Definition and determinants of price elasticity

Definition and determinants of price elasticity Definition of price elasticity (PES) to supply refers to a measurement of relationship between change in quantity supplied and a change in price. There is a few determinants that affects the outcome of the PES. One of the determinants is time period. Supply will be more elastic when time given to a company to change its adjustment is more. In short run, the time given to firms and companies are too short to adjust or change and adapt. For example, Sammys burger face a shortage of beef meat as raw material. It is inelastic if the time period is limited to a few hours only. The price of the burger might increase but the there is simple no other methods to help Sammy. In long run, time given to firms and producers are long enough to adjust their firm size and prepare for firms to enter or leave. In this way, Sammy would have enough time to search for alternate way for new resources. Another determinant is resource substitution possibilities, which means some goods or product that can only be produced or made by using special technique or limited resources. These products have a very low elasticity of supply or maybe zero. However goods which are commonly produced that could be simply found have a relatively high elasticity of supply. Example, Louis Vuitton handbags are all handmade from genuine leather, hence there are less products that may substitute it. The PES of Louis Vuitton is much more inelastic. Question 2B Price Businesses can use the concept price elasticity to decide their pricing strategy by determining whether the good to be sold is inelastic, elastic, unitary, perfectly inelastic, and perfectly elastic. If the price elasticity is inelastic it shows that the percentage change in quantity demanded is less than the percentage change in price. For example, good A is given a discount of 10%, but quantity demanded only increased slightly by a 3%, thus is will be a smarter way to gain more profit by increasing the price instead of decreasing and only quantity demanded will only decrease slightly. Diagram 2.1 shows the demand curve of this case. 10% Quantity demanded D Diagram 2.1- Inelastic Demand 4% Furthermore, when the demand of a certain good is elastic it shows a scenario which the percentage change in quantity demanded is larger than the percentage change in price. For example, good B is an inelastic good, hence giving discounts or decreasing the price will attract more customers, thus increasing the total revenue of the business. Diagram 2.2 shows the demand curve of good B decreasing the price by 10% and earning 20% more quantity demanded. Price 10% D 20% Quantity demanded Diagram 2.2- Elastic Demand Thirdly, if demand of a good is unitary elastic, which the percentage change in quantity demanded equals to the percentage change in price. Any rise in price will be exactly offset by a fall in quantity, leaving the total revenue unchanged. In Diagram 2.3, it shows that when given a 10% discount, quantity demanded will increase by 10%; the total revenue earned is the same as before discount. Therefore, producer should decrease the price of product, manufacturing less goods saving more time and man power and redirecting it to another productive product. Price 10% D Quantity demanded Diagram 2.3-Unitary Elastic 10% When demand is perfectly inelastic, the quantity demanded will not change as the price change. Consumers will not response to any change in price at all. In diagram 2.4, it shows that when price decrease by 10%; no changes are to be seen. Hence if producers increase the price of the product, quantity demanded will not be affected. Price D 10% Quantity demanded Diagram 2.4- Perfectly Inelastic Price Last but not least is perfectly elastic demand, where only slight percentage change in price will cause an infinite percentage change in quantity demanded. This means that consumers have a great response to a change in price. Hence, producers should remain the price or follow the market value and not simply changing the price because a small change can bring an infinite change in quantity demanded. D Quantity demanded Diagram 2.5- Perfectly elastic Question 3A Supply is the production of a certain good or product by suppliers or future suppliers for the market a variation of price at a certain time period. From the law of supply, if the price of a certain good increase, so will the quantity supplied of the good. A supply curve is a graph that shows quantity of goods that producers will supply according to the price. The graph will always sloped upwards to the right side because quantity supply is bigger at a dearer price. Diagram 3.1 shows how a supply curve is. Price Quantity supplied Diagram 3.1 S0 Price There are a few reasons supply of a product will increase. If there is an increase in supply, the supply curve will shift rightwards. Diagram 3.2 shows a shift in the supply curve from S0 to S1. S1 Diagram 3.2 Quantity supplied Firstly, a decrease or increase in the cost of making a good will determine the supply. In this case, cost of raw material or packaging too will affect the cost price. If cost of raw material for a certain good drop, suppliers will tend to produce more good and hence the supply will increase. Example, the cost of flour drops and results to an increase supply of bread. The drop in cost of flour the raw material of bread will lower down the cost of production thus suppliers will be able to produce more. Hence, the supply increases. Secondly, the improvement in technology will affect the supply of a certain good. Improvement in technology is able to decrease the cost of production and increase productivity of a certain good, thus resulting in an increase in supply of good at every price level. For example, the development in robotic arms and computers enabled car manufacturers to produce cars in a faster pace yet with a promising product. Hence, car manufacturers can cut cost at man power and also costly mistakes. Supply will increase as the technology continues to develop. Last but not least, is the price of substitute goods and competitive goods that may affect the supply of a good. Producing these goods requires similarly the same raw material. Hence, producers will choose to concentrate on the product which is more profitable and a better demand rate. Example, nukia N99 is more popular compared to nukia M99, thus producers will try to produce more nukia N99 which is more profitable than nukia M99. Hence supply of nukia N99 will increase. Question 3B Economists are saying that price floor and price ceilings can control the distribution of scarce good to those consumers who value them most highly. Price floor also know as minimum price is set above the equilibrium price to take effect. By doing so, goods have to be sold at a minimum price; hence minimum profits are earned by suppliers. On the other hand, price ceiling or the maximum price is set below the equilibrium price to take effect, lowering the price will attract consumers. Diagram 3.3 shows the price floor and Diagram 3.4 shows the price ceiling. Price S e Pe D Piece ceiling (Max. price) Diagram 3.3 Price Ceiling Quantity Demand Price D S Quantity Demand Piece Floor (Min. price) e Pe Diagram 3.4- Price Floor S : Supply curve D : Demand curve Pe : Price Equilibrium e : Equilibrium point Rationing function of price is the increase or decrease in price to clear the market of any shortage or surplus, while the resource allocation defines as an amount of resource given to a party for a specific purpose. The price floor and price ceiling are said to be stifle the rationing function of prices and distort resource allocation because they are made by the government to make sure suppliers gain profit. But this may result in surplus between demand and supply. As an example, good A is set at a price floor of $20 which is $5 more than the price at equilibrium. Some consumers are willing and able to buy the product at a higher price, and producers will continue supply good A. producers may raise the price of good A, but in return less consumer will buy it. This may result a surplus in the market. Other than that it also results distort resource allocation because not all products are able to be sell out. S: Supply curve D: Demand curve Pe: Price Equilibrium S Price of good A surplus $20 Pe D Quantity demand of good A Furthermore, once a price ceiling is put onto a good by the government, a shortage will happen between the supply and the demand of the product which eventually causes stifle of rationing function of prices and distorts the resource allocation. For example, salts have a price ceiling of $3 per packet, which is determined by the government. In other words, consumers are able to buy salt at a much cheaper price. But suppliers will not be able to make a better profit; hence supply will be limited by producers. This results to a shortage of salt in the market. Distort resource allocation occurs, thus not all consumers are able to buy salt because of the stocks are limited. Price of salt (per packet) S: Supply curve D: Demand curve Pe: Price Equilibrium Quantity of sugar (package) S Shortage Pe $3 D Question 5A The definition of demand can be defined as quantities of a good or service that people are ready and willing to buy at various prices within some given time period, other factor besides price held constant, ceteris paribus. Price of Cintan First of all, a change in demand will cause the demand curve to shift rightwards. Other than the price of the good itself, there are a few other determinants that leads to a shift in the curve. Some of the determinants are price of substitute or complementary good, size of a household income, taste and fashion, weather condition, and etc. the curve will shift rightwards if there is an increase in demand and vice versa. Example, a drop in the price of Maggie instant noodle which is the substitute of Cintan instant noodle drops from $3 to $2. In this case, the demand of Cintan will drop, hence the demand curve of Cintan will shift leftwards. This is because consumers will be attracted by the cheaper good and not the dearer one. According to the law of demand, as the price of a good decrease, the quantity demanded of the good rises and vice versa, ceteris paribus. Diagram 5.1 shows the demand curve of Cintan instant noodle shift from D0 to D1 when a there is a decrease in demand. D1 D0 Diagram 5.1 Quantity Demanded On the other hand, a change in quantity demanded is shown as a movement along the demand curve. The one and only factor which can results a change in quantity demanded is the price of the good itself. When the price decreases, the quantity demanded will increase and vice versa, ceteris paribus. For example, in Diagram 5.2 an upward movement from A to B along the demand curve due to an increase in price of cheese from $5 to $8. The quantity demanded of cheese decreases from Qd0 to QD1 according to law of demand. Price of cheese($) 8 B 5 A Diagram 5.2 D Qd1 Qd0 Quantity demanded of cheese D: Demand curve A: point A B: point B Qd: Quantity demanded Question 5B Income elasticity of demand (YED) shows the proportionate  change  in the  demand  for a good in  response  to a change in households income. YED can also be explained as the percentage change in quantity demanded divided by the percentage change in households income. Below is the way YED is written down in formula form: The percentage change in quantity demanded YED = The percentage change in households income There are several degrees affecting the YED. First degree of all is the positive YED. The outcome of the YED is a positive outcome, which means that demand will rise as income rise too. Positive YED can be further broken down into two categories, income elastic and income inelastic. Income elastic is said to be income elastic when the outcome is greater than 0 but lesser than 1 (0< YED 1) it is said to be income inelastic. This is because the percentage change in quantity demanded differs by a large percentage over the percentage change in households income. The good is known as luxury, example of luxury goods are branded items, sport cars, and branded clothes. Second degree of YED is negative YED, which is a negative outcome of YED value (YED< 0). In this case, when demand falls, income rises. Goods under this degree are known as inferior good. Example of inferior goods are