be more inclined to stay home and starve instead.
Where did the thought of justice come from? “The particular attributes that became associated with Justice harken back to the Babylonian iconography of the god Shamash and to the Egyptian goddess Ma’at.” (digitalcommons.com) Dating back to early Egyptian times, justice and punishment began. The earliest times were cruel and obsessively unusual types of punishment, many involving disembowelment, dismemberment, and most likely, fire. Over the last few centuries, it has evolved into what has become a more civil type of law and order, but that doesn’t take away the gorey past.
“In today’s society we do not use torture as a means of punishment, as history progressed torture became less prolific, it was only 100 years or so ago that this was considered a barbaric practice.” In America, the 8th Amendment is titled “Cruel and Unusual Punishment,” outlawing forms of excessive penalties. While in other countries, such as Vietnam, caning in public is still a very normal behavior. So where does the line start and end? Most people think that “cruel punishment” starts with physical altercation. In fact, according to abc.com, 65% of the nation believes in spanking their kids as a form of punishment, yet 35% believe it is unusual and should have no place in today’s society. Is this considered “punishment”? Well of course it is, but why do many people still think of it as outdated?
I think it is definitely a much simpler time, in terms of the way our government handles punishment. The world has evolved to so much more than quartering someone for taking a piece of bread. But what if this was still normal? Would crime be as rampant in cities such as Chicago and Los Angeles? We may not know, but senators and officials have made it known that many people think capital punishment should be reinstated, thinking this would control some levels of crime.Works Cited
Justice in the Rennassaince
Guido Rugerio
The Sutton Hoo burial site was discovered in the year 1939 by Mrs. Edith Pretty at Sutton Hoo, Suffolk. The burial sites were found on her land and she brought in archaeologist Basil Brown. According to www.khanacademy.org (para 3), the archaeologist started her excavation with mounds 2,3, and 4 but found her greatest discoveries under mound 1. The first 27-metre long ship outline was found and it proved the existence of Anglo Saxon warriors, along with the treasures that were found (para 4).
Coins, gold ingots, byzantine silverware, gold jewelry, a lavish feasting set, and an ornate iron helmet were among the treasures (para 5), but the most historical treasures found were the Sutton Hoo Helmet and the king’s golden belt. As stated by www.google.com the helmet weighed about 2.5 kilograms and was decorated with powerful beasts such as a dragon with the eyebrows of the helmet being its wings and the mustache being its tail. Boars heads and pictures of Sutton Hoo warriors also accompanied the beasts on this treasure. The famous belt, as mentioned earlier, is a living example of how people of the Sutton Hoo era expressed their social status. For example, the bigger and more elaborate the buckle, the higher the social status and respect for that man. These gold buckles tended to weigh around 412.7 grams according to www.google.com (para 24 and 25) and were decorated with thirteen different serpents, birds of prey, and mysterious four-legged creatures.
Along with the artifacts found, the archaeologists dug up disagreement as well. According to www.khanacademy.com (para 5) it is stated that graverobbers found the burial sites and stole most of the treasured historical artifacts. It is also stated on www.archaeology.co.uk (para 2) that graverobbers never discovered the tombs, it wasn’t until 1939, as stated before, that the burial sites were discovered. This controversy is one of two that surrounds the topic of the Sutton Hoo. The second is whether or not the Sutton Hoo warriors actually existed, instead of just being characters in poetry. It is referred to on www.khanacademy.com (para 6) that the Sutton Hoo people, their ships, treasures, and way of life was just a myth written in poetry and for thousands of years, people believed it to be just that. But the discovery itself put those disbeliefs to rest, because it proves that such people, ships, and treasures did exist at some time.
The burial site found in Suffolk, England was among many later discovered. Other sites include Bewcastle, Cumbria, North Yorkshire, Chesire, Northamptonshire, and many others according to www.historic-uk.com (para 1). Among these sites were a majority of churches, crosses, and market places all surrounding the Anglo-Saxon culture and way of life.
With reference to www.historic-uk.com (para 41), 1200 years ago in Bewcastle, an Anglo-Saxon cross was placed on the grounds of St. Cuthbert church. This cross, being about four meters high, is considered one of the earliest known sundials in the country of England. Another Anglo-Saxon cross was discovered in Cumbria in the churchyard of St. Paul’s church (para 43).
(Para 30) states that in North Yorkshire stands a church called St. Gregory’s Minster. It was built in the 11th century and it was discovered that this church held a viking sundial written in the language of the Anglo-Saxons. As for another church discovered, All Saint’s Church in Northamptonshire was once thought to be apart of an Anglo-Saxon manor, but unfortunately the only part remaining of this wonderful breakthrough, is the bell tower (para 27).
And lastly is the market square in Chesire that has been recently reassembled. This marketplace ages back to the 9th century AD and contained,not only anglo-saxon life, but also religion. Chesire held two anglo-saxon crosses that were considered unusually large (para 48). Unfortunately, when the Civil War struck, these artifacts were torn down and broken into separate pieces. In the year of 1816, these remarkable artifacts were then reassembled and may be viewed today.
For thousands of years the Sutton Hoo culture was debated as a myth, it was considered nonexistent. It’s puzzle was missing pieces, with an unfinished picture. Thanks to this history making archaeological dig, the missing pieces were filled in and this remarkable culture’s existence became visible as well as the same for the culture of Anglo-Saxon. Despite all of the controversies, Sutton Hoo and the Anglo-Saxons made its mark in history with treasures beyond hope, poetry, stories, and the way of life itself.Work cited
https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/medieval-world/latin-western-europe/early-medieval/a/the-sutton-hoo-ship-burial
https://www.google.com/culturalinstitute/beta/u/0/exhibit/sutton-hoo-anglo-saxon-ship-burial/gQOPNM9M
https://www.archaeology.co.uk/specials/the-timeline-of-britain/sutton-hoo.htm
http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryMagazine/DestinationsUK/AngloSaxonSites/
All Things English Language Arts... 