Masculinity In Shakespeare

Masculinity In Shakespeare Masculinity used to be a political question in the times of early modern England. Such expressions as courage-masculine and manly virtue had some peculiar meanings and showed the duty and responsibility to the ideals and values of aggressive Protestantism. Diplomatics, compromise and other ways to settle the conflicts considered to be feminine. William Shakespeare had his own opinion about the militant-Protestant warship of brave masculinity and his view was quite skeptical. Presenting series of various portraits of the menacingly charismatic soldier-hero, Shakespeare made a turn to an unusual kind of leader at the later part of his career of a writer. If the protagonists of the warlike tragedies call up a Herculean model and prototype of manliness, The Tempest draws a portrait of a ruler who uses the arts of culture and civilization in order to return peace to a divided world. The new masculine characters are really developed and not similar to each other in many aspects, but there are strong features which stay common for them. There are several Shakespeares plays receiving close readings, those include Troilus, Cressida, Macbeth, Coriolanus and the plays I am going to investigate in the essay: Henry V, Hamlet and Othello. Masculinity is expressed by various protagonists in the plays. This trait embraces brave and courageous deeds and actions, fearless and undaunted decisions of characters full of fortitude and strength in different situations. Thus, play Hamlet (Shakespeare, Hamlet) reveals courageous character of Hamlet vivid for masculinity traits. The importance lies in the fact that this trait is leading in the decision-making process during the action, the absence of masculinity would change the way characters behaved. The author describes the era when manliness is crucial in peoples lives, it is a kind of a mover. Masculine characters are opposed to less manlike and coward weak features, like Iago in Othello and King Claudius in Hamlet. This contrasting opposition reveals masculinity of other heroes in a brighter way, allowing the audience to realize an overall characteristics of masculinity. Thus it can be supposed that different sides of masculinity (lofty and low-lying traits) not only shows brave characters but also serves as an educative element via influence on the audience with an aim to outline and form an idea of masculinity and its importance in the life. Beyond all doubt, Hamlet is masculine as he is ready to revenge for the murder of his father. But he is also hesitant in some way that appears as his inner conflict within the play. To be, or not to be: that is the question, says Hamlet (Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act 3, scene 1) deciding whether to take vengeance on the King or not, though Hamlet defeats this fear in his mind and without any hesitation revenges for his father. The importance of masculinity in Othello is also crucial, as this trait forces the hero (Othello) to commit murder of his beloved wife. It is an interesting fact that this feature is characteristic not only of men but also of women in the plays. Thus Desdemona even after being wounded by her husband was near death but said that she wouldnt reveal the murder, as much she loved her husband. Thus, masculinity is highly important for unwinding of the action and revealing the protagonists way of lives, characters making the plays impressive, persuasive, and worthy of admiration real classic masterpieces in the world literature. Next I would like to compare and contrast in some way three protagonists of the plays: Henry V, Hamlet and Othello. In spite of the fact that a particular number of scenes also do focus on the other characters, Henry straightforwardly initiates almost all of the important actions in the plot, and he is obviously the works hero and protagonist. Another protagonist is Hamlet who has charmed readers and audiences for many years, and the first thing to say about this character is that Hamlet is very enigmatic. Always there is much more about him than all the other heroes of the play can realize. Even the most caring and intelligent readers finish the text with such a feeling that they havent learnt all there is to identify about this particular character. Hamlet notices to other characters that there is way more than the eye can meet for him. And same as Henri Hamlet is the one to initiate the dramatic actions of the story. While he talks, Hamlet sounds as if there was something really important he wouldnt say, probably something that even he himself is not conscious about. Truly the talent to write s uch monologues and dialogues which can create this effect is one of the writers most significant achievements. And Henry is an exceptional figure too; he also possesses not just a degree of intelligence but almost as much of charisma as Hamlet does. Perhaps Henry Vs most noticeable quality is his resolve and firmness: once that