second-hand items, replica items, and low class good. Last but not least is when YED equals exactly to zero (YED = 0 ). This only occurs when the quantity demanded does not change as the income changes. All the goods under this degree are necessity. Basic needs such as rice and salt are utilized on daily life, hence income will not affect the demand. Question 6A Diagram 6.1 Consumer surplus is the difference between total amount that consumers are willing and able to pay for a good or service and the total amount that they actually pay. Producer surplus is the difference between what producers are willing and able to supply a god for and the price they actually receive. The level of producer surplus is shown by the area above the curve and below the market price. Price of good Consumer Surplus S: Supply curve D: Demand curve Pe: Price equilibrium Q: Quantity D S Pe Quantity of good Producer Surplus Consumer surplus shows the highest price customers are willing to pay and the market price that they are actually paying for. Consumer surplus tells us that customers gets the benefit from paying lesser than the actual price. The area under the demand curve and above the price equilibrium represents the consumers surplus. For example. A consumer whom is willing to pay $20 for Good A but the actual price for Good A is only $5 to have it. Hence the consumer surplus is $5 which is the value that is paid lesser than what he is willing to pay. Other than that, the area above the supply curve and under the price equilibrium represents the producers surplus. For example, producers are willing to sell their product shoe at a price of $100 but instead the market paid them $200. Hence, the producers received $100 more than they are willing to take, $100 is the producers surplus. (Geoff Riley, Eton College, September 2006, http://tutor2u.net/economics/revision-notes/a2-micro-consumer-producer-surplus.html .) Question 6B Scarcity, choice and opportunity cost are the three basic concepts of economics. Scarcity is a case where human needs are in excess compared to resources available. Choice is the time where humans are force to make a choice by scarcity between two or more choices. But for every choice humans make, another will be sacrificed, and the sacrificed choice are known as opportunity costs. The above concepts are best explained by a production possibility frontier graph (PPH) that shows various maximum combination of two outputs that the economy produce. A few assumptions are set on the PPF graph- only two products produced, efficient production, fixes production, and fixed technology. Moreover, any points outside the reach of the PPF is unattainable points and the point which lies beneath the PPF is possible to achieve and is also known as attainable points but usually not desirable, inefficient points. While points on the curve are possible outputs that is known as efficient points. E B A 10 9 C 8 5 D 2 4 3 1 0 Diagram 6.1 Combinations Television Radios A 0 10 B 1 9 C 2 8 D 3 5 E 4 0 Table 6.1 In this case, the society faces a scarce resource to produce televisions and radios. Therefore, the society will have to make a choice to produce which good more or less. If combination A is chosen, 10 radios will be produced while none for television. 4 television are sacrificed or taken as opportunity cost. The following combinations happens as the table shown above.

Is Media Globalization A Form Of Cultural Imperialism Media Essay

Is Media Globalization A Form Of Cultural Imperialism Media Essay It can be argued that media globalisation can be a form of cultural imperialism but others may argue that its not. Many critics have defined globalisation or media imperialism as an important channel for the expansion of consumer-based culture extending across borders (Tomlinson J. 1997, p22). The critics have also defined the growing phenomenon of people from North America who tend to buy media and entertainment products from there. As a result they are heavily influenced with what the media tells them that the consumers seem to be led in one direction of culture and hence the effect of this is that people are dislodged from their own culture because of cultural imperialism which is a direct result of media globalisation and the effects of it. Media globalisation can play a huge role in various cultures thus impending cultural imperialism. For instance, the generation of ideas and culture from the developed and modern west to the undeveloped world such as Asia can result in homogenisation of consumerist culture which can endanger and alter cultural values (Tomlinson J. 1997, p23). Media imperialism can be defined as a progression where the arrangement, ownership allocation and the actual content of the media in a specific country can be influenced by external pressures from the content of the media in other countries or country without the same response of influence from the country that is affected (Boyd-Barrett, O. 1998, p160). The concept of media imperialism was developed after a broader analysis of cultural imperialism and dependency took place. Imperialism could differ in relation to other forms of media which consist of diverse heights, proportions of activity in various different media sectors. The definition itself refers to ownership, structure, distribution or content (Boyd-Barrett, O. 1998, p162). Many factors can affect media globalisation such as economic, social, cultural and political factors. Media globalisation is a form of cultural imperialism as media in places such as America with channels such as CNN broadcast government news which can most assuredly influence people from around the world as television is a communication channel and depending on what industry they belong to, it may biased thus it would contribute towards cultural imperialism which shows how the media integrates and thus affect it (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40). During the 1960s and the 1970s America and some other First World nations took the media to their advantage. America challenged the idea of the emergence of news and cultural factors for example film, music, television and advertisements and thus entertainment was portrayed through the media which helped to develop many countries (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40). Some critics such as Herman and McChesney argue that the main universal avenue, specifically in regards to the media, is still taken over by the American interests and by the American domestic market, although its importance may turn down as other nations become more prosperous and become more media active (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40). With the widespread of the Internet, it has given the media another channel to which to interact with the world and is the most useful, all-encompassing channel of communication used throughout the world. Media globalisation has greatly expanded the significance of communication through various media channels such as social networking sites on Facebook which has become so dominant that people from around the globe and from countless different cultures use these communication channels even though it originally originated from the West but which still has many affects on the less developed world. The radio is also another form of media which can generate globalisation in the sense that it has universal accessibility. The radio has been around for hundreds of years and it still seen as an influential tool in helping and expanding ideas around the globe. The radio in Europe was mainly used for governmental uses during the times of war and thus other countries from around the globe considered the radio as a popular movement as well as a political dissenter which was used to criticise the state policies (Boyd-Barrett, O. 1998, p162). Furthermore, the radio is a tool which can be used for media purposes, educational, entertainment and they provide as useful political mediums to benefit the community. Hence, although many people treat the Internet as a worldwide, electronic device which is best known for democracy at its peak, it has led to a divide and has its own disadvantages. The Internet and technology itself has affected many social and economic factors within the society which has also affected those living in undeveloped countries that people who are poor do not have access to the Internet and considering that the Internet is part of a global movement, they seem to be neglected. The radio can still solve this issue in the sense that the radio has been around for many years and the less fortunate people may have some or little access to it and can contribute to everyday debates, politics and communication (Boyd-Barrett, O. 1998, p162). In summary, media globalisation affects people on so many levels depending on which form of media they use that although the Internet revolution may leave some people neglected, the radio may help and act as a substitute. Thus the form of cul tural imperialism will depend on who uses what media and whether they are influenced by it or not. Schilers early definition of cultural imperialism was highly inclusive. He described it as the total of the procedures in which the community is placed into the modern world system and how powerful it is that it tends to attract, force or even induce social institutions by shaping them (Stevenson N. 1999, p22). Thus the way the social institutions are shaped, it liaises and advertises the morals and structures of the powerful centre of the actual system. There is no globalisation without media and communication but this is sometimes ignored. The media itself acts as a connector which interconnects different cultures from around the globe. Marshall McLuhan describes globalisation as inter-relations amid various countries which aim to highlight the electronic media and technology which increasingly integrates the world and therefore the events in a certain country may be experienced in real-time by other people which would make the world more integrated (Eds. Golding P. Harris P. 1997, p17). Hence people from around the world are imposed by the cultural imperialism which takes place in regards to the media which heavily influences the public. The fusion of different cultures from different countries can be integrated, mixed and represented into various foremost forms of media representation which can form the media globalisation and multiculturalism. The expansion of the business model of media, foreign investment in the media and the power of multinational advertisers were seen to threaten the use of media for nationally determined, development -oriented purposes (Eds. Golding P. Harris P. 1997, p16). Media globalisation is a form of cultural imperialism as the media is tied in with the cultural concepts which originate from the financial dealings of dependency. Thus the minor or Third World countries are dependent on the industrialised world for money, technology and commodities whilst delivering cheaper items ensuing in little advantage to the local economy (Eds. Golding P. Harris P. 1997, p16). Therefore, the role of this culture is to make the undeveloped countries satisfied with what they have. This idea is similar to Gramscis theory of hegemony, in which the privileged battle to use the media and in order to set a prominent ideology for culture and informational uses (Eds. Golding P. Harris P. 1997, p18). In conclusion, there are many theories in regards to media globalisation and whether it is a form of cultural imperialism. The media imperialism is not structured. Boyd-Barrett depended on an experimental definition. He believed that media imperialism was unequal in the sense it provided different set of connections amongst countries specifically in regards to the media (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40). On the other hand, Marxist centered his theory on the inequality of power and the path in which the media flows whereas Lee described the stages of media imperialism which was observed. He particularly focused on the emergence of television, overseas savings and the adoption of foreign models and their impact on cultures (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40). However, some other critics noticed that Lee had missed several correlations between the bigger context of dependency and the media especially advertising as the focal point (Straubhaar, J.D. 1991, p40).

