DOCSLIB.ORG

Spring 2005 the Sonnets the Name Is New, Dedication the Beat Goes on Puzzle Shakespeare Authorship Studies by Robert R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Vol.4:no.3 "Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments..." Spring 2005 The Sonnets The name is new, dedication the beat goes on puzzle Shakespeare Authorship Studies By Robert R. Prechter, Jr. ©2005 Conference meets in Portland The famous dedi- his year’s author- cation to Shake- ship conference speare’s Sonnets, Tin Portland, Or- published in 1609, egon, would have been has been the sub- the 9th Annual Edward ject of conster- de Vere Studies Con- nation and ridi- ference, but instead in- cule, and several augurated a new era scholars have under the name The denounced it as Shakespeare Author- ship Studies Confer- convoluted and ence. bombastic. Fig. 1 Conference Direc- Students of the tor Dr. Daniel Wright authorship question have long suspected had decided upon the that the odd arrangement of words, obscure change last fall in an meaning and bizarre syntax suggest the Charles Beauclerk (l) and William Cecil, 8th Marquess of Exeter, seated attempt to make the possibility of an encoded message. Inspired together at the Awards Banquet. Beauclerk, who lived in the US for 10 forum more inviting to years actively promoting Oxford in the late 1980s and 90s, received by discussions at an Oxfordian conference scholars who were in- in 1998, I tackled the problem of the Sonnets the Distinguished Scholarship Award, while Cecil was the featured speaker at the banquet. terested in the author- dedication and presented a summary of ship debate, but who some of my findings at the annual conference might also be reluctant of the Shakespeare Oxford Society in to seem to commit to Stratford (Ontario) in October 2000. Oxford’s authorship by To summarize what I believe lies hidden attending a conference in the Sonnets dedication, it contains not named after him. a code but—at least from our point of view Nonetheless, as —a puzzle. The contents of what I call the Wright also notes, his Dedication Puzzle are a list of names, commitment to Oxford including most importantly the following: remains as firm as ever, and the majority of (1) The names of the principals who got papers presented con- the Sonnets published. tinue to explore au- (2) The names of the characters in the thorship issues from an Sonnets. Oxfordian perspective. (3) The true name of Shakespeare. This year’s conference (4) Additional names of (mostly) real Dr. Roger Stritmatter and Fellowship President Lynne Kositsky gave was a testament to the people that Edward de Vere used as a joint presentation laying out an excellent case for why the infamous continuing Oxfordian pseudonyms. “Strachey letter” is not a problem for Oxford—who died in 1604— being the author of The Tempest. nature of the event, and (Continued on page 12) (Continued on page 7) page 2 Shakespeare Matters Spring 2005 Letters: 2005 Board Nominations and To the Editor: proposed By-Laws Amendments On my recent visit to Portland to attend As chair of the nominating committee, Nominee for President: Ted Story, the Shakespeare Authorship Studies Con- I am writing to advise you of the Shakespeare Fellowship Secretary, Pro- ference, I had an opportunity to renew nominations for the board and President ducer/Director (New York, NY). many old friendships and to observe the for the September 29, 2005, annual state of the debate “live” for the first time meeting of the Shakespeare Fellowship. Nominees for the Board: in many years. It was good to get up to The bylaws of the Fellowship require the speed with some of the new developments, nominating committee to notify the Lynne Kositsky (2nd three year term) especially Hank Whittemore’s important membership of its nominees for election Award-winning Canadian writer work on the Sonnets. His emphasis on the for these positions ninety days before the (Toronto, Ont). royalty of Shakespeare goes to the heart of annual meeting. As per the bylaws section Tim Holcomb (2nd three year term) the mystery to which—willy nilly—we have all become apprenticed. Now that I no III.C, members at their discretion may Founder and artistic director, longer believe that Oxford was a de Vere by then nominate additional candidates for Hampshire Shakespeare Co. blood, I can see clearly why the boar in the board or offices by petition. (Amherst, Mass). Shakespeare is such a potent symbol of This communication is not a ballot, Sarah Smith (2nd three year term) destruction. The boar, his de Vere identity, but a list of nominees from the nominat- Award-winning American writer destroys his royal hopes. ing committee, approved by the current (Brookline, MA). More importantly, however, I can see trustees: Michael Dunn (to finish appointed how vital it is that we as a movement do not Presidency: As you are aware, Lynne term, two years) Actor, founder, create our own orthodoxy, based on ro- Kositsky has very ably carried on the Truebard (Pacific Palisades, CA). mantic notions of Shakespeare the Oxfor- Presidency of the Shakespeare Fellow- K.C. Ligon (to finish appointed dian. Too many of us seem too eager to put ship following the resignation of Charles term, two years) Writer, Dialect into port before the journey’s end in order Berney last November. Lynne wishes to Coach (New York, N.Y.). to build castles in the