he has made a decision to complete a goal, he would use all the resources that are at his disposal in order to see that it is done. He heedfully presents himself as an insurmountable force to which others need actively to choose in what way to react. This strategy may seem morally doubtful on the one hand, but it is a strong masculine feature and really valuable psychological weapon that is used by Henry to suppress his enemies and make them doing that he needs. More and more, Henry acts in such a manner that would be lamentable for a usual citizen but that makes Henri look as an exemplary royalty. As an example, Henry often receives some criticism from the m odern readers for rejecting to take amenability for the war with France. Henri even says the French governor that if the French soldiers do not surrender, they will be answerable for the slaughter that he will then start. Othello is as firm as Henri, but Hamlet is absolutely different kind of hero. He is very philosophical and meditative. That is a new type of a male character created by Shakespeare. And it seems to me that Hamlet differs from Othello and Henri much more than any other of these three. He is drawn to puzzling matters or questions that are not able to get an answer with particular certainty. Hamlet becomes totally obsessed with the idea to prove his relatives fault before starting acting. He is also disturbed by questions about what happens to people after death, about the sense of suicide, about what bodies become after the soul leaves them, etc. But even in spite of the fact that Hamlet is full of thoughts to the degree of obsession, he still behaves impulsively. Wh en the protagonist acts, he does it with unexpected and sudden speed and very little or simply no forethought (when he kills Polonius through the curtain with his sword without taking a short look who was there. It seems important to me, that Hamlet is very melancholy and dissatisfied with many things in his life, such as state of Denmark and the situation in Hamlets own family. Coming back to Henri V, one more outstanding quality that he has is his freedom with language usage. Henrys rhetorical skill seems a very powerful weapon, the force of which is almost the same as his armys power. With his speech, Henry can inspire his followers, terrorize his opponents, and persuade almost any person who listens to him. With Henrys words, William Shakespeare establishes rhetoric which is, just like Henry, at the same time openly frank and very experienced and sophisticated. Othello is of course also able to captivate others with his conversation. The dukes reply to Othellos speech about how he was seeking marriage with Desdemona by using his tales of adventure is: I think this tale would win my daughter too. Othello occasionally presents himself as an outsider and foreigner, may be because he realizes his exotic attractiveness or because he is defensive about his distinction from other citizens of the city. For instance, in spite of his evident oratory in Act I, scen e iii, he does still protest: Rude am I in my speech, / And little blessed with the soft phrase of peace (Shakespeare , Othello 24). Although Othello never behaves as a rude person and never speaks like that, he still allows his elocution to decrease because he gets more and more under the influence of Iagos intrigues. Before the final part of the play, Othello recovers his presence of mind and then captivates both the characters and audience with his strong speech. And I have already mentioned above that Hamlet is a great speaker too just as other two characters. Henry has another very interesting quality for a king: the capability to seem honestly while manipulating the listeners and partners in the conversation. This feature wasnt respected as others before, as it is a quality of a wise diplomat, not a quality of a warrior though. Shakespeare does not give a direct comment on Henrys reasons for invading France, but we may see easily from the kings speeches the weight of his responsibility, so the reader can make a conclusion, that Henry is not moved by the lust for more power or money. Henry simply takes his position in life as a king really seriously, and he has dedicated himself to the fulfilling of those duties of his noble rank. It is seen clearly from Henrys nationalistic speeches that the author has an intention for the audience to see Henry V as a real national hero, or as a great and estimable king as minimum. So as the king is a hero, he is made such a person by his devotion to his duties that seemed above own private emotions for him. Together with his ability of resolution, the adherence makes Henri the emperor he is; in spite of the fact that it sometimes produces very questionable private settlements, it also helps to mitigate the effect of those decisions in our eyes. The same words may also apply to Othello, as his personal decisions were wrong too he murdered his own wife but really his commitment to his