British Culture - User contributions [en]

Great Chain of Being

2010-07-12T21:44:49Z

Stallkbs:

The hierarchical structure of all matter and living beings. A classical and medieval Christian concept, the Great Chain of Being was believed to be ordained by God.

The concept of the Great Chain of Being or “scala naturae” gives every existing thing a place in the hierarchical structure made by God. It was used not only in the classical Christian period, but also in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
The Great Chain of Being differentiates and orders the things according to their proportion of “spirit” and “matter”. Creatures with more “spirit” have a higher position, than things containing more “matter”.
The Great Chain of Being divides all beings in groups, which are also structured hierarchically within themselves:

'''God''', as omnipotent and omnipresent creator of all other beings, is at the top of the ladder and consists only of “spirit”.

'''Angels''' consist also only of “spirit” and are beyond the limitations of time. They possess language, emotions and feelings, but unlike God lack omnipotence and omnipresence.
The group of angels had several subdivisions during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, creating three, seven, nine or even ten different groups of angels, but most common was the division made by Dionysius (~500 A.D) and St Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) with nine groups of angels and their hierarchy: Seraphim, Cherubim, Thrones, Dominations, Principalities, Powers, Virtues, Archangels, Angels.

'''Man''' combines “spirit” and “matter”, because human beings are spiritual beings with passion and reason, but also have a body and are bound to the limitations of time. They have a special role in the chain of being, because of this duality between “spirit” and “matter”. Especially in the Renaissance the human being was seen as a “microcosm” reflecting the “macrocosm”, namely the structure of the world and its constituent parts: the four elements. The “humours” of the body “black bile”(earth), “yellow bile”(fire), “phlegm” (water) and “blood” (air), resembled the four elements. This shows also the correspondence between the different groups of the chain of being.
In addition to that the concept of the chain of being was not only used by humans to differentiate themselves from other forms of beings, but also to create an order within themselves. Kings and Queens for example were directly positioned after the group of angels at the top of the groups of man (in other versions they are only below the Pope or on the same level with him). Other mighty people like Archbishops, Dukes and Bishops succeeded, while common people were seen in lower positions. The chain therefore provided a rationale for the authority of the rulers.

'''Animals''' lack the spiritual competence of humans but are animated beings with limited intelligence. They are also classified in several subdivisions, according to their living spaces or their skills. For example animals like mussels are at the bottom of the chain, because they can not move on their own, whereas the lion and the elephant are considered as intelligent, powerful animals and therefore on the top of the animal group.

'''Plants''' are living beings, which can grow and reproduce, but cannot move on their own and have no intelligence. Trees build the top of this group, while fungi are at its bottom.

'''Minerals''' are the lowest beings, because they cannot grow and reproduce like plants and have no “spirit” but consist only of “matter”. They are divided into gems, metals and other forms of minerals like marble, sand etc.

Although the Chain of Being divides the different beings into groups, the concept of continuity is of high importance in the ideas of the Middle Ages. This means that there are no huge differences between the groups, for example, between animals and plants, because the lowest animals are those, which are already close to the status of plants, according to their abilities to interact and to move etc. Furthermore the concept of correspondence shows the relation of all groups to each other, showing that everything is part of God’s creation and therefore belongs together and cannot be separated completely, but only ordered.

The '''concept of “correspondences”''' is especially relevant concerning the preservation of a monarch’s power. Not only was he or she – by nature – placed above all other human beings and therefore had the divine right to rule, but according to the correspondence, an act against the King would entail horrible consequences for the disloyal, the state and even the entire universe. This idea is summed up by E.M.W. Tillyard under the headline “Macrocosm and Body Politic”. It means that order in the state duplicates order in the macrocosmic world. It was an effective mechanism against any revolutionary tendencies within the state.

Another form of correspondences is for example the interconnectedness of “Macrocosm and Microcosm”; meaning what has been said above about the “four humours”, man resembling a universe in himself with four elements. In the same respect, the blood circling our veins equals the rivers flowing on the surface of the earth, our breath stands for the air, the hair for the grass and the heart in the centre of the human body is equaled to the sun in the centre of the universe. Just as the correspondence between the political body and the universe can preserve the monarch’s power, this idea could serve as a moral statue and hypothetically bring somebody to live a ‘healthy’ life.

