The Story of the Crusades Essay -- Essays Papers

The Story of the Crusades The Story of the Crusades is a book that was written in 1963 by Alfred Duggan. The book’s title tells you what the book is about, the Crusades. The book follows the Western Christian’s perspective on the 200 year event, from 1095 to 1291. It starts out setting up the plot (which most good books do), then sets up the plot, and keeps on setting up the plot. The book is very slow at the beginning, then slowly starts to move but not fast enough. If I were rating this book on how exciting it was, I would not forget to count the number of times I almost fell asleep trying to read it. But the Crusades have always interested me, so I couldn’t give up on the book, The book covers all of the crusades, but it also covers all of the down time between the crusades, which is not interesting to read. I am sure it is very important to know about, but a book should be fun also, considering its written as a story, and not as the Bible. There were interesting parts though. Especially During the 3rd crusade, I never learned about the Muslim assassins who played a big part. Also I found it interesting to read more information about King Richard who was kidnapped by The Duke of Austria. Another interesting part of the book was the attitude the author took on the First Crusade. He named the Chapter â€Å"The Great Lords Ride Out†. Mr. Duggan portrays the first crusade a lot different than I have been taught in the past. The way I’ve been taught about the C...

Mans Transition to Agriculture Essay -- History, Neolithic Revolution

During mans transition to agriculture human achievements were both interesting and essential even though archeologists needed to interpret the remains of tools, cave paintings and burial sites. The social norms adopted during this period led to the creation of society as we know it today. Agriculture led to the formation of more complex societies where people were able to settle in one place for longer periods focus on economic, political, and religious goals which helped to increase the number of people in the world. On the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in Mesopotamia and the Nile in Egypt emerged civilizations affected the history of the eastern half of the Mediterranean. Theses civilizations led to formation of cities and increased urbanization over a vast period of time. On the banks of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in Mesopotamia and the Nile in Egypt emerged civilizations that were to have profound influence on the history of the eastern half of the Mediterranean. The rise of these civilizations, led to increased urbanization, and the formation of states. (Bogucki, 1999) During this period people lived off what they came across, off the animals they hunted, and the plants they gathered. The people were constantly moving to areas were animals were more abundant which kept them constantly on the moving to new areas in search of new food sources. This meant that some groups of people could remain in one area for longer periods of time, sheltered from the elements in primitive huts and caves. The next step in mans development was the transition to an entirely new way of life characterized by greater control of nature. Man started to cultivate the cereals which he had always gathered as wild plants, and domesticat... ...as possible to stand with one foot in a green field and the other in the dry desert sand. Secondly, being totally surrounded by uninhabitable land Egypt was far less accessible than Mesopotamia and consequently far more isolated from the outside world. This difference had major political consequences in that the history of Egypt was fairly stable and static with little interference from the outside world. Mesopotamia faced constant invasions from others. Many of the invaders assumed control and founded new empires. However, a considerable degree of continuity was preserved in Mesopotamia because most newcomers adapted to the current cultural traditions. (Zvelebil, 2009) With agriculture human beings were able to settle in one place and focus on economic, political, and religious goals and activities along with increasing the number of people in the world.