principles was much more important for him than his own feelings. As for Hamlet, it looks to me that personal feelings are much more important for him, he is jealous about his mother, misses his father and some of his actions really bring more danger to the country, so I think that duty was less of importance for him in comparison to the other two male characters. Now Id like to pay more attention to Othello, who himself is an embodiment of generous, courageous military leader, beloved husband in a combination with blind deep trustfulness and naivety in his attitude to his friends. These main features are truly masculine and in some way he even can be referred as an ideal man. But his foolish trust makes him do absurd things, crying, giving oath of revenge. Trustfulness is a comic element as such character is weird for the reader. The fact that Othello may be looked at as a comic character sometimes makes him different from Hamlet and Henri, who always look serious to the audience. It is surprising that such a strong-willed, courageous Othello can trust and believe as sincere as a child. Behaving sometimes as a child may be really called one of very masculine features of character, as playing games always stays in male souls deeply in heart. There is a saying that Man is a child by his nature. Open-heartedness and ingenuousness are rare features that in the play lead to tragic consequences a murder. Othello believes Iago unconditionally and after the fight of Cassio and Rodrigo he clarifies details of a fight from an honest Iago (Shakespeare, Othello 45). Othello is confirmed in positive and good-natured character of Iago thus removes Cassio from the post. Every hero in the play believes Iago this contributes to the comic of the drama both Desdemona and Cassio are touched by an advice of kind Iago who is sincerely express sympathy to the bad luck of others. Tragic events in the play are developing impetuously, but comic foolishness and trustfulness make contrast with tragic elements creating an authentic picture of human life when any dramatic event is not devoid of comic features and irony. Iago makes Othello jealous and he cannot resist suspicion, he is immersed in his misery but still blindly believes only Iago who masterly shows insulted honesty, and as a friendly a dvisor, he convinces Othello in unfaithfulness of Desdemona and Othello gives an oath to revenge on the knees. Iago directs behavior of Othello and even makes him faint, convince that his wife is of a frivolous character. Here I want to say that Henri and Hamlet have nothing comic in their characters and stories of lives, especially Hamlet who is a truly tragic in all the situations. In spite of the fact that Othello is seen as a cultural and national outsider in Venice, his authority as a soldier and leader is notwithstanding very valuable and important to the country, and he is an inalienable part of Venetian society. He is in very needed by the duke and other representatives of the government, as an evidence there is Cassios remark that the senate sent about three several quests (Shakespeare, Othello 123) in order to look for Othello. The Venetian senate has enough of confidence about Othello to give him a position of a full war and political commander of Cyprus. This quality may be considered as a classic masculine one and we can make a parallel with Othello here, but talking about Hamlet we definitely see some difference. Hamlet is more of a philosopher and he needs time to make his own decision either to be or not to be. In my opinion it is prominent that the prince and heir who is aware of Denmarks problems can think about those only in individual and phi losophical terms. He doesnt spend much time thinking about the dangers of national security or the threatening to its steadiness from inside (in spite of the fact that some of those were helped to be created by his own indiscretion). On the other hand Othello owes such strong masculine qualities as generousity, courage of military leader and strong soldier, being a great husband. But trustfulness and naivety are the two qualities which may put Othello aside from Hamlet and Henri V. Masculinity plays an important role in Shakespeares plays Henry V, Othello and Hamlet. Masculinity is highly important for unwinding of the action, characters making the plays impressive, persuasive, and worthy of admiration. There can be seen an educative element via influence on the audience with an aim to form the modern concept of masculinity. I have noticed that all three characterized protagonists own great rhetoric talents, are very developed, have a deep sense of honor and duty. Some of personal traits may differ, such as open-heartedness, ingenuousness, decisiveness, philosophical understanding of the world. That creates a new type of masculine heroes, who are not as flat as some of their predecessors. They are really developed and granted with deep inside worlds by the talent of a great English dramatist.