A Poetic Journey of Love and Honor :: English Literature Essays

A Poetic Journey of Love and Honor A Trilogy of Love From the moment we met in early spring, as she stepped out of her car and threw her hair back, I knew I was in love. â€Å"Her long dark hair, her beautiful smile†¦when she say’s â€Å"hi†, I’m faint for a while†. While gazing into her soft beautiful eyes as she spoke, I couldn’t help but notice her laughter that accompanied that mystifying beauty. â€Å"Her laughter echo’s, the silence awakes†¦her beauty abound.. just makes my heart ache..† She told me she was from the mountains in Kentucky and how much she loved and wanted to return some day. â€Å"She comes from the mountains, A place she calls home†¦This place she loves, where she’s not alone†¦Ã¢â‚¬  I knew this was a woman like no other woman in my life. † She’s into my life like a song and a prayer†¦never before, it just wasn’t there..† In the days that followed, as we strolled in the park immersed with spring fragrances, I knew I would never be the same. â€Å"My life has changed like flowers in June†¦A new day is here, â€Å"smell the lilacs in bloom.† I found her not only beautiful but intelligent and I couldn’t stop thinking of her. â€Å"As your beauty comes into focus.. My thoughts are yours, forever yours†. The more I got to know her, the happier I became. â€Å"For no one has made me happier, filling my life as completely†¦ As you had made me, caressing me with your smile when our eyes meet..†. I set out to honor her whenever I could, she was such a wonderful mother and lover that I was compelled to tell the world. â€Å"If winds could talk, they’d tell a tale that fills the soul with love and warmth†¦ And just having known you, my life is for the better†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Then just like that, something changed and we were no longer together. â€Å"But now she’s gone like a crisp spring day, and I’m all alone... with nothing to say†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Where there once was love, is there no more. â€Å"I know not when, love came and gone†¦ where it ended or when it begun..† Today I can only hope and speculate about tomorrow and what might have been. â€Å"With each day passing only hope is alive†¦sweet dreams of a future that did not survive.

Loneliness and Friendship in Steinbecks Of Mice and Men :: essays research papers

The novel Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck describes the life of a man and his best friend who has the mentality of a child. Their friendship is very strong and this is unusual due to the other characters in the book being very lonely. Every time George and Lennie manage to stick a job out, Lennie makes a mistake and they are forced to leave. But they hope after all of their intense work that they can finally have their dream and get a place they can call their own. Through many difficulties and hardships they manage to deal with the arguments and lack of companionship at their workplace. Between the two key themes of friendship and loneliness Steinbeck makes the novel Of Mice and Men a real success. One of the ways Steinbeck establishes the theme of loneliness is through setting itself. Section one of the book is set at a pleasant and peaceful river a few miles south of Soledad. The first four letters sole meaning only. Also Soledad means lonely place in Spanish. The river seems very secluded and isolated. There’s nothing but nature. It’s a very harmonious and tranquil place. A clearing so quiet you could hear a pin drop. It’s also the place George tells Lennie to meet him if he gets into any sort of trouble. This is a complete contrast to where the rest of the book is mainly set. A ranch where George and Lennie the two main characters manage to find work. The ranch displays isolation mainly through the actions characters take and the events that happen. Characters in the novel also contribute to the understanding of the theme of loneliness. George Milton and Lennie Small are the two main characters in the novel. They are like two halves. â€Å"The first man was small and quick, dark of face, with restless eyes and sharp strong features.† George is the smaller of the two men but has taken care of Lennie for a while, since Lennie’s Aunt Clara died and this highlights the theme of friendship. He is the more knowledgeable one of the two. â€Å"You crazy son-of-a-bitch. You keep me in hot water all the time.† George gets a little irritated with Lennie at times but looks after him no matter what. Their friendship is solid has to watch over him at all times, as Lennie is incapable of looking after himself and is one of the many characters who doesn’t change at all through the novel.

Orientalism: Defined and Shown Through The Work of Henry Kissinger :: Orientalism Said Kissinger Essays

Orientalism: Defined and Shown Through The Work of Henry Kissinger Edward Said first published Orientalism in 1978 and the book has continued to open readers' eyes to the true effects of biased thought. Said carefully examines what he calls 'Orientalism' in an attempt to show how different cultures view each other and depend upon other cultures to define their own. This essay will include a brief definition of Orientalism as well as how Henry Kissinger has an Orientalist view upon developing countries, shown through numerous examples from Said's book. Given on the first few pages of his book, Edward Said allows his readers to absorb the concept of Orientalism early on in his book, adding to the definition throughout. Said presents his definition of Orientalism in three "interdependent" fashions, the first shown through the Orient's place among Western European culture: The Orient is not only adjacent to Europe; it is also the place of Europe's greatest and richest and oldest colonies, the source of its civilizations and languages, its cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most recurring images of the Other. In addition, the Orient has helped to define Europe (or the West) as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience. [pp. 1-2] Simply put, Said claims that Orientalism represents how Europe has defined themselves against Oriental characteristics. A second form of Orientalism comes from the academic world and is still prevalent in today's society. Said states that "anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient [regardless of field of study] is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism. In a more general sense, this can be seen when academics make the "ontological and epistemological distinction made between 'the Orient' and (most of the time) 'the Occident'" (p 2). Said states that while this form is not as common as in years past, Orientalism will exist so long as these ideas are taught. As the first of the two definitions deal with the "academic and imaginative meanings of Orientalism," the third meaning is derived from the combination of the first two. Said believes that Orientalism can also be thought of as "the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient- dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style, for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient" (p 3). Orientalism: Defined and Shown Through The Work of Henry Kissinger :: Orientalism Said Kissinger Essays Orientalism: Defined and Shown Through The Work of Henry Kissinger Edward Said first published Orientalism in 1978 and the book has continued to open readers' eyes to the true effects of biased thought. Said carefully examines what he calls 'Orientalism' in an attempt to show how different cultures view each other and depend upon other cultures to define their own. This essay will include a brief definition of Orientalism as well as how Henry Kissinger has an Orientalist view upon developing countries, shown through numerous examples from Said's book. Given on the first few pages of his book, Edward Said allows his readers to absorb the concept of Orientalism early on in his book, adding to the definition throughout. Said presents his definition of Orientalism in three "interdependent" fashions, the first shown through the Orient's place among Western European culture: The Orient is not only adjacent to Europe; it is also the place of Europe's greatest and richest and oldest colonies, the source of its civilizations and languages, its cultural contestant, and one of its deepest and most recurring images of the Other. In addition, the Orient has helped to define Europe (or the West) as its contrasting image, idea, personality, experience. [pp. 1-2] Simply put, Said claims that Orientalism represents how Europe has defined themselves against Oriental characteristics. A second form of Orientalism comes from the academic world and is still prevalent in today's society. Said states that "anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient [regardless of field of study] is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism. In a more general sense, this can be seen when academics make the "ontological and epistemological distinction made between 'the Orient' and (most of the time) 'the Occident'" (p 2). Said states that while this form is not as common as in years past, Orientalism will exist so long as these ideas are taught. As the first of the two definitions deal with the "academic and imaginative meanings of Orientalism," the third meaning is derived from the combination of the first two. Said believes that Orientalism can also be thought of as "the corporate institution for dealing with the Orient- dealing with it by making statements about it, authorizing views of it, describing it, by teaching it, settling it, ruling over it: in short, Orientalism as a Western style, for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient" (p 3).