The Impact Of Religious Settlers In Religious Times Essays -- essays r

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The places where we live today have not always been here. The way we live has not always been the same. In fact, very few places that existed back in the colonial times exist today. If they still exist, it is because of the success gained over the years gone by after the settlers came to the New World. Settlers came to the New World in search of many things. They came in search of gold, they came for new lives, and they came for religious freedom. In England, during this time period, people were being judged, separated and persecuted on the basis of their religious beliefs. There were two groups of people that were unhappy with the Church. These groups came to be known as the Puritans and the Separatists. The Puritans are the people who are known to want to make changes within the Church of England. Then there were the Separatists, who were so disgusted with the Church of England that they just wanted out. They wanted to be recognized totally separate from it. One group, the Separatists. â€Å" In 1609, a group of about 125 Separatists moved from England to Holland (a part of the Netherlands) because the Dutch had a policy of religious tolerance.† They were able to practice religion how they wanted to, but they were uneasy about the thought of their children losing their English roots as time went on. So they came up with the idea of immigrating to the New World. Only about 30 wanted to voyage to Virginia, which was an unknown land to all. The Separatists sailed from Holland in 1620. This group was also known as the Pilgrims. The pilgrims are widely known for â€Å"The First Thanksgiving† as their offertory meal with the Native Americans. The Pilgrims goal was to establish a colony â€Å" as a distinct body by themselves.† And off they went for their voyage across sea, goals sighted for just north of Jamestown. Unfortunately, they were blown off course, so when they finally got a glimpse of land, it was Cape Cod. It was the separatists that put together the Mayflower Compact, which was a legal basis recognizing James I as their king and it state â€Å" that they would form a civil body politic, which would frame such just and equal laws for the good of all the people.† A solemn agreement was made to abide by the compact, and it was signed before anyone got off the ship. Only men signed the document because women of that time were not cons... ...st everyone who believe that in order to be recognized in life, you had to abide by the religious rules. Puritans especially believed that they could make changes in the Church to fit the needs of the members of the community. But what they did was just make the situation worse for the people who were already unhappy. The Separatists cut off all ties completely with the Church, because they were fed up with trying to deal with its strict rules and regulations.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It is because of people like Roger Williams, John Wheelwright, and Thomas Hooker that we have some of the religions that we have today. It is also the factor of the colonies being where they are today. Everything that was done in the past by people like them, has had a great effect on today’s society. It is because of the people from the past that gives the people the courage today to stand up for what they believe in. Without theses people, we would not have the great Martin Luther King, Jr., or other great people who made changes in history. We owe a great deal to their courage and their actions, because without them, we may not have some of the places, people, or ideas that we have today.

The term ‘stagnation’ was coined by the Gorbachevian discourse of the perestroika era to describe the situation in the Soviet Union from 1964-1985

The term ‘stagnation' was coined by the Gorbachevian discourse of the perestroika era to describe the situation in the Soviet Union from 1964-1985, under the rules of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko. The assertion of ‘apparent' stagnation suggests some ambiguity from the outset as to the actual situation in the USSR. Indeed, some have suggested that the term is too simplistic – this idea is especially asserted by Edwin Bacon and Mark Sandle in their recent reconsideration of the Brezhnev era. Nevertheless, when Gorbachev came to power he referred to a ‘pre-crisis' situation in the Soviet Union. Undoubtedly, the ‘stagnation' era did see social, economic and cultural changes which led to some deterioration in the USSR's situation, but improvement was not entirely excluded, certainly not for the whole period, thus to say that the Soviet Union was on the verge of crisis by 1985 can certainly be contested. Furthermore, the notion of ‘changes' is paradoxical when the era is marked by great conservatism. Consequently, there are many factors to debate in discussion of the assertion that ‘the period of apparent stagnation saw vital social, economic and cultural changes which by the early 1980s had brought the Soviet Union to the verge of crisis'. The economic situation by the early 1980s is perhaps the most powerful for suggesting the USSR verged on crisis. It seems implausible that the entire ‘stagnation' period to economic crisis for initially, recognition that the economy was doing badly and determination to achieve parity with the USA, led to Kosygin's 1965 reform programme. However, this was halted due to concern, bolstered by events in Czechoslovakia in 1968, that economic change could stimulate demands for political democratisation – economic conservatism would thereafter shape the period. The two chief sectors of the economy were agriculture and industry. On the one hand, agriculture received much budgetary expenditure, enabling prices to be kept down, stimulating