Effect of the Internet on Society Essay

The world in which we live is vastly different than that of even those who lived in the generation that came before us, especially in the arena of computer technology. Few would debate that the most revolutionary innovation of the last several decades, along with the home computer is the Internet. It is through the Internet that the average person can access the largest libraries and art galleries of the world, instantly review the news and weather up to the minute, and communicate with others-all without leaving the classroom, home or office. In fact, Internet technology has also made it possible for online access from the local coffee shop or fast food restaurant. Like other advances that came before it, however, the Internet brings up questions as to whether the Internet helps or harms society, what the implications are for an Internet society, and other key considerations. This research will analyze and discuss these various issues in an effort to better understand where the Internet began, where it will go in the future, and what it means to the modern society itself. The Birth of the Internet Before the Internet can fairly be examined and discussed, it is important to take just a slight step back in time and look at the origins of the Internet. Many people falsely believe that the Internet was the creation of marketing gurus who sought a better way to sell products and advertise to the masses in an instant, or the brainchild of a certain former vice president of the United States, but in reality, nothing could be farther from the truth. What many do not realize is that the Internet was, in the beginning, a top secret American governmental creation to allow for the effective sharing of information between the many government authorities. The first version of what we today know as the internet was launched in 1969 by the Advanced Research Projects Administration, ARPA (Vangelisti). Eventually, to make a long story short, the Internet was introduced to the general public, and soon gained massive popularity that in the 21st century has included use by people virtually from age 1 to 100. Just as quickly, the debate of the utility and best use of this awesome technology arose. Use and Usefulness of the Internet On a typical day in the United States alone, over 55 million people of all ages and demographic backgrounds access the Internet for purposes ranging from business to entertainment to academia and beyond (DiMaggio, et al). Any media form with this type of influence and allure for the general population will undoubtedly have its share of supporters and critics, legitimate users and abusers. With this consideration, it is worthwhile to discuss exactly why people use the Internet and if the Internet itself, in the end result, is really as useful as the hype surrounding it seems to indicate. A common denominator for the ultimate utility of almost any technology or product is of course money- if something cannot create monetary value, in the eyes of many, it is essentially useless. This traditional view was quickly realized by those who pioneered Internet usage in the general public in the 1980s. Before that time, anyone who wished to engage in the selling of any commodity, from shares of stock to cardigan sweaters needed to physically set up a physical place of business for customers to visit for the transaction of business, keep regular business hours and so forth, spending many thousands of dollars in the process and of course being limited to doing business in a realistic geographic area. Thanks to the Internet, however, a great deal of business can in fact be done from anywhere, as long as both parties in the transaction have computers and Internet access (Monthly Labor Review). Beyond the traditional business arrangement, in recent years, what has come to be known as telecommuting has emerged. Basically, telecommuting allows a worker to complete assigned work tasks away from the traditional office setting by using computer/Internet technology for communication, transference of data, etc. Additional popular uses for the Internet are in education, allowing for school children to access libraries thousands of miles from their classroom, or for homebound individuals to study the curricula of some of the top universities in the world. Certainly, the Internet has demonstrated already that it has a wide range of uses, and with time, more of those uses will emerge. This being understood, however, the issue of the usefulness of the Internet needs to be weighed. In researching the idea of the Internet as either something highly useful or causing more harm than good, it is fair to say, and is in fact supported by evidence, that the Internet can in fact be highly useful in a complex and fast moving world such as the one in which the people of the 21st century live. Even before the Internet was brought forward for the general public to use in more traditional settings, it is not unreasonable to assume that the technology had protected the citizens of the US from a military and governmental standpoint in countless ways that most people would not be aware of for obvious reasons (DiMaggio, et al). In the public arena, Internet technology has made it possible for physicians across the globe to consult on medical cases to save lives; essential news and information has been spread in split seconds, and billions of dollars of revenue has been generated through the use of the earlier discussed e-commerce applications of Internet technology. These uses are hard to dispute or to question the value of; however, there are likewise some areas of question for the usefulness of Internet technology. It was discussed earlier that the Internet has in fact made it possible for many people to work or conduct business away from the traditional sites of that work or business-telecommuting, virtual study for eager young minds and the transmission