While the Great Chain of Being provides a comprehensible order for the people, the correspondences connect it to the people’s everyday life.

==Sources:==

http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/ren.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_chain_of_being

Lovejoy, Arthur O.: ''The Great Chain of Being. A Study of the history of an idea'', Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1961.

“Renaissance.” A Guide to the Study of Literature: A Companion Text for Core Studies 6, Landmarks of Literature. 23 Sept. 2001. Dept. of English, Brooklyn College, 10 July 2010. http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/ren.html.

Tillyard, E.M.W.: "The Elizabethan World Picture." New York: Vintage Book, 1959.

Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley

2010-05-31T20:20:39Z

Stallkbs:

*** I don't know how to change the title to 'Henry Stuart - Lord Darnley'. If anyone knows how...***

Henry Stuart was, as his title ‘Lord Darnley’ proclaims, member of the Scottish Parliament as the 1st Duke of Albany and even in line for the Scottish crown due to his family relations. However he is more famous for the prominence of his wife Mary Stuart and the circumstances of his death.

He was born on December 1545 in Yorkshire and was killed only at age 21 on the 10th of February in 1567 in Edinburgh.1

[[File:henrystuart.jpg|200px|thumb|left|A Portrait of Henry Stuart - Lord Darnley]]

In 1565 he married Mary Stuart, his cousin (among other intricate family connections), who had either fallen in love with him or married for political reasons, depending on the source.1 The marriage soon bore their only child in 1566, James I, who later would unite the English and Scottish throne under his crown and herald the start of the Stuart regency in Britain.2

The couple separated not long after their marriage, when Henry believed that Mary Stuart had a relationship with her Italian private secretary David Riccio and that she even was pregnant by him. Driven by envy, Henry Stuart and some accomplices violently entered a banquet at The Palace of Holyroodhouse where Riccio and Mary were present, and Riccio was stabbed to death under the eyes of Mary.

Only a year later, Darnley got word of an imminent conspiracy against him and fled to safety in Glasgow. There however, he fell seriously ill and when Mary came to visit him, husband and wife became reconciled. After a mutual trip to Edinburgh, Darnley was staying at Kirk o’Field, just inside the city walls of Edinburgh. On the evening of the 9th of February 1567, Mary said goodbye to her husband and left him for some festivities inside town. On the next morning, the apartment building blew up by a gunpowder explosion in its basement and Henry Stuart was found dead. Surprisingly however, his body was located at a distance to the destroyed building and showed signs of strangulation. It is speculated that he tried to flee from his murderers but was caught and strangled.1

[[File:kirkofield.jpg|200px|thumb|left|This painting shows the scene of Kirk o'Field after the explosion.3]]

A group of Scottish conspirators under the lead of James Bothwell where held responsible. Since Mary was well acquainted with Bothwell, it is believed that she at least knew, if not ordered the murder of her husband. The fact that the murderer subsequently kidnapped her to Dunbar where they got married for a wonder supports this assumption.2

References:

1. Alison Weir: Mary, Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley. Random House, New York 2004.

2. Maurer, Michael: Kleine Geschichte Englands. Reclam: Stuttgart 2007.

3. http://www.learningcurve.gov.uk/snapshots/snapshot02/kirk-o-field-popup1.htm [as accessed on 31/05/2010]

Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley

2010-05-31T20:19:28Z

Stallkbs: Created page with 'Henry Stuart was, as his title ‘Lord Darnley’ proclaims, member of the Scottish Parliament as the 1st Duke of Albany and even in line for the Scottish crown due to his family…'

Henry Stuart was, as his title ‘Lord Darnley’ proclaims, member of the Scottish Parliament as the 1st Duke of Albany and even in line for the Scottish crown due to his family relations. However he is more famous for the prominence of his wife Mary Stuart and the circumstances of his death.

He was born on December 1545 in Yorkshire and was killed only at age 21 on the 10th of February in 1567 in Edinburgh.1

[[File:henrystuart.jpg|200px|thumb|left|A Portrait of Henry Stuart - Lord Darnley]]

In 1565 he married Mary Stuart, his cousin (among other intricate family connections), who had either fallen in love with him or married for political reasons, depending on the source.1 The marriage soon bore their only child in 1566, James I, who later would unite the English and Scottish throne under his crown and herald the start of the Stuart regency in Britain.2

The couple separated not long after their marriage, when Henry believed that Mary Stuart had a relationship with her Italian private secretary David Riccio and that she even was pregnant by him. Driven by envy, Henry Stuart and some accomplices violently entered a banquet at The Palace of Holyroodhouse where Riccio and Mary were present, and Riccio was stabbed to death under the eyes of Mary.