consumption and the output of agricultural goods increases 1976-801. However, there were fundamental flaws in the system: subsidies were a burden for the state, nor did they stop the need for grain imports; furthermore, the inability to deal with weather conditions led to disastrous harvests 1979-812. Continued migration to the towns was also problematic. Failure was officially recognised in 1982 with the introduction of a Food Programme to ease food shortages, though according to Bialer, it was equally inefficient in mitigating the problem3. Bialer paints a similar picture of industry. While arguing that initially investments and production levels increased, as time went on, slow down set in4. Essentially, Bialer implies this was inevitable considering the lack of change in industrial policy5. Similarly, although Keep recognises moves towards scientific management, he stresses these had virtually ended by the early 1980s due to inefficient resources and reluctance of enterprise managers to adapt6 – inertia surrounded the system from all angles. As he states, ‘hoarding stocks, ‘storming' at month's end, and a reluctance to innovate would remain characteristic of the Soviet industrial scene until the era of perestroika'7. Perhaps crisis by the early 1980s was demonstrated by Japan's take-over as the world's second largest producer of industrial goods and services8 – considering the USSR's aim was to advance as a superpower, this was devastating. Finally, inefficiency seemed inevitable when, despite increasing absenteeism by the early 1980s and high labour turnover, punishments, such as sacking, did not exist to prevent it. On the one hand, to say that the economy was on the verge of a crisis is debateable. There had been some long-lasting improvements: expansion of the data-processing industry, an increase in electricity and expansions in the rail network and the automobile industry9 – there was hardly total stagnation of the economy. Harrison argues that by the early 1980s it was wrong to condemn the economy for it was still growing, despite a slower rate, government spending and revenues were controlled, and inflationary pressures were small10. However, even he acknowledges that ‘alarm bells were already ringing in the Kremlin when Brezhnev died'11. Overall, the economic situation by the early 1980s reveals that detrimental changes had occurred as the period progressed. Keep points to several factors by the mid-1980s which could cause a ‘pre-crisis situation' such as a declining rate of return on capital investment leading to a slower rate of GNP and industrial output, and a declining rate of gross industrial expansion. 12 Furthermore, people had more money than they had goods to buy, causing consumer frustration and increased savings. Similarly, the shadow economy was concerning, especially as despite supervisory organs to deal with it, it was increasingly tolerated, perhaps indicating the state's acknowledgement that their efforts would not stabilise the economy. Ultimately, economic improvement was stifled under Brezhnev because of his commitment to defence spending and his failure to reform the system by maintaining centralisation. Without change, even if not verging on crisis, surely the USSR was on the road – as Gooding states, ‘disaffection had not yet turned to revolt. Unless the economic tendency were reversed, however, crisis was inevitable'13. The same was to be the case under Andropov and Chernenko. On the one hand, Andropov believed economic expansion essential: his measures were to include a stamping down on absenteeism and low production. However, according to Service, ‘probably he did not wish to venture far along the route of reforms'14. In practice, although industrial output had increased by 5% from 1982-3, and the value of grain by 7%15 and although, as Harrison argues, growth slowdown had stopped by 198316, Andropov's caution prevented him from instigating fundamental change that could reverse the threat of a crisis. Finally, Chernenko's short term of office brought no improvement in the economic sphere. That social change brought the USSR to the verge of crisis by the early 1980s is debateable. Firstly, labour and living standards must be examined. The ‘social contract', whereby the worker had a poorly paid yet, in return, secure and easy work-life, may have led to economic inefficiency, but, as Hosking states, ‘as a social system†¦ worked well enough'17 – it created satisfaction and stability for much of the period. However, a change occurred when the contract broke down by the early 1980s, threatening stability. Gooding attributes this to the fact that people would react if the regime faltered on its promise of a better standard of life and ‘by now it was hard to hide that the period of steady improvement in living standards had ended'18 – shortages were widespread and, as he argues, while the black market eased the plight, it highlighted the level people had to go to to survive19. One major improvement was that, due to agricultural subsidies, by the early 1980s the rural-urban gap had narrowed as peasants became much better off. Gooding also stresses that because peasants were given internal passports and welfare benefits, ‘the regime had at last put them on an equal footing with other citizens'20. Keep does stress that ‘socially and culturally the gulf remained wide'21, hence the emigration to towns. Nevertheless, the up-side was that increasingly society became industrial, leading to Edwin Bacon's concept of ‘social revolution' with ‘an increasingly ‘modern' society†¦. urbanised, educated and professionalised'22 – illiteracy had largely disappeared and education improved. However, these improvements were to be self-constraining as the system proved unable to accommodate such advancements because the supply of jobs for an increasingly advanced