of vital data at the speed of light. The natural assumption would be that these features would bring pure benefit with no ill effects. However, the reality is that with many other things, those will less than pure intentions have turned the Internet into an open season for criminals. In brief, the Internet has given rise to a new breed of criminal who harnesses the power of computers to steal valuable information from its rightful owners, defraud innocent people, and victimize innocent children (Vangelisti). No innovation is without danger; therefore, the key for society to safely interact with the Internet in the future will be to use common sense and be aware that there are those that would harm them in the online world. The debate of the usefulness or lack thereof, as well as safety or danger of the Internet could take up thousands of pages and never fully be satisfied; what can be looked at in a more defined way, however, are the implications for a society that seems to spend much of its waking hours online. Implications for an Online Society For a generation of adults who changed their everyday lives due to the advent of the Internet, as well as a generation of children who were literally born and raised in the age of online interaction, there are of course implications that have been seen and are worthwhile to discuss. While the implications for the material world as it were has already been covered, the implications from a social and psychological vantage point are just as significant, if not more significant. For children who are sat in front of a computer keyboard as soon as they are able to use their hands to touch the keys, it seems that the first effect that multimedia like the Internet will have on the developing mind of a child is again what some would call a double-edged sword. Obviously, a child who has the ability to hear classical music, view priceless art, and learn as much as possible as their young mind is in its formative years would have a much better chance of maturing into an intelligent adult than the child who spent his or her early years taking in the often obscene content of cable television programs. On the other hand, if a child is enabled to access the Internet without restriction and precaution, they could in fact be exposed to content that is in fact worse than anything that has ever been seen on television. Either way, this is a key consideration for an online society, as there have been countless studies which prove that an early childhood which consists of the viewing of obscene and violent content can spur mental disorders in these people in childhood and moving into adolescence and adulthood. Additionally, even in the cases when the child does not evolve into a criminal or problem individual, there are also social problems which take place when children, or even adults, substitute an artificial media source such as the Internet for the traditional communication methods such as having face to face conversations with other people. Research proves that the activity of interacting with people in person helps children to develop key social skills that are necessary for the proper development of the human personality. Adults also have to continually sharpen their interpersonal skills. Therefore, when the Internet becomes the main outlet for the communication between people of all ages, what is seen is a society of isolated people who lack the necessary social skills to be fully functional members of that society itself. This can lead to increased psychological problems over the long term (The Classroom in Cyberspace). The physical wellbeing of society, especially children, is also affected by the Internet. The wide appeal of the Internet is without question and as a consequence, the children who are growing up with the Internet as a regular part of everyday life are spending a majority of their waking hours using the Internet not only for studies, but also for communicating with other children via e-mail, playing online games, etc. When a child picks up the computer mouse instead of engaging in physical activity such as playing outdoors with a soccer ball, for instance, the affect on developing humans is staggering. Research proves that when human beings choose sedentary activities like endless hours of Internet usage as opposed to engaging in outdoor activities that include physical exercise, the occurrences of obesity skyrocket, which in turn can lead to chronic ailments such as high blood pressure, diabetes and cancer (Wartella & Jennings). It would appear that for all that the Internet has to offer, too much of a good thing is a bad thing. Conclusion As we have seen in this research, the Internet is both a benefit to society when used properly and a threat when abused or used to excess. Looking back through the history of innovation, this same conclusion applies to the introduction of motion pictures, radio and television, yet society has managed to survive, even with those in it that would seek to cause problems and harm others. Therefore, in conclusion, what can fairly be said about the effect of the Internet on society is that the ultimate effect is in the hands of every member of society. The challenge going forward will be for individuals to realize that the Internet can be the best invention of the age- if they will only allow it to be. References â€Å"The Classroom in Cyberspace. † The Mail on Sunday (London, England) 11 Feb. 1996: 30. Dimaggio, Paul, Eszter Hargittai, W. Russell Neuman, and John P. Robinson. â€Å"Social Implications of the Internet. † Annual Review of Sociology (2001): 307. â€Å"Telecommuting or Work Invasion. † Monthly Labor Review 123. 3 (2000): 62. Vangelisti, Anita L. , ed. Handbook of Family Communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004. Wartella, Ellen A. , and Nancy Jennings. â€Å"Children and Computers: New Technology-Old Concerns. † The Future of Children 10. 2 (2000): 31.