Only a year later, Darnley got word of an imminent conspiracy against him and fled to safety in Glasgow. There however, he fell seriously ill and when Mary came to visit him, husband and wife became reconciled. After a mutual trip to Edinburgh, Darnley was staying at Kirk o’Field, just inside the city walls of Edinburgh. On the evening of the 9th of February 1567, Mary said goodbye to her husband and left him for some festivities inside town. On the next morning, the apartment building blew up by a gunpowder explosion in its basement and Henry Stuart was found dead. Surprisingly however, his body was located at a distance to the destroyed building and showed signs of strangulation. It is speculated that he tried to flee from his murderers but was caught and strangled.1

[[File:kirkofield.jpg|200px|thumb|left|This painting shows the scene of Kirk o'Field after the explosion.3]]

A group of Scottish conspirators under the lead of James Bothwell where held responsible. Since Mary was well acquainted with Bothwell, it is believed that she at least knew, if not ordered the murder of her husband. The fact that the murderer subsequently kidnapped her to Dunbar where they got married for a wonder supports this assumption.2

References:

1. Alison Weir: Mary, Queen of Scots and the Murder of Lord Darnley. Random House, New York 2004.

2. Maurer, Michael: Kleine Geschichte Englands. Reclam: Stuttgart 2007.

3. http://www.learningcurve.gov.uk/snapshots/snapshot02/kirk-o-field-popup1.htm [as accessed on 31/05/2010]

File:Henrystuart.jpg

2010-05-31T20:14:37Z

Stallkbs: uploaded a new version of "File:Henrystuart.jpg"

File:Kirkofield.jpg

2010-05-31T20:13:10Z

Stallkbs:

2010-05-03T18:33:56Z

Stallkbs:

The House of Wessex

2010-05-03T18:33:06Z

Stallkbs:

The House of Wessex was one of the seven kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England, known as 'the heptarchy'. In reaction to the ongoing attacks by the Danish invaders, the heptarchy united under the Family of Wessex to form the Kingdom of England in 871. It's first King was Alfred the Great, who ruled vom 871 until 899.

It's regional descent is located correspondingly to today's counties of Hampshire, Dorset, Wiltshire, and Somerset. [http://www.http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639995/House-of-Wessex 1]
[[File:anglo-saxon-kingdoms.jpg]]

The dynasty of the House of Wessex is referred to as the 'Saxon Period'. It lasted from Alfred the Great's reign until the death of Harold II in 1066, when the Norman King William the Conqueror heralded the start of the 'House of Normandy'. The Wessex' regency was however not contiuous: It was interrupted from 1014 until 1042 by Danish conquerors and then restored for the two regencies of Edward the Confessor and Herold II.

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/ansax.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639995/House-of-Wessex

File:Anglo-saxon-kingdoms.jpg

2010-05-03T18:32:23Z

Stallkbs:

The House of Wessex

2010-05-03T18:30:42Z

Stallkbs: Created page with 'The House of Wessex was one of the seven kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England, known as 'the heptarchy'. In reaction to the ongoing attacks by the Danish invaders, the heptarchy unite…'

The House of Wessex was one of the seven kingdoms in Anglo-Saxon England, known as 'the heptarchy'. In reaction to the ongoing attacks by the Danish invaders, the heptarchy united under the Family of Wessex to form the Kingdom of England in 871. It's first King was Alfred the Great, who ruled vom 871 until 899.

It's regional descent is located correspondingly to today's counties of Hampshire, Dorset, Wiltshire, and Somerset. [http://www.http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639995/House-of-Wessex 1]
[[File:Example.jpg]]

The dynasty of the House of Wessex is referred to as the 'Saxon Period'. It lasted from Alfred the Great's reign until the death of Harold II in 1066, when the Norman King William the Conqueror heralded the start of the 'House of Normandy'. The Wessex' regency was however not contiuous: It was interrupted from 1014 until 1042 by Danish conquerors and then restored for the two regencies of Edward the Confessor and Herold II.

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/ansax.html

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/639995/House-of-Wessex