population was incompatible. Several other factors demonstrate changes that could be deemed as contributing to a possible crisis. A falling rate of population growth in some regions by the early 1980s was worrying as was the declining life expectancy, linked to the under-equipped hospitals and poorly trained doctors. Keep also states that the incidence of serious diseases increased 1980-85 such as scarlet fever which rose by 21%23. The problem of alcohol, ironically worsened by the state's commitment to its production, was severe: Keep states that from 1980-5 newly reported cases of alcohol morbidity increased by 10%24 and, as a cause of absenteeism, crime and domestic violence, it created social upheaval in several respects. The ‘stagnation' period also saw increases in divorce, illegitimacy and abortion – indicators of a destabilising family situation, though some attempts were made to mitigate such crises in 1981 with pro-natalist measures such as improved maternity leave, creating, according to Keep, a recovery in the birth rate in the early 1980s25. Overall therefore, social change during the ‘stagnation' period presents a mixture of factors, making it difficult to assert definitively that it brought the USSR to the brink of crisis. On the one hand, Keep and Hosking point to disturbances that occurred in response to conditions such as housing and food supplies. However, that they constituted crisis is dubious as unrest was not organised and trade unions were constrained by the state. While Keep points to police and party controls, he also argues that most people had much to be happy about26. Indeed, throughout much of the period most people lived better than they had before: according to Gooding, despite shortages, meat milk and butter were more plentiful, improvements had been made regarding consumer goods, such as televisions, and although housing was still a problem, it had improved significantly27. Nevertheless, the end of the period saw a veritable decline in several respects. Most worrying was the scarcity of meat by 1982 – as Gooding concedes, ‘Lack of freedom could be put up with; lack of meat†¦ was a far more serious matter'28. On the one hand, as with the economic situation, it seems that the period after Brezhnev did see some move towards crisis abatement. Andropov laid great emphasis on social discipline and as Service states, police cracked down on drunkenness in the streets and punishments incurred for indiscipline at work29. Furthermore, Service believes that Andropov sincerely wanted to improve living standards and actually talked to workers30. However, whatever he learned did not transpire into change for the better – caution prevailed and therefore the possibility of crisis perpetuated. Overall, Keep argues that most citizens did not appreciate the seriousness of the country's problems by the mid-1980s, they even thought in some respects they lived better than in the West31. However, surely this delusion could not last forever, as the meat shortage was beginning to demonstrate. At the very least, if a direct social crisis was not looming by 1985, perhaps indirectly social problems were having an effect for, as Hosking states, they were undermining the economic strength of the USSR32. The cultural situation of the ‘stagnation' period saw many changes. Brezhnev ended Khrushchev's cultural ‘thaw' and brought a return to orthodoxy, epitomised by a gradual return to Stalin, reasserting the period's conservatism; according to Bialer, there was resistance to experimentation and alien ideas33. Bialer also points to other aspects of cultural policy including patriotism, the cult of Lenin, and from the mid-1970s, the cult of Brezhnev34. If such policies had been adhered to there would be no fear of cultural crisis. However, seeds of discontent were stirring and while repression prevented eruption in the short term, perhaps this perpetuated discontent rather than solved it. Firstly, some signs of instability emerged in popular culture. Keep argues that liberalization was needed to appease youths – discotheques and rock-and-roll appeared along with expression of some critical ideas such as the balladeer Vysotsky's blast of the gulag35. There was some increased suppression under Andropov, yet youth dissatisfaction expressed regardless; according to Keep this represented ‘the deep psychological malaise that afflicted the younger generation†¦ '36. The ‘stagnation' period also saw the rise of cultural nationalism. This represented a nostalgic mood with a return to early art, architecture and Russian religious philosophy37 and the establishment of an All-Russian Society for the Preservation of Historical and Cultural Monuments which had grown substantially by the early 1980s38. Cultural nationalism also encompassed ‘village prose' writing which projected the idea that urban life, with its materiality, lacked value. That such writings had become relatively widespread leads Keep to state that ‘by the late Brezhnev era the system of literary controls had become more flexible'39. He also argues the same for visual arts. However, although Keep states that ‘by the mid-1980s cultural nationalism may be said to have struck root in the Russian popular consciousness', that it was subversive is unlikely considering the system of repression and censorship that could have suppressed it. In fact, Keep believed that ‘nationalism could provide the nomenklatura with†¦ [a] basis of support'40. Connected to this was nationalism within the republics. On the one hand, the era is characterised by equalisation and indigenisation; for example, in non-Russian republics, the top position went to someone of the titular nationality. This created stability for much of the period. However, Fowkes points to factors which stimulated national grievances: for example, from the late 1970s a greater