Son of God

Page 1 Marrisa Lumia Jesus Across the Millennium March 29, 2012 Jesus: The Son of God A meaning behind a name can be very significant. It can be a way to interpret someone, describe him or her, and see who he or she really is. Jesus is a man who has numerous names and various meanings to them. He is the known as a teacher, a famous prophet, a miracle worker, and a wonderful example. One significant name that Jesus is known for is the Son of God. At the heart of the Nicene Creed it states â€Å" the only- begotten Son of God†. The Son of God is to be of the same nature as God and the Son of God is â€Å"of God†.Out of all the names for Jesus, Son of God has had one of the most lifelong impacts in Christian history and has become part of the profession of faith by many Christians. But according to the theological view, Jesus is known as a respected prophet, but not as the Son of God. The Son of God is extremely significant in the historical context, Christianity, and to t he theological view. What exactly does the Son of God mean? Literally speaking, it does not mean that God procreated him, it is much more spiritual than that. Jesus was â€Å"chosen to be† the â€Å"Son of God† by the Resurrection from the dead.This was not in human flesh, but by the power of the Holy Spirit. This means because of the Resurrection from the dead, Jesus Page 2 was not just another physical offspring of David. Jesus was the divine Son of God who went sent down from God to save us. There is disagreement about Jesus’ nature and his relationship with God the Father. Many believe in the trinity and use expressions God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit in attempts to express this saying as all three persons. On the other hand, many believe that there is only one highest being who expressed Himself in three different ways.They believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are purely forms of God. While others trust that God is the o nly divine being and that Christ is only a created being. It is taught in the Bible that the Messiah was Jesus, whose â€Å"mortal† parents were Joseph and Mary of Nazareth. Jesus was a man who lived a sinless life and then gave His life on the cross in order to redeem mankind from their sins. According to John 1:11-12, â€Å"He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name. The historical view of Jesus had many names and meanings, but in the Scriptures Christians referred to Jesus as the Son of God. In both the Old and New Testament Jesus was referred to as the Son of God. In the Old Testament Son of God is recurrent. According to NewAdvent. org , the word â€Å"son† was used by many of the Semites to represent close connection or intimate relationship. A hero or warrior was known as the â€Å"son of strength†, a wicked man â€Å"son of wickedness†, and a possessor â€Å"son of possession†. In the Old Testament the label â€Å"Son Page 3 of God† was applied to persons having any special relationship with God.The title â€Å" Sons of God† were referred to as Angels, leaders of the people, kings, princes, and judges because they withheld authority from God. In the Old Testament, Jesus was not only known as the Son of God but he was also called Emmanuel (which means God with us), Wonderful, God the Mighty, Prince of Peace, Counselor, the Father of the world to come. In the New Testament, the Son of God is referred to Jesus Christ in both the Gospels and Epistles. By expressing His Divinity this shed light on many of the meanings attached to passages of the Gospels.In the New Testament, an angel announced: â€Å"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High†¦ the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God† (Luke 1:32, 35). Also it states that Nathaniel, at his first meeting, called Him the Son of God (John 1:49). Ironically the Devils and Jews also referred to Him as the Son of God. In each one of these cases, the meaning of Son of God was equivalent to the Messiah. A puzzling question from the theological standpoint that raised conflict was, â€Å"How could Jesus be The Son of God, and God at the same time? The question has been on the minds of many Theologists for centuries. Christian theology depends on the Father-Son language to correctly describe the connection between Jesus and God. For thousands of years, Christians have believed that there is one God, and three persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each of them being one with God. According to Christian theology, there is a problem with the doctrine of trinity. The doctrine states that there is precisely one God; which means that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God; and that Father, Son, and Spirit are separate.T his could mean that ‘is God’ Page 