The War of the Roses

The War of the Roses was a series of dynastic civil wars fought between the House of Lancaster and the House of York. Theses two houses fought for the English throne, and both thought it was theirs to take. The houses both claimed the throne due to the fact that they had decent through the sons of Edward Ill. So they both felt that they were deserving of the throne. This wasn't the first or the last time that these two houses fought each other, but this was by far their biggest encounter. One reason that these two started fghting was the aftermath of the Hundred Years War.The inancial and social troubles hit hard and they thought they could do better Job running things. People during this time started to panic and they all wanted a piece of the pie. Prior to the war, heirs to the throne started dying so the number of aristocrats started dropping slowly. Some people suggest that the English aristocracy was destroyed due to the War of the Roses, but I would argue differently. The fact that all these men were fghting over the throne does suggest that there were some deaths, but I don't believe that it was the cause of the removal of the English aristocracy.Before I make my argument on why I believe the aristocracy was not destroyed by the War of the roses, I want to give a brief outline of the war. The hostility rose after the death of Henry V and the infant Henry VI was in line to take over. Richard, Duke of York, challenged the right of Henry VI's crown because he wanted it for himself. He had descent through Edward Ill's surviving sons. There is evidence that shows how important the throne was to the people during this time and they were willing to do anything to try and get it. There was obviously some history behind the people who fought in the war and how the title of the war was amed.The Heraldic badges that associated themselves with the two houses, York and Lancaster, were roses. The House of York was a white rose and the House of Lancaster was a red rose . Early in the conflict, the York picked the white rose as their symbol, but the Lancaster rose was not introduced until after Henry Tudor won the battle of Bosworth. So the war was not called â€Å"War of the Roses† until years later after the war. During the war the participants wore badges to show which lord or patron that they were associated with. One example of this that I read was the white boar of Richard Ill worn by the Yorkist army.The houses were named after the cities York and Lancaster of course, but the houses didn't have much to do with the city it was named after. The House of Lancaster was established in 1399 by Henry of Bolingbroke. Henry of Bolingbroke was later crowned as Henry IV after he deposed his cousin Richard II. The next Lancaster king was Henry V and he died in 1422, but there was some hostility on who would take over the crown. When Henry V died he only had an infant son to take over. This is when Richard Ill challenged Henry VI's right to the cr own like I mentioned before.Richard Ill was a very powerful man and eld very important offices within the state. This was the first political disagreement between the two houses and the beginning ofa feud that would start a war. In 1453 Henry VI (by now he was old enough to take the throne) went into insanity. â€Å"Henrys condition was non-violent: as a result of depressive stuper he lost control of his limbs York, to take over as the protector of the realm. Henry recovered in 1455 and took over his duties, which forced York to take up arms of self-protection. The fighting started with the battle of St.Albans in 1455. â€Å"Their numbers were vaguely estimated t 3000 men, while the Duke of Norfolk and other friends were hastening to their aid; the Kings force was estimated at 2000 men. â€Å"2 Richard, Duke of York and the Earl of Warwick defeated the Lancastrians who was led by Edmund. Edmund was the Duke of Somerset, and he played an important role before the war for the Lanca strians. He was killed in this battle and Henry VI was captured which resulted in Richard being appointed Lord Protector. The queen, Margaret of Anjou, kept pushing the Lancastrians to challenge the York House.Things were pretty quite over the next few years, but it started heating back up in 1459. York and his followers were forced out of the country, but he would retaliate sooner than people thought he would. One of his strongest followers invaded England and captured Henry at the Battle of Northampton. The heavy rain played in the favor of the Earl of Warwick during this battle and capturing Henry was much easier than people think. This battle resulted in four years of truce between the two houses, but they still didn't like the other one.There wasn't any major conflict during this time, but it was still uneasy between them. The civil wars between the two houses continued in 1459. York returned to the country becoming the Protector of England, but was not able to take the throne. York moved north with his son Edmund, but the Lancastrian nobles surprised and killed both of them in the Battle of Wakefield. The Lancastrian army went south afterwards but was unsuccessful in the taking of London. York had an eldest son named Edward, Earl of March, who was later named King Edward IV.He was best known for winning the Battle of Towton. In Anthony Goodman's book he states, â€Å"At Towton Edward could muster probably fewer than half the peers that Henry could. â€Å"3 This goes to show ow big of a victory it was for Edward. He crushed the Lancastrian army in March 1461 by gathering the Yorkist armies resulting in a strong force that was too much to handle for the Lancaster's. It was the bloodiest battle of the war, which resulted in Henry, Margaret, and their son fleeing to Scotland. The next series of battles was over disputes within the Yorkists ranks.Warwick and his followers felt like they were a powerful group, and when they got looked over at Edward's court, it didn't make them very happy. Warwick didn't agree with a foreign policy that the king was putting n place and the tension grew greater. This resulted in another civil war in 1469, where Warwick and the Duke of Clarence instigated risings in the north. Then they defeated the kings supporters at Edgecote. There he held Edward prisoner, but nothing really came out of it. Edward had regained control by 1470 and made Warwick and Clarence fled to France. While in France, they allied themselves with Louis X'.Here is where things get a little tricky because they also allied themselves with their former enemy Margaret of Anjou. Working together, they went back to England in September of 1470. There, they forced Edward out of his throne and restored the crown to Henry VI. After being stripped of the crown, Edward fled out of England to the Netherlands with his supporters. There he got Burgundian aid and returned to England a year later. Edward outsmarted Warwick due to the fact that he kn ew the land, and talked Clarence into Joining his side. Then he easily defeated that Warwick was defeated and her and her son fled west to the safety of Wales.Edward anticipated that Margaret would do this and beat her there. She was captured as a prisoner, and her supporters were defeated. There her son was killed and Margaret didn't have much power or support after these series of events. Very soon after these events, Henry VI was murdered in the Tower of London. It is thought that Henry heard of the death of his son, and when Edward IV was re-crowned, he ordered Henrys death. Edward's throne was secure for the rest of his life and was never challenged or taken away. When Edward died in 1483, hostility begins again.Richard Ill took over the throne and he first moved to prevent the unpopular Woodville family of Edward's widow from participating in the government. Richard sed the suspicious Edward IVs marriage as pretext. To stop Richard, Henry Tudor (a distant relative of the Lanca strian king) was brought in and defeated him at Bosworth. He was then crowned Henry VI', and married Elizabeth of York to unite the two rival houses. Yorkist revolted and these were the last few battles of the war, but nothing really came out of it. These battles weren't very big or important; it was Just the fact that the Yorkist were upset that they were united.Many historians like to believe that the Wars of the Roses were the result of the English aristocracy being destroyed. After reading material on these wars and reading Kington Oliphant's article, I can't help but to think otherwise. According to Oliphant there are 27 historic houses. † There are about twenty-seven great historic houses that belong to the former division, if we adopt a fair test for the term â€Å"Historic House,† and excluede from it all those families which have not held an Earldom in the male line continuously for at least one hundred years, or thereabouts, before the Reformation. 