stress was given to the Russian language, leading to accusations of Russification, and also the Russian monopoly over central institutions was maintained41. Fowkes even suggests that Brezhnev's national policy ‘contained the seeds of its own destruction'42 especially due to the ‘pervasive hidden opposition†¦ practised by almost every non-Russian national group' such as attempts to maintain traditional national cultures43. There were even some instances of popular national fronts. However, that such protests constituted crisis-point seems implausible. On the one hand, 249,000 Jews were allowed to emigrate between 1971-1980; yet this was not in response to internal crisis, more due to pressure from the USA – that the Jews were to prefigure the need for a general liberalisation was not true. Furthermore, as Fowkes points out, radical nationalists were a minority44. Crisis did come eventually but that in 1985 it was inevitable seems an over-exaggeration – essentially, repression kept nationalism under control, though its subtle presence could create long term problems. An examination of the cultural situation enables an evaluation of the level of open hostility that could have brought crisis. On the one hand, Keep refers to the emergence of ‘cultural opposition'45. True, there may have been informal discussions among academics, who also published works in the samizdat. However, there was a rigorous censorship system which suppressed freedom – history, social sciences and literature were often severely censored for subversive messages. Moreover, to progress in life, you had to conform. As Sandle argues, ‘The state deployed a whole variety of sanctions – sackings, harassment, public humiliations and coercing people into psychiatric hospitals†¦ '46. Ultimately, the goal was achieved: dissidence, though having thrived in the early 1970s, had basically disappeared by the 1980s – though also due to its internal divisions – hence stability within the regime seems plausible. However, there was also a grey area between conformism and dissent, an area which flowed underneath the surface, expressing non-orthodox views. This ‘loyal' opposition within the system itself, despite its silence, was essentially seditious, and as several have suggested, would ultimately create the ideas and personnel for perestroika. It was maintained by an informal network of discussions and a creative way of writing that expressed views without being overtly dissident – there was a determination, according to Sandle, that ‘the period of re-Stalinisation and retrenchment would not snuff out the spark of change and liberalisation that began in 1956'47. On the one hand, by the early 1980s critical opinions were becoming more overt. Elliot points to the workings of clandestine groups who disseminated leaflets criticising the authoritarian system though argues that, despite subversive messages, they would never threaten in practice because they were not widespread and because leaders were often arrested or exiled48. Overall, ‘loyal' opposition had to wait until after Brezhnev, at which point the beginnings of open reformist expression demonstrated that, despite prior suppression, discontent had remained. By 1985, perhaps it could be suggested that, had Gorbachev and glasnost' not come along, these intellectual ideas could have threatened a conservative regime – as Sandle states, this ‘diverse' intellectual life that had continued in silence became ‘an essential part of the destruction of the ‘citadel of dogmatism' after 1985'49. Nevertheless, it does seem that with active dissidence largely gone in the early 1980s, severe threats to stability were, if not fundamentally absent, then severely mitigated. In conclusion, that the apparent stagnation period brought the Soviet Union to the verge of crisis by the early 1980s is not an easy statement to evaluate. On the one hand, the masses were not privy to the information that Gorbachev was regarding the state of the USSR by 1985. On the popular level, therefore, perhaps crisis was not that imminent. Certainly, this connects to Elliot's idea that the stability of the regime was ‘apparently based more on passive toleration than active support'50. Furthermore, the concept of ‘stagnation' is very contentious; Sandle suggests that, as it was coined by perestroika reformers, it sprang essentially from their need to justify their ideas than perhaps being a true reflection of society51. Furthermore, that the stagnation period as a whole created a crisis situation by the early 1980s is exaggerated for it is consensus that deterioration came mid-way through the period, whether after Brezhnev became ill, or perhaps earlier, from events in Czechoslovakia. However, that conservatism was to dominate the era was fundamental – if it had meant the situation remained constant over the twenty years, there may have been no cause for concern; but conservatism ironically brought detrimental change. That this was inevitable is plausible considering the situation at the top – the period was certainly stagnant in this respect for Brezhnev's ‘stability of cadres' bred inertia, and despite personnel changes under Andropov, essentially the gerontocracy remained. Overall, social, economic and cultural changes that caused concern did occur. While crisis may not have been apparent at the time, especially as dissidence and discontent did not seem that widespread, perhaps all that was needed was a final push to bring the situation to a head. Ultimately, the situation probably hinged on the economy – as Gooding suggests, ‘economic failure would do in fact what continued oppression and arbitrariness were most unlikely to do: it would shake ordinary people out of their passivity. Therefore, failure to reform could only be safe for so long – as proponents of conservatism were dying out, so too was stability.