4 either means ‘is identical God’ or ‘is divine’. Either way there is a problem to this puzzle. One way it opposes the doctrine is if the Father is equal to God and the Son is equal to God, then it would conclude that the Father is identical to the Son. Another way this opposes the doctrine is if the Father is divine and the Son is divine and the Father is separate from the Son, then there are at least two divine persons, which means there would be two Gods. According to theology, either way the doctrine would be missing pieces to its puzzle.Jesus was a man of wonder with many names and meanings to them. He was known for being a teacher, a famous prophet, a miracle worker, and a wonderful example. One significant name that Jesus was known for is the Son of God. Throughout Christian history the title Son of God has had a lifelong impact on Christian and became part of their profession of faith. The development o f the theological view was very different. Jesus maybe known as a respected prophet, but he was not as the Son of God. The title of Jesus as the Son of God is very significant.He is a man of glorious wonder and faith. Although through the theologists eyes Jesus maybe the Son of God but is not God himself. But in the historical view and the Bible, the Son of God is extremely significant and respected. Page 5 Bibliography Dunn, James Douglas Grant. , and Scott Mcknight. â€Å"Chapter 4. † The Historical Jesus in Recent Research. Winona Lake, Ind: Eisenbrauns, 2005. 271+. Print Borg, Marcus J. , and N. T. Wright. The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions. [San Francisco, CA]: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998. Print.Aherne, Cornelius. â€Å"Son of God. † The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 14. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. 13 Apr. 2012 http://www. newadvent. org/cathen/14142b. htm Dunn, James Douglas Grant. , and Scott Mcknight. â€Å"Chapter 4. † The Historical Jesus in Rec ent Research. Winona Lake, Ind: Eisenbrauns, 2005. 271+. Print â€Å"Son of God. † Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 04 Dec. 2012. Web. 13 Apr. 2012. . Murray, Michael, and Michael Rea. â€Å"Philosophy and Christian Theology. † (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). Web. 13 Apr. 2012.

A Brief History Of The Mayan Civilization - 2938 Words

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MAYAN CIVILIZATION Michael Costa History 157: History of Latin America May 8, 2015 Mayan civilization peaked too early to impress the Spanish in the manner of the Inca and Aztec empires. The great Mayan ceremonial centers visited by modern tourists were all in ruin when the Spanish arrived in the 1500s. In fact, the highpoint of Mayan imperial organization was almost a thousand years earlier. Mayan city-states were located in high mountains, in densely forested tropical lowlands, and on the arid Yucatà ¡n peninsula. Like the Mexicas (and other indigenous people of central Mexico), the Maya built stone pyramids, but they did not dedicate any to human sacrifice. Mayan cities contained ball courts where opposing teams tried to get a rubber ball through a stone hoop. The game was not a sport, but a ritual, and often a matter of life and death. Mayan writing, composed of symbols called glyphs, was the most elaborate created by any indigenous civilization. In an attempt to eradicate Mayan indigenous religious belief, the Spanish conquistadors burned large collections o f Mayan writings. The Mayan language lives on today, but its linguistic fragmentation mirrors the political fragmentation of the city-states. Modern Mayan is a family of languages, rather than a single language. Quichà © and Mam, two modern Mayan languages, are no more alike than English and German or French and Italian. Life was good to those luckyShow MoreRelatedA Country Isn t Born From One Of The Most Beautiful Countries1226 Words   |  5 PagesA country isn’t born from one day to another, and they all have a history. It’s certain that they have come a long way, but because of the sacrifices they’ve had to make along the road. Mexico, being one of the most beautiful countries, has a reputation for its beaches, food, and tourist attractions, but all that glitters is not gold. Mexico attracts tourist from all over the world and its culture has spread to all parts of the world, but it’s not so pretty side, crime, has also had an impact onRead MoreEverything about the Number Zero586 Words   |  2 Pagesthat Zero to the Zeroth Power doesn’t have a value. Extended History Of Zero A long time ago there was no zero in math. People knew that they didn’t have anything but they had no way to symbolize it. The credit for the first recorded Zero can be given to the