4 The house s in the 13th century really started getting recognized, and this is the period that begins hostility between houses. This also is the period that you see a rapid decline in houses. † The Earls of Albermarle had died out so early as the Twelfth Century, and four great historic Earldoms dropped in the Thirteenth. The Century of Edward the Third swept away at least seven Norman Houses of the very first class; amoun which were those of Clare, Bigod, and Bohun,- names intertwined with the brightest achievements of our early history.In the first and more peaceful part of Henry the Sixth's reign, before Englishman had dreamt of civil war, the process of decay was Just as rapid. The last Mortimer, Earl of March, the rightful heir o the crown died a prisoner in 1424; the last Montacute, Earl of Salisbury, was struck down by a cannon ball at the siege of Orleans, not long before the appearance of the immortal Maid; the last Beauchamp, Duke of Warwick, passed away in 1445. â€Å"5 So w hat Oliphant is getting to is the fact that there were 12 houses that were already disappeared before the war even started.Well you might ask well there are still a number of houses to be counted for during the war so what is your point? Well from the start of the war (1455) to the end of the war (1487) there were a number of ouses that died that was unrelated to the war. Oliphant mentions the houses that died during the war but not because of the war. â€Å"Foremost in this category comes the name of Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal of the realm, who died in 1475. To this we may add the less known names of Bromflete, Harington, Scales, and Sudeley. The Wars of the Roses had nothing to do with the extinction of these five houses in Roses.The Bonville, Tiptoft, Beaufort, Holland, and Lovell all died during the strife. Oliphant tells the story behind each of these names and how they died to end their ouse. The point that I want to make clear throughout this paper is the fact th at the number of houses that had died out before the Wars of the Roses, clearly outweigh the number of houses that have failed since the beginning of it. Well you might ask, Why did this happen? YouVe gave me numbers and the fact that the Wars of the Roses didn't cause the fail of the English aristocracy, but how did it happen.Oliphant does a great Job of comparing another countries aristocracy to England's. He uses old Scottish houses and what they did compared to what the old English houses did. Two causes have preserved the old Scottish houses from sharing the fate of their English brethren. The first was the prejudice in favour of heirs male, which would not allow the lands of a noble family to be split up among co-heiresses; the second cause was the practice of allotting small estates to younger sons, whereby the chance of always having an heir male at hand was much increased. 7 Showing the old Scottish houses and how they did things like this proves that there was a way to sav e the old English houses, but they failed to do so. Land was a big issue back then and it still is today. The Scottish houses knew that and knew they had to do something to preserve that land. They had to find a way to keep in the heir's family so it wouldn't eventually die out like most of the old English houses did. The next way the Scottish â€Å"preserved† their houses was the practice of allotting small estates to younger sons.The probability of always having a male take over the heir was a lot higher than if they didn't do this. These are Just some ways that the Scottish houses did to ensure that they didn't run into the same mistake that the English did. To me the English houses didn't invest in themselves very much. They didn't have a back up plan in case something happen to them and they died out. Historians studying this era tend to think that the Wars of the Roses wiped out these houses so they weren't really thinking about investing in themselves.Oliphant proves t hat most of these houses were already died out ten years prior to the war so that assumption is inaccurate. There was a lack of effort in making sure that the houses never died out, but there shouldn't be any excuse for it. They should be prepared for the freak accidents or the natural causes that may come their way for the sake of the house. I believe that it was a little about pride, and the old Scottish aristocracy had that. They were proud of their houses and they wanted to keep it going.The English were to caught up in other things to think about, what happens to the house if something happens to me? What I wanted to get out of this paper was to know more about the War of the Roses and to dig deeper inside the war. I wanted to find something worth arguing about and giving evidence on my point of view. I found out that the English houses started to die out and historians had suggestions for why this was happening. Some had the ame mindset I had, and others thought it was because of the war.I believe that the war had an effect on some of the houses during time, but it didn't have the extinction effect that people said it did. The Wars of the Roses was a great time period and had a lot of conflict that went with it. I'm positive that the conflict did have a little effect on the old English aristocracy dying out, but to say the war was the reason why it was destroyed makes no sense at all. In my opinion it was irresponsible of the men to not something special like the Scottish did, and who knows what the English could have been today. The War of the Roses British Studies THE WAR OF THE ROSES †¢ Introduction †¢ Name of The War of the Roses †¢ Famous people in The War of the Roses †¢ Causes of The War of the Roses †¢ The War of the Roses †¢ The result and impact of The War of the Roses †¢ The summary †¢ Bibliography I. INTRODUCTION T he Middle Age considers one of the most exciting periods in English history. One of the most historical events of medieval era is the Wars of the Roses in the fifteenth century. The Hundred Years’ War , in which England lost practically all its lands in France, ended in 1453, but there was no peace in the country.The feudal struggle had broken out and the atmosphere in this country was instable and uncertain leading to the civil war in the fifteenth century. The War of the Roses was a series of dynastic civil war for the throne of England between supporters of two rival branches of the royal house Plantagenet: the house of Lancaster (whose badge was red rose) a nd York (whose badge was white house) from 1455-1485. These thirty years of warfare was even more destructive to England the Hundred years’ War that had been in the previous century. Most of the fighting in the Hundred Years’ War took place in France, which meant most of the military damage affected in French peasantry rather than the English. In the War of the Roses, most of the fighting occurred in England, and thus the loss of the life and property was much greater for England citizens). Why was the called The War of the Roses? Why did the War of the Roses happen? How it happened? And what was the result? There are many interesting things about this famous war. Let’ discover together. II. THE NAME OF THE WAR OF THE ROSES: ? It is really an exciting name. Why was called the war of the roses?This name was given to the Wars by Tudor historians. The name â€Å"Wars of the Roses† refers to the Heraldic badges associated with the two royal houses, the White Rose of York and the Red Rose of Lancaster. [pic] ? However, it is not thought to have been used during the time of the wars. – The White Rose was one of the many emblems which were used by King Edward IV as a symbol of his father's right to some lands and a castle in the North. Generally he preferred to use the emblem of the sun and its rays, a reference to the three suns which appeared at the dawn of the day of the battle of Mortimer's Cross 1461.The White Rose only later became accepted as the symbol of the House of York, particularly when Elizabeth of York married King Henry VII, but before then other emblems were in general use by the Yorkists. – The Red Rose was the emblem of the House of Tudor, and the Tudors only played a substantial part in the Wars during their final stages. The king Henry Tudor united the two roses to create the Tudor ‘rose which contain both white rose and red rose after marrying Elizabeth of the York. > That‘s why the war betwe en them got the name the War of the Roses. III. FAMOUS PEOPLE RELATING TO THE WAR OF THE ROSES During the war of the Roses, there are kings or Dukes who contributed main roles in the war. Let’ begin our discovery with the first king of the house Lancaster. †¢ THE HOUSE OF LANCASTER 1. THE KING HENRY IV Reign: 30 September 1399 – 20 March 1413 Coronation: 13 October 1399 Predecessor: Richard II Successor: Henry V Henry IV was King of England and Lord of Ireland (1399–1413). He was the ninth King of England of the House of Plantagenet. He became the first King of England from the Lancaster branch of the Plantagenet, one of the two family branches that were belligerents in the War of the Roses. 2. THE KING HENRY VReign: 20 March 1413 – 31 August 1422 Coronation: 9 April 1413 Predecessor: Henry IV Successor: Henry VI Henry V was King of England from 1413 until his death at the age of 35 in 1422. He was the second English monarch who came from the House o f Lancaster. After military experience fighting various lords who rebelled against his father, Henry IV, Henry came into political conflict with the increasingly ill king. After his father's death, Henry rapidly assumed control of the country and embarked on war with France. Henry IV was a very brilliant king. 3. THE KING HENRY VI Reign :31 August 1422 – 4 March 1461Coronation: 6 November 1429 Predecessor: Henry V Successor: Edward IV Henry VI (1421 – 1471) was King of England from 1422 to 1461 and again from 1470 to 1471, and disputed King of France from 1422 to 1453. His periods of insanity and his inherent benevolence eventually required his wife, Margaret of Anjou, to assume control of his kingdom, which contributed to his own downfall, the collapse of the House of Lancaster, and the rise of the House of York. 4. THE KING HENRY VII (HENRY TUDOR) Reign: 22 August 1485 – 21 April 1509 Coronation: 30 October 1485 Predecessor: Richard III Successor: Henry VIIIHe nry VII (Welsh: Harri Tudur;1457 – 1509) was King of England and Lord of Ireland from his seizing the crown on 22 August 1485 until his death on 21 April 1509, as the first monarch of the House of Tudor. Henry won the throne when he defeated Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Fiel. He was the last king of England to win his throne on the field of battle. He was successful in restoring the power and stability of the English monarchy after the political upheavals of the Wars of the Roses. He founded a long-lasting dynasty and was peacefully succeeded by his son, Henry VIII, after a reign of nearly 24 years. THE HOUSE OF THE YORK: I. THE KING EDWARD IV Reign: 4 March 1461  Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 3 October 1470 Coronation: 28 June 1461 Predecessor: Henry VI Successor :Henry VI Edward IV (1442  Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 1483) was King of England from 4 March 1461 until 3 October 1470, and again from 11 April 1471 until his death. He was the first Yorkist King of England. The first half of his rule was ma rred by the violence associated with the Wars of the Roses, but he overcame the Lancastrian challenge to this throne at Tewkesbury in 1471 to reign in peace until his sudden death. 