American Religion: The Puritans and the Quakers

In the mid-1500's, England saw a new trend in the way people worshipped and practiced religion. The new movement called â€Å"Puritanism,† called for a life lived simply and spent in prayer, listening to sermons and worship in Church. The Puritans lived seriously and believed that celebrations such as holidays like Christmas and Easter as well as the arts like music and dance were unnecessary trappings to have in life. They believed that people should only be concerned about â€Å"godly† ways and plain living in order to reach heaven. This presented problems at that time for Queen Elizabeth.In those years, the queen was tasked with stabilizing the country and decided that to do this, England had to have a comprehensive Church that could accommodate the views of both the Protestants and the conservative Catholics (Emerson 18). Therefore, it was decided that the Church of England teach doctrines that would be acceptable to the Protestants and at the same time keep alive t he Catholic traditions used in worship. The compromise did not quite sit well as hoped. The Puritans believed that in religious worship, only the spiritual doctrines were the only things that were important.All other external articles such as ministry vestments were not only unnecessary but could be taken as evil. The Conservatives however, defended the use of such vestments as traditional symbols of status and identification. Due to differences of opinion with regard to the way worship and the Episcopal structure is conducted in the Anglican Church, separatist and underground groups were formed with the object of seeking reform in the religious practices. Due to conflicts that usually arise where there is a difference of opinion, some Puritans decidedto leave England and settle in North America. It was in 1620 that the ship the Mayflower docked and the first Puritans came to settle in Massachusetts (Barbour, and Frost 5) One of the other Reformist groups was called the Quakers. Unl ike the Puritans, the Quakers believed that religious worship was a personal and individual thing that did not require any intermediary in the form of leaders, priests or ministers. Like the Puritans, the Quakers also suffered the consequences of conflict and therefore some decided to migrate and settle in America as well.It was in 1677 that a group of Quakers led by William Penn set foot on North American soil and settled in the state of Pennsylvania. This settlement of opposing religious groups would have significant effect on the way religion is practiced and how other differing faiths would be treated. The Quakers held meetings were people gathered to sit quietly to reflect and pray in silence. They only spoke up when they feel God wanted to, and this privilege was open to both men and women. They practiced their faith by action always looking out to help the poor and establish peace.They also campaigned for women's rights as well as that of the Native Americans. Despite their s imilarities in terms of experience of persecution in England, subsequent emigration to America and ideals of a Utopia brought about by spiritual living, the fundamental beliefs of both groups differed thoroughly. Whereas the Puritans insisted on strict hierarchies, conformity to religion and the singular importance of doctrine, the Quakers propagated tolerance for all religions and races. They supported pacifism in the search for peace and equality with women in spiritualism.The Quakers also believed that doctrine takes second place to an individual's â€Å"inner light. † This kind of thinking angered the Puritans so much that any Quaker who was caught trying to preach in Massachusetts was either tortured or executed (Hall 130) Such was the treatment experienced by female Quaker preachers Ann Austin and Mary Fisher (Jones, Sharpless, and Gummere 27) who tried to preach to the Puritan community in Boston in 1656. Upon arrival at Boston harbor, their luggage were seized and sea rched for â€Å"heretical and blasphemous doctrines.† The women themselves were taken to prison and stripped before being confined in total darkness. It was only later that the captain of the ship that brought them was compelled to take them back to Barbados. These all happened despite the lack of any law declaring being a Quaker as illegal. Governor Endicott who was away from Boston at that time even said that had he been there, the women would never have been freed without some whipping. Later investigations as to why Boston was so hostile to the women reveal:It must be said in the first place that the judgment of the officials, and particularly of the ministers, in the Massachusetts Colony had been seriously prejudiced by rumours and accounts that had preceded the arrival of the two women. Anti-Quaker pamphlets had already come from the press in great numbers, and they were unsparing in their accounts of the new â€Å"heresy. † Some of these pamphlets were written b y ministers who, either before or after the publication of their attack, were settled in New England and were in high repute there. (Jones, Sharpless, and Gummere 29)Modern studies also reveal that the Puritans believed that the Quakers brought with them discord, rebellion and witchcraft that threatened to undermine the sanctity of the Puritan community. Because the Quaker tenets were so opposed to that of the Puritans, Quakers were viewed to represent a new spiritual empire that threatened to overthrow the spiritual empire which the Puritan in strict religious fervor was building. Another main difference between the Puritan and Quaker settlers was their treatment and dealings with the Native Americans.Due to their belief that every human being was born with the â€Å"inner light,† the Quakers treated the Native Americans as friends and equals. In his â€Å"Letter to the Lenni Lenape Indians,† William Penn states: â€Å"†This great God has written his law in our hearts, by which we are taught and commanded to love and help and do good to one another, and not to do harm and mischief one unto another. â€Å"† â€Å"†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ I have great love and regard toward you, and I desire to win and gain your love and friendship