Babylonians in 300 BC. A long period followed this where no one used Zero as a placeholder. Then the Mayans, independently invented Zero in 4th Century AD. The Mayans were very good at mathematics, astronomy, art, and architecture. TheyRead MorePositive And Negative Impact Of Mexico1299 Words   |  6 Pageswas a land inhabited by many different tribes, all having their own government, economies, and social systems (history-world.org, 2015). These groups of people, which included Aztecs, Mayans, Zapotecs, Huasatecs, among many others, were agriculturalists, hunters and gatherers, politicians, and religious leaders, forming civilizations and empires by conquering lands and forming cities (history-world.org, 2015). In 1519, Spanish explorers arrived on the shores of Mexico, and with the arrival of theseRead MoreLatin American Destination Project Essay1818 Words   |  8 Pagesif you wish. 11. History background - provide brief description of important information regarding your destination and its history. Must be in paragraph form. You could list cool facts as a bonus. Mexico City: The history of Mexico city is very interesting. People have been living in Mexico city before the arrival of the Aztecs in the thirteenth century. Around 100 b.c, the first ancient civilization of Mexico, the Olmecs, settled in Mexico. Around 400 b.c, their civilization mysteriously disappearedRead More Honduras Essay2311 Words   |  10 Pagesnbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; HISTORY Honduras lies at what was the southern tip of the Mayan civilization that spread southwards from the Yucatà ¡n peninsula through modern Guatemala to the city of Copà ¡n, now in north-west Honduras. The Mayan civilization collapsed long before the arrival of Christopher Columbus, who visited Trujillo in north-east Honduras in 1502 on his third voyage to theRead MoreIntroduction. Tobacco Use Throughout The United States1254 Words   |  6 Pagesof tobacco use by poverty status. Are less fortunate individuals more likely to use tobacco compared to middle-class and higher-class individuals? Brief History Where did tobacco originate and how did it develop into the deathliest substance known to man today? Tobacco has had a long existence in the Americas, dating back into the Mayan civilization (healthliteracy.org). Before the Europeans came to the Americas, tobacco was grown by American Indians and was soon the first crop grown for money (healthliteracyRead MoreThe Value of Gender and How it Represents the Body in Society1528 Words   |  7 PagesIn order to answer the question I would like to explain in brief the value of gender and the ways it represents the body in the society. The term â€Å"Gender â€Å"and â€Å"Race â€Å"is by now used so frequently in academic discussions. While sex differences are rooted in biology how we come to understand and perform gender is based on culture. As it is said by ( Byers Dell ) that we always view culture â€Å" as a process through which people circulate and struggle social relations, and therefore, our selves.Read More The History of Tattoos Essays2153 Words   |  9 Pagesraising scars. This is the definition; however, to many a tattoo has more of an abstract, personal meaning. Tattoos symbolize individuality, experiences, status, religion, and art. They come in many shapes, sizes, colors, designs, and styles. The history behind the tattoo is just as fascinating as the tattoo itself. Whether flaunted or hidden, sought as art or bought out of a whim, the tattoo has left its mark on generation after generation (Krakow). The purpose of tattooing varies from culture toRead MoreFrom Indio to Filipino4934 Words   |  20 PagesFROM INDIO TO â€Å"FILIPINO† The  history of the Philippines  is believed to have begun with the arrival of the first humans via  land bridges  at least  30,000 years ago.[1]  The first recorded visit from the West  is the arrival of  Ferdinand Magellan, who sighted  Samar  on March 16, 1521 and landed on  Homonhon  Island southeast of Samar the next day. Before Magellan arrived,  Negrito  tribes roamed the isles, but they were later supplanted by  Austronesians. These groups then stratified into: hunter-gathererRead More Tamales: History, Regional Differences, and Family Cultural Interpretations 5900 Words   |  24 PagesTamales: History, Regional Differences, and Family Cultural Interpretations Introduction: Tradition has been said to mirror a way of life. Observation has concluded that participants in tradition â€Å"actively construct as well as reflect culture and community† (Sacks 275). For most people in the 21st century, tradition only reveals itself during special times or certain seasons. For others it is simply a way of life. The foodways of Mexicans and Native Americans are of particular