5. THE KING RICHARD III Reign 26 June 1483 – 22 August 1485 Coronation 6 July 1483Predecessor Edward V Successor Henry VII Richard III (2 October 1452 – 22 August 1485) was King of England for two years, from 1483 until his death in 1485 during the Battle of Bosworth Field. He was the last king of the House of York and the last of the Plantagenet dynasty. III. CAUSES OF THE WAR OF THE ROSES ? There are three main causes leading to the War of the Roses. ? The first reason is the political crisis (dynastic problems) – In 1215, the Norman barons were united with the Saxon nobles and the growing bourgeoisie of the big towns and they took park in the governing in the country.During the Hundred years’ war, they built castles with high walls and kept private armies of thousands of men . Realizing the danger with big barons represented to the crown, Edward III tried to marry his sons to their daughters, and the heiresses of the House but this not help to strengthen the position of the House Plantagenet. Then, Henry Bolingbroke seized the crown and became the first king of the Lancaster dynasty, Henry IV (1399- 1413). ; It marked the end of the line of the Plantagenet monarchy and the beginning of the Tudor reign; the end of Medieval England and the beginning of the country’s Renaissance. However, Henry IV‘s reign was not an easy one. Having taking the throne by force, he had made many enemies, especially those whose legitimate claim to the throne he had ignored. Henry ‘s oldest son ( who would became Henry V ) was a brilliant and courageous warrior and was responsible, on many occasion, for putting down major rebellions against his father–rebellions that came from the other side of the family who wanted the throne. Beginning in 1405, Henr y IV suffered from a recurring illness that finally took his life in 1413. – Henry V (1387-1422) would go on to secure English-held lands in France and trengthen the bond between the two countries by winning the right to the French, as well as to the English, Crown. Henry V died at a young age in battle in France, leaving a nine-month-old son–King Henry VI. While Henry V was busy fighting wars in France and accumulating wealth for his country, the feudal between the York and Lancaster Houses was subdued. Only one rebellion occurred, and the leader of that rebellion was tried for treason and killed. – However, with Henry V's death–and only a baby for king, and Henry V's wife, who was not only young but of French blood–members of both Houses began maneuvering again for power. Henry VI was a weak man, surrounded by poorly managed counselors. Not only did Henry suffer from mental illnesses, he lost most of the land that his father had won in France. Al though Henry VI technically was king of France, he lost all authority in that country. Many English nobles, each with his own powerful army, grew discontent with Henry VI's rule. The interests of the House of the Lancaster supported by the big barons collided with the interests of the lesser barons and merchants of the towns, who support the House of the York. As a result, the feudal struggle grew into an open war between the Lancastrians and the Yorkist.William Shakespeare offers one poetic endorsement of this view: â€Å"My Lord of Hereford [Henry IV] here, whom you call king, Is a foul traitor to proud Hereford's king[Richard II]: And if you crown him, let me prophesy: The blood of English shall manure the ground, And future ages groan for this foul act; Peace shall go sleep with Turks and infidels, And in this seat of peace tumultuous wars Shall kin with kin and kind with kind confound; Disorder, horror, fear and mutiny Shall here inhabit, and this land be call'd The field of G olgotha and dead men's skulls. O, if you raise this house against this house, It will the woefullest division proveThat ever fell upon this cursed earth. † ? The second reason, in my opinion, is financial problems and societal changes. – The fifteenth century had many changes in society that seriously affected to the war of the roses. The issues increased from the beginning of Henry VI's reign in 1422 with the corruption, public disorder, riots and the maladministration of justice.. After the leadership of King Henry V, â€Å"The Flower of Chivalry† and the â€Å"Mirror of all Christian Kings,† the weak and placid Henry VI was a great disappointment. >We can see that it was a bad government, militarily ineffective and financially irresponsible.His fool and weakness in governing directed his country down the bloody road of civil war. The king loaded his ministers and friends with gifts and pensions. Many people who were owed money at the Exchequer, such as military commanders, could not collect on their debts because there was not enough money to go around. People lost faith in the courts and turned to threats and violence to gain victory in their disputes. The result is a social climate approaching gangsterism. The social violence before and during the Wars of the Roses is often blamed on a phenomenon known as â€Å"bastard feudalism. † ?Finally, I consider the hundred year’ war affecting to the war of the roses, too. – The Wars of the Roses began soon after the Hundred Years War ended. The suggestion that nobles were trying to retrieve fortunes lost in the withdrawal from France does not agree with the evidence. Few major families lost much by the English defeat – most of the major magnates were growing wealthier. – However, the end of the Hundred Years war did remove one reason for unity within England: foreign war tends to unite people at home. The end of the War also left many unemployed soldier s – a destabilizing group in society.Medieval knights and nobles were a military caste, and it was as easy for them to engage in domestic as foreign warfare. IV. THE WAR OF THE ROSE T he war of the roses, which lasted for thirty years (1455-1485), turned into a bitter struggle for the Crown, in which each party murdered every likely heir to the throne of the opposite party. It was a dark time for England, when the Kings and nobles were busy fighting and murdering each other and no time to take care of the common people, who suffered greatly. ? The opening battle of the Wars took place at St Albans in 1455. Richard of York leads a force of about 3,000 on a march toward London.Henry VI moves from London to intercept the Yorkist army. Henry halts his march in the town of Saint Albans and waits. Richard attacks and defeats Henry inflicting about 300 casualties. The Queen and her young son Edward flee into exile. The Yorkist faction also kills the Lancastrian ally Somerset, the pr imary supporter of Henry VI. ? After that, the queen rebelled at these actions, gathered an army around her, and positioned herself outside of York. When the duke learned of this, he went after her, although the queen's troops were double the size of the duke's. The duke's army was easily defeated.In 1459 Richard was killed at the Battle of Wakefield. ? In 1461, the Battle of Towson, one of the bloodiest battles ever fought on English soil at the time, was fought with an estimated 25,000 people dying. Edward's army greatly defeated the queen's army, forcing the queen and king, with their son, to flee to Scotland. That same year, Edward was officially crowned king of England, becoming Edward IV. ? Edward enjoy a few years of peace, but when he married Elizabeth Woodville in secret, he embarrassed Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, who was working to arrange a marriage for Edward with the French king.Edward also disallowed his brothers, Richard and George, to marry Neville's daughters. In 1469, Neville and George fought against Edward. They won a decisive battle, held Edward hostage, killed Edward's father-in-law, and forced Edward to have parliament recognize Edward as an illegitimate king and to give the crown to George. Edward's younger brother, Richard, rescued the king, and Neville and George had to flee to France. ? In France, it was King Louis XI who suggested the alliance of Queen Margaret and Neville. The two agreed, Neville promised his daughter as wife to the queen's son, and returned to England with a powerful army.Edward was defeated and had to flee to Holland and then to Burgundy. Edward, supported by the king of Burgundy, returned to England. Shortly after Neville had paraded Henry VI all over London as the restored king, he was defeated by Edward's new army in 1471. Henry as well as his son were then killed, strengthening Edward's claim to the throne. ? Edward died young, in 1483, leaving his twelve-year-old son heir to the throne. Edward V's reig n lasted only a couple of months. Richard, the uncle to the young king, claimed that his brother (Edward IV) had married Elizabeth illegally and therefore his heirs could not be crowned king.Parliament agreed, and crowned King Richard III in 1483. Edward V was placed in the Tower of London, along with his younger brother, and was never again seen. ? Two years later, in 1485, Richard would meet his death in a battle against Henry Tudor of the House of Lancaster; he would become King Henry VII. Henry married Elizabeth of York, the strongest claimant for the throne from the York house, thus securing his position and ending the long Wars of the Roses. [pic]The map of the battles in the War of the Roses (1455-1485) V. THE RESULT AND EFFECTS OF THE WAR OF THE ROSES Historians still debate the true extent of the conflict's impact on medieval English life, and some revisionists suggest that it leaded to many profound changes in England. The most obvious impact is the collapse of