by a kind, just, and peaceable life; and the people I send are of the same mind, and shall in all things behave themselves accordingly.And if in anything any shall offend you or your people, you shall have a full and speedy satisfaction for the same by an equal number of honest men on both sides, that by no means you may have just occasion of being offended against them. â€Å"† (Soderlund 88) The Puritans on the other hand, viewed the polytheistic and unorganized nature of religion in addition to the â€Å"inadequate† clothing of the Native Americans as â€Å"sinful. † With their literal translation of the Bible, the Puritans viewed the Native Americans' regard for everything living in additio n to the one â€Å"Great Spirit† as idolatry.The Puritans also believed that only a select group of people was chosen by God to join Him in heaven. The Native Americans believed that in all men, were equally good in the â€Å"Great Spirit's sight. † The difference between the Puritan and Native American view of sin didn't help either. While the Puritans looked at man as â€Å"evil,† and life was only a temporary transit before the more important and worthy life with God, the Native Americans believed that man was made up of both good and evil and that life in the present was no different from the afterlife.(Culture Clash: The Puritans and the Native Americans) Both the beliefs fostered by the Puritans and the Quakers contributed greatly to ideals of America as it is today. The value of hard work, discipline and steadfastness promoted by the Puritans in conjunction with the equality and emancipation brought by the Quaker attitude of tolerance for race, gender and religion, are just a few contributing factors that has made America society the way it is today. Works Cited Barbour, Hugh, and J.William Frost. The Quakers. New York: Greenwood Press, 1988. Questia. 18 Sept. 2007 . â€Å"Culture Clash: The Puritans and the Native Americans. † 123HelpMe. com. 18 Sep 2007 . Emerson, Everett. Puritanism in America, 1620-1750. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1977. Questia. 18 Sept. 2007 . Hall, Thomas Cuming. The Religious Background of American Culture.Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1930. Questia. 18 Sept. 2007 . Jones, Rufus M. , Isaac Sharpless, and Amelia M. Gummere. The Quakers in the American Colonies. London: Macmillan, 1911. Questia. 18 Sept. 2007 . Soderlund, Jean.. ,†Handwritten Letter to the Indians (Lenni Lenape)† William Penn and the Founding of Pennsylvania, a Documentary History. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983

San Diego School System

Question 1: What is the appropriate discount rate for a government agency such as the San Diego City Schools? The appropriate discount rate should be determined from the federal risk free interest rate plus a small risk premium. The federal risk free interest rate in 2002 averaged 5. 4%. Using this as the base, a government agency other than the federal government would need to add a small risk premium to compensate investors for the additionalrisk associated with being a school district instead of the federal government. San Diego would also need to add additional compensation to account for tax factors. With these factors in mind, San Diego should use a discount factor of approximately 7. 8% (5. 4% risk free rate + . 5% risk premium + 1. 9% tax compensation). Question 2: Calculate the ROI for San Diego’s ERP system. How can you quantify the soft benefits of the system and include them in the analysis? The soft benefits can be quantified through creative assumptions. These assumptions can come from experiences others had when implementing similar solutions or from drawing on similarities between other quantifiable benefits. Other principals compared their successful implementation like receiving an additional recruiting team, valued at $320K/year, this can be used as the estimate for Weiman’simproved recruiting due to the HR solution. Likewise, SDCS spent $400k/year on an internal audit team to provide access to HR data, this team could be disbanded with the implementation of an HR solution leading to a $400k/year benefit. Improved employee morale and productivity could be measured by a lower turnover rate, leading to lower training costs and recruitment costs, as well as higher output rates leading to lower clerical demands and improved service. {draw:frame} Question 3: With the information you have access to, what should Weimann present and recommend at the board meeting? Specifically, would you recommend going forward with the HR system implementation? If not, what alternatives would you suggest? Currently, payroll is managed through paper time cards and time sheets, leading to errors and wasted hours for correction. Over twenty eight different forms are used to process various pay actions. With an ERP HR solution, these forms could be simplified, transitioned to paperless and would become more convenient as a result. The ERP HR solution would also result in fewer errors, with employees checking in and out through the system instead of paper cards. Employees would also be able to frequently check their timecard and make payroll aware of any errors, before paychecks were distributed eliminating, or greatly reducing, the need for any out of period paychecks which increased payroll processing costs dramatically. Employee benefits are currently handled by the benefits department which also monitors payments by employees and the benefits status of each employee. With an ERP solution, employees could be held responsible for their own payments and ensure good standing by monitoring their accounts. Question 4: What are the risks associated with the project? Would you advise the school board of these risks? As presenting the program to the school board, risks would be brought up in order to ensure no corners were cut after initial implementation. In would be advised and urged that the risks of implementation are natural and inevitable with any technological system. As with any ERP system, many setbacks will be crossed. However, the benefits clearly outweigh the risks and should implementation succeed, the school board will greatly benefit with long term cost reductions.