the Plantag enet and the raise of the Tudor dynasty. ; Moreover, with their heavy casualties among the nobility, the wars are thought to have continued the changes in feudal English society caused by the effects of the Black Death, including a weakening of the feudal power of the nobles and a corresponding strengthening of the merchant classes, and the growth of a strong, centralized monarchy under the Tudors.It marked the end of the medieval period in England and the movement towards the Renaissance. VI. SUMMARY ? In my opinion, Middle Ages encompass one of the most exciting and bloodthirsty periods in English and European History with two important events. They are the Hundred Years’ War and The War of the Roses which seriously affected to the society, politics, economy and other aspect of England at that time especially the War of the Roses. It marked the end of the line of the Plantagenet monarchy and the beginning of the Tudor reign (118 years) and even the end of Medieval England a nd the beginning of the country’s Renaissance.It was really an exciting period. I hope that some information above will be useful for all of you during this course and later. VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY ? The War of the Rose Evans, HT (introduction by Ralph A Griffiths) – Sutton Publishing 1998 ? The Wars of the Roses Gillingham, John – Weidenfeld ; Nicholson 2001 ? The Wars of the Roses Griffiths, Ralph A – Sutton Publishing 1998 ? Lancaster ; York Ramsay, JH – Oxford University Press 1892 QUESTION: 1. Which is considered the first main battle in the war of the roses? a. The battle of St. Albans b. The battle of Barnet c. The battle of Tadcaster d. The battle of Blore Heath 2. enry IV had a famous wife , depends on your point of view, who was this powerful women. a. Margaret of Anjou b. Mary de Guise c. Eleanor of Aquitaine d. Matida of Flanders 3. Richard duke of York was killed at which major battle? a. battle of Doncaster b. Battle of Wakefield c. Battle of Tacaster d. Battle of Sedgemoor 4. how long did the War of the Roses last? a. 10 years b. 30 years c. 50 years d. 100 years 5. this battle is widely thought to have the bloodiest ever fought on England soid. It marked a major Yorkist victory in 1461. which of these is it? a. battle of Hexbam b. Battle of Towton c. Battle of the Tadcaster d.Battle of the Hedgley Moor 6. what color rose was used to represent Lancastrians? a. white b. red c. blue d. black 7. In which century did the wars of the Roses take place ? a. 14th century b. 15th century c. 16th century d. 17th century 8. which foreign power sided with Edward IV during the wars a. Italy b. Spain c. France d. Bungery 9. which of these people was on the Lancastrians side during the war of the Roses? a. Thomas Cromwell b. Margaret of Anjou c. Richard Neville the king maker d. Richard Duke of York 10. Who was the first king of House of Lancaster? a. Richard Duke b. Henry Bolingbroke c. Henry Tudor d. Edward II END [pic][pic]

The Hunters: Phantom Chapter 28

No one answered the door at the Smalwoods' house. The driveway was empty and the house looked deserted, the shades pul ed down. â€Å"Maybe Caleb's not here,† Matt said nervously. â€Å"Could he have gone somewhere else when he got out of the hospital?† â€Å"I can smell him. I can hear him breathing,† Stefan growled. â€Å"He's in there, al right. He's hiding out.† Matt had never seen Stefan look so angry. His usual y calm green eyes were bright with rage, and his fangs seemed to be involuntarily extended, little sharp points showing every time he opened his mouth. Stefan caught Matt looking at them and frowned, running his tongue selfconsciously across his canines. Matt glanced at Alaric, who he'd been thinking of as the only other normal person left in their group, but Alaric was watching Stefan with what was clearly fascination rather than alarm. Not entirely normal, then, either, Matt thought. â€Å"We can get in,† Meredith said calmly. She looked to Alaric. â€Å"Let me know if someone's coming.† He nodded and positioned himself to block the view of anyone walking past on the sidewalk. With cool efficiency, Meredith wedged one end of her fighting stave in the crack of the front door and started to pry it open. The door was made of heavy oak, and clearly had two locks and a chain engaged inside, and it withstood Meredith's leverage against it. Meredith swore, then muttered, â€Å"Come on, come on,† redoubling her efforts. The locks and chains gave suddenly against her strength, and the door flew open, banging into the wal behind it. â€Å"So much for a quiet entrance,† Stefan said. He shifted restlessly on the doorstep as they filed past him. â€Å"You're invited in,† Meredith said, but Stefan shook his head. â€Å"I can't,† he said. â€Å"It only works if you live here.† Meredith's lips tightened, and she turned and ran up the stairs. There was a brief shout of surprise and some muffled thumping. Alaric glanced at Matt nervously, and then up the stairs. â€Å"Should we help her?† he said. Before Matt could answer – and he was pretty sure Meredith wasn't the one who needed help – she returned, shoving Caleb down the stairs before her, twisting one of his arms tightly behind his back. â€Å"Invite him in,† she ordered as Caleb stumbled to the bottom of the stairs. Caleb shook his head, and she yanked his arm up higher so that he yelped in pain. â€Å"I won't,† he said stubbornly. â€Å"You can't come in.† Meredith pushed him toward Stefan, stopping him just at the threshold of the front door. â€Å"Look at me,† Stefan said softly, and Caleb's eyes flew to his. Stefan's pupils widened, swal owing his green irises in black, and Caleb shook his head frantical y, but seemed unable to break his gaze. â€Å"Let. Me. In,† Stefan ordered. â€Å"Come in, then,† said Caleb sul enly. Meredith released him and his eyes cleared. He turned and dashed up the stairs. Stefan burst through the door like he'd been shot through a gun and then stalked up the stairs. His smooth, stealthy movements reminded Matt of a predator's – of a lion or a shark. Matt shivered. Sometimes he forgot how truly dangerous Stefan was. â€Å"I'd better go with him,† Meredith said. â€Å"We don't want Stefan doing anything he'd regret.† She paused. â€Å"Not before we find out what we need to know, anyway. Alaric, you're the one who knows the most about magic, so you come with me. Matt, keep an eye out and warn us if the Smal woods pul into the drive.† She and Alaric fol owed Stefan up the stairs. Matt waited for the screaming to start, but it remained ominously quiet upstairs. Keeping one eye on the driveway through the front windows, Matt prowled through the living room. He and Tyler had been friends once upon a time, or at least had hung out, because they were both first-string on the footbal team. They'd known each other since middle school. Tyler drank too much, partied too hard, was gross and sexist toward girls, but there had been something about him that Matt had sometimes enjoyed. It was the way he'd thrown himself into things, whether it was the no-holdsbarred tackle of an opposing team's quarterback or throwing the absolutely craziest party anyone had ever seen. Or the time when they'd been in seventh grade and he'd gotten obsessed with winning at Street Fighter on PlayStation 2. Every day he'd had Matt and the rest of the guys over, al of them spending hours sitting on the floor of Tyler's bedroom, eating chips and talking trash and pounding the buttons of the control er until Tyler had figured out how to win every fight. Matt heaved a sigh and peered out the front window again. There was a brief muffled thump from upstairs, and Matt froze. Silence. As he turned back to pace across the living room again, Matt noticed a particular photo among the neat row of frames on top of the piano. He crossed over and picked it up. It must have been the footbal banquet, junior year. In the picture, Matt's arm was around Elena, who he'd been dating then, and she was smiling up at him. Next to them stood Tyler, hand in hand with a girl whose name Matt couldn't remember. Alison, maybe, or Alicia. She'd been older than them, a senior, and had graduated that year and left town. They were al dressed up, he and Tyler in jackets and ties, the girls in party dresses. Elena had worn a white, deceptively simple short dress, and looked so lovely that she'd taken Matt's breath away. Things had been so easy then. The quarterback and the prettiest girl in school. They'd been the perfect couple. Then Stefan came to town, a cold, mechanical voice whispered to him, and destroyed everything. Stefan, who had pretended to be Matt's friend. Stefan, who had pretended to be a human being. Stefan, who had pursued Matt's girlfriend, the only girl Matt had ever real y been in love with. Probably the only girl he would ever feel that way about. Sure, they'd broken up just before Elena met Stefan, but Matt might have gotten her back, if not for him. Matt's mouth twisted, and he threw the photo to the floor. The glass didn't break, and the photo just lay there, Matt and Elena and Tyler and the girl whose name he didn't remember smiling innocently up at the ceiling, unaware of what was heading toward them, of the chaos that would erupt less than a year later. Because of Stefan. Stefan. Matt's face was hot with anger. There was a buzzing in his head. Stefan the traitor. Stefan the monster. Stefan who had stolen Matt's girl. Matt stepped deliberately onto the picture and ground it beneath his heel. The wooden frame snapped. The feel of the glass shattering under his foot was oddly satisfying. Without looking back, Matt stomped across the living room toward the stairs. It was time for him to deal with the monster who had ruined his life. â€Å"Confess!† Stefan growled, doing his best to compel Caleb. But he was so weak and Caleb kept throwing up mental blocks. No doubt about it – this boy had access to Power. â€Å"I don't know what you're talking about,† Caleb said, pressing his back against the wal as if he could tunnel into it. His eyes flicked nervously from Stefan's angry face to Meredith, who was holding her staff balanced between her hands, ready to strike, and back to Stefan. â€Å"If you just leave me alone, I won't go to the police. I don't want any trouble.† Caleb looked pale and shorter than Stefan remembered. There were bruises on his face, and one of his arms was in a cast and supported by a sling. Despite everything, Stefan felt a twinge of guilt as he looked at him. He's not human, he reminded himself. Although†¦ Caleb didn't seem al that wolfish either, for a werewolf. Shouldn't there be a little more of the animal in him? Stefan hadn't known many werewolves, but Tyler had been al big white teeth and barely repressed aggression. Next to him, Alaric blinked at the injured boy. Cocking his head to one side and examining him, he echoed Stefan's thoughts, asking skeptical y, â€Å"Are you sure he's a werewolf?† â€Å"A werewolf?† said Caleb. â€Å"Are you al crazy?† But Stefan was watching Caleb careful y, and he saw a tiny flicker in Caleb's eyes. â€Å"You're lying,† Stefan said coldly, reaching out with his mind once more, final y finding a crack in Caleb's defenses. â€Å"You don't think we're crazy. You're just surprised that we know about you.† Caleb sighed. His face was stil white and strained, but a certain falseness went out of it as Stefan spoke. His shoulders slumped and he stepped away from the wal a little, head hanging wearily. Meredith tensed, ready to spring, as he moved forward. He stopped and held up his hands. â€Å"I'm not going to try anything. And I'm not a werewolf. But, yeah, I know Tyler is, and I'm guessing that you know that, too.† â€Å"You've got the werewolf gene,† Stefan told him. â€Å"You could easily be a werewolf, too.† Caleb shrugged and looked Stefan straight in the eye. â€Å"I guess. But it didn't happen to me; it happened to Tyler.† â€Å"Happened to?† Meredith asked, her voice rising with outrage. â€Å"Do you know what Tyler did to become a werewolf?† Caleb glanced at her warily. â€Å"What he did? Tyler didn't do anything. The family curse caught up with him, that's al .† His face was shadowed and anxious. Stefan found his tone gentling despite himself. â€Å"Caleb, you have to kil someone to become a werewolf, even if you carry the gene. Unless you're bitten by a werewolf yourself, there are certain rituals that have to be performed. Blood rituals. Tyler murdered an innocent girl.† Caleb's knees seemed to give out, and he slid to the floor with a muffled thump. He looked sick. â€Å"Tyler wouldn't do that,† he said, but his voice was unsteady. â€Å"Tyler was like a brother to me after my parents died. He wouldn't kil anyone. I don't believe you.† â€Å"He did,† Meredith confirmed. â€Å"Tyler murdered Sue Carson. We negotiated for her to come back to life, but it doesn't change the fact that he did kil her.† Her voice held the unmistakable ring of truth, and al the fight seemed to go out of Caleb. He sank lower and rested his forehead against his knees. â€Å"What do you want from me?† He looked so thin and rumpled that, despite the urgency of their mission, Stefan was distracted. â€Å"Weren't you tal er than this?† he asked. â€Å"Bigger? More†¦ put together? The last time I saw you, I mean.† Caleb mumbled something into his knees, too muffled and distorted for even a vampire to hear properly. â€Å"What?† Stefan asked. Caleb looked up, his face smudged with tears. â€Å"It was a glamour, okay?† he said bitterly. â€Å"I made myself look better because I wanted Elena to want me.† Stefan thought of Caleb's glowing, healthy face, his height, his crowning halo of golden curls. No wonder he had seemed suspicious; subconsciously Stefan must have known how unlikely it was that an ordinary human would look that much like an archangel. No wonder he felt so much lighter than I expected when I threw him across the graveyard, Stefan thought. â€Å"So you are a magic user, even if you aren't a werewolf,† Meredith said swiftly. Caleb shrugged. â€Å"You knew that already,† he said. â€Å"I saw what you did to my workroom in the shed. What more do you want from me?† Meredith stepped forward warningly, stave at the ready, her gaze clear and pitiless, and Caleb flinched away from her. â€Å"What we want,† she said, enunciating every word distinctly, â€Å"is for you to tel us how you summoned the phantom, and how we can get rid of it. We want our friends back.† Caleb stared at her. â€Å"I swear I don't know what you're talking about.† Stefan prowled toward Caleb on his other side, keeping him off balance so that the boy's eyes flicked nervously back and forth between Stefan and Meredith. Then Stefan stopped. He could see that Caleb looked genuinely confused. Was it possible that he was tel ing the truth? Stefan knelt so that he was at eye level with Caleb and tried a softer tone. â€Å"Caleb?† he asked, depleting his last remnants of Power to compel the boy to speak. â€Å"Can you tel us what kind of magic you did? Something with the roses, right? What was the spel supposed to do?† Caleb swal owed, his Adam's apple bobbing. â€Å"I had to find out what happened to Tyler,† he said. â€Å"So I came here for the summer. No one seemed worried, but I knew Tyler wouldn't just drop out of sight. Tyler had talked about you, al of you, and Elena Gilbert. Tyler hated you, Stefan, and at first he liked Elena, and then he real y hated her, too. When I came here, though, everyone knew Elena Gilbert was dead. Her family was stil mourning her. And you were gone, Stefan; you'd left town. I tried to put the pieces together about what had happened – there were some pretty strange stories – and then lots of other weird things happened in town. Violence, and girls going crazy, and children attacking their parents. And then, suddenly, it was over; it just stopped, and it was like I was the only one who remembered it happening. But I also remembered just a normal summer. Elena Gilbert had been here the whole time, and no one thought anything of it, because they didn't remember her dying. Only I seemed to have two sets of memories. People who I'd seen get hurt† – he shuddered at the memory – â€Å"or even kil ed were fine again. I felt like I was going crazy.† Caleb pushed his shaggy dark blond hair back out of his face, rubbed his nose, and took a breath. â€Å"Whatever was going on, I knew you and Elena were at the center of it. The differences between the memories told me that. And I figured that you must be connected to Tyler's disappearance, too. Either you'd done something to him, or you knew something about what had happened to him. I figured if I could pul you and your friends apart, something would come out. Once you were set against one another, I'd be able to work my way in and find out what was going on. Maybe I could get Elena to fal for me with a glamour, or one of the other girls. I just had to know.† He looked from one to another of them. â€Å"The rose spel was supposed to make you irrational, turn you against one another.† Alaric frowned. â€Å"You mean you didn't summon anything?† Caleb shook his head. â€Å"Look,† he said, pul ing a thick leather-bound volume from under his bed. â€Å"The spel I used is in here. That's al I did, honest.† Alaric took the book and flipped through the pages until he found the right spel . He studied it, his forehead crinkling, and said, â€Å"He's tel ing the truth. There isn't anything about summoning a phantom in this book. And the spel here fits what we saw in Caleb's workshop and what I've been reading in his notebooks. This rose spel is a fairly low-level discord spel ; it would make whatever negative emotions we were feeling – hate, anger, jealousy, fear, sorrow – just a little bit stronger, make us a little more likely to blame one another for anything that went wrong.† â€Å"But when combined with the powers of whatever phantom might be hanging around here, the spel would become a feedback loop, just as Mrs. Flowers said could happen, strengthening our emotions and making the phantom more powerful,† Stefan said slowly. â€Å"Jealousy,† said Meredith thoughtful y. â€Å"You know, I hate to admit it, but I was horribly jealous of Celia when she was here.† She glanced apologetical y at Alaric, who reached out and gently touched her hand. â€Å"She was jealous of you, too,† Stefan said matter-offactly. â€Å"I could sense it.† He sighed. â€Å"And I've been feeling jealous as wel .† â€Å"So perhaps a jealousy phantom?† Alaric said. â€Å"Good, that'l give us more of a basis for researching banishing spel s. Although I haven't been feeling jealous at al .† â€Å"Of course not,† Meredith said pointedly. â€Å"You're the one who's had two girls fighting over you.† Suddenly Stefan felt so exhausted that his legs shook. He needed to feed, immediately. He nodded awkwardly to Caleb. â€Å"I'm sorry†¦ for what happened.† Caleb looked up at him. â€Å"Please tel me what happened to Tyler,† he implored. â€Å"I have to know. I'l leave you alone if you just tel me the truth, I promise.† Meredith and Stefan glanced at each other, and Stefan raised his eyebrows slightly. â€Å"Tyler was alive when he left town this past winter,† Meredith said slowly. â€Å"That's al we know about him, I swear.† Caleb stared up at her for a long moment, then nodded. â€Å"Thank you,† he said simply. She nodded back at him crisply, like a general acknowledging the troops, and led the way out of his room. Just then a muffled, cutoff shout came from downstairs, fol owed by a thud. Stefan and Alaric raced after Meredith down the stairs, almost bumping into her as she pul ed to a sudden halt. â€Å"What is it?† Stefan asked. Meredith drew aside. Matt was lying facedown at the foot of the stairs, his arms flung out as though to catch himself. Meredith stepped quickly the rest of the way down the stairs to him and turned him over gently. His eyes were closed, his face pale. He was breathing, slowly but steadily. Meredith felt his pulse, then shook him gently by the shoulder. â€Å"Matt,† she cal ed. â€Å"Matt!† She looked up at Stefan and Alaric. â€Å"Just like the others,† she said grimly. â€Å"The phantom's got him.†