What Are the Advantages of Jpepa?

Republic of the Philippines Department of Education Region IV – A CALABARZON Division of Laguna District of Liliw LILIW CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Liliw SUMMATIVE TEST IN SCIENCE VI I. Write the letter of the correct answer. _____1. Why plants called producers? They _____________. a. Consume food b. Make their own food c. Provide food for other organisms d. All of the above ______ 2. Why animals called consumers? They ______________. a. Do not eat plants b. Produce their own food c. Depend on other plants food d. Depend on plants for protection ______ 3.Which of the following can cause dead plants and animals to decay and turn into useful substances? a. Mosses b. Producers c. Consumers d. Decomposers ______ 4. Which of these materials is NOT needed during photosynthesis? a. Carbon dioxide b. Water c. Sunlight d. Oxygen _______ 5. The transfer of food energy from the producers to a series of consumer is called a. Food web b. Food chain c. Food cycle d. All of the above ________ 6. Plant gives off______ which animals and human beings breathe in order to live. a. Carbon dioxide b. Oxygen c. Carbon monoxide d. Hydrogen ________ 7.What activity can disturb the carbon dioxide oxygen cycle in an aquarium? a. Placing enough amount of water. b. Placing equal amount of plants and fishes. c. Putting too many fishes with small amount of plants. d. Placing the aquarium in a place where there is enough sunlight. ________ 8. Which is the correct sequence of organisms in a food chain? a. Rice grain chick hawk decomposers b. Chick hawk rice grains decomposers c. Hawk rice grains decomposers chicks d. Rice grains decomposers chick hawk ________ 9.What does a food web show? It shows a. A series of food links b. The role of the consumers c. A series of eating activities d. An interlink among food chain ________ 10. What is the role of producers in a food chain? a. They make their own food. b. They feed primary consumers. c. They replace nutrients in the soil. d. They provide oxygen in the air. ________ 11. Photosynthesis is performed by a. Herbivores b. Producers c. Primary consumers d. decomposers _________ 12. The role or profession of an organism in an ecosystem is its a. Habitat b. Consumption c. Ecological niche d. Production _________13.What happens in a food chain? a. Energy is lost to the air. b. Energy is transferred from producer to consumer. c. Energy is transferred from consumer to producer. d. Energy is increased from consumer to another consumer. _________14. Why are decomposers important? a. They break down complex wastes into simple materials. b. They provide carbon dioxide and oxygen to the soil. c. They deplete the soil of nitrogen and other minerals. d. They make the soil dry. _________15. What is transferred in a food web? a. Parasites b. Predators c. Energy d. Water II. Fill in the blanks. Choose your answer from the list below. 6. Plants are called_______________________ because they manufacture their own food. 17. _______________ ___ shows the path way of food from producers to a series of consumers. 18. When several food chains are interwoven and taking place in a particular community, a ___________________ results. 19. The chemical energy of food taken from the plants is trans fomed in the bodies of ______________________. 20. The_____________ is the main source of energy for all living things. ———————– Consumer Producers Sun Food Chain Food Web