sand, a mindset that step down from the Presidency while panders to the Stratfordian obsession with remaining on the board, and continuing Two board members, Steve Aucella creating schools of criticism. Instead, we her work with the Fellowship in other and Earl Showerman, are resigning, both would be well advised to keep to the open capacities. for personal reasons. They will continue seas, where we can enjoy the salt spray upon our cheeks and hear the shrouds rattle in the wind. Wary of literary ortho- Subscriptions to Shakespeare Matters are $40 doxies, people are more likely to respond Shakespeare Matters Published quarterly by the per year ($20 for online issues only). Family or to a call to join us on our voyage. The Shakespeare Fellowship institution subscriptions are $45 per year. My view has always been that this de- Patrons of the Fellowship are $75 and up. bate will not be won on the Stratfordians’ Editorial Offices Send subscription requests to: P.O. Box 263 terms, i.e., on their standards of scholar- The Shakespeare Fellowship ship, but on ours. Moreover, it will only be Somerville, MA 02143 P.O. Box 434 Marshfield MA 02051 won by asserting the whole truth, and noth- Editor: ing but the truth, however shocking to the William Boyle The purpose of the Shakespeare Fellowship sensibilities of our culture. Intuition and is to promote public awareness and acceptance imagination are vital components in un- Contributing Editors: of the authorship of the Shakespeare Canon by derstanding works of art which transcend Mark Anderson, Dr. Charles Berney, Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (1550- the rational mind. As Yeats reminds us in Charles Boyle, Dr. Felicia Londre, 1604), and further to encourage a high level of Lynne Kositsky, Alex McNeil, scholarly research and publication into all his poem “The Scholars”, what on earth Dr. Anne Pluto, Elisabeth Sears, aspects of Shakespeare studies, and also into the would the dry men do if the Roman love Dr. Roger Stritmatter, Richard Whalen, history and culture of the Elizabethan era. poet [Catullus] whom they circumscribe Hank Whittemore, Dr. Daniel L. Wright The Society was founded and incorporated with their commentaries should walk their in 2001 in the State of Massachusetts and is Phone (Somerville, MA): (617) 628-3411 chartered under the membership corporation way? They would of course condemn him. email: [email protected] laws of that state. It is a recognized 501(c)(3) So, perhaps we should not try too hard All contents copyright ©2005 nonprofit (Fed ID 04-3578550). to be Oxfordians, but dig deeply into the The Shakespeare Fellowship Dues, grants and contributions are tax- works to become true Shakespeareans. deductible to the extent allowed by law. Shakespeare Matters welcomes articles, essays, commentary, book reviews, letters and news items. Charles Beauclerk Contributions should be reasonably concise and, when Hadleigh, England, UK appropriate, validated by peer review. The views expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect those of the 15 June 2005 Fellowship as a literary and educational organization. Internet Ed. (©2005, The Shakespeare Fellowship - not for sale or distribution without written consent) Spring 2005 Shakespeare Matters page 3 to work with the Fellowship as active From the Editor members. In their place the Shakespeare Fellowship Board of Trustees is nominat- Shakespeare in Washington DC ing On page five in this issue we report on as Michael Wood’s In Search of Shake- speare and Stephen Greenblatt’s Will in Alex McNeil (after leave of absence, a recent press conference held at the Folger Shakespeare Library in Washington, DC the World. one year term). Lawyer, author, form- announcing a 6-month-long Shakespeare As we’ve noted before in these pages, er President of the SF (Newton, MA) festival to be held in our nation’s capital. we are in the midst of a major counter- Richard Desper (One year term) PhD, It strikes us that this long, elaborate offensive from those who would preserve Oxfordian scholar, former Assistant festival is a big deal in the ongoing the Stratford story forever—which is to Treasurer, SOS (Ayer, MA). authorship saga, coming as it will on the say “never EVER.” heelsof a major motion picture on Oxford Oxfordians should mark their calendars In addition, the nominating commit- as Shakespeare (Soul of the Age) that we now and not let this event unfold without tee has proposed two bylaw amendments expect will be released in late 2006, not to some strong counter-publicity to remind which, after discussion and approval by mention the recent push to reinvent the everyone that you must be acquainted the existing trustees, you will be asked to Stratfordian position through such books with Oxford to really know Shakespeare.
Recommended publications
  • Chronicles of the Family Baker"

    Chronicles of the Family Baker"

    Chronicles of the Family by Lee C.Baker i ii Table of Contents 1 THE MEDIEVAL BAKERS........................................................................................1 2 THE BAKERS OF SISSINGHURST.........................................................................20 3 THE BAKERS OF LONDON AND OXFORD ............................................................49 4 THE BAKERS AT HOTHFIELD ..............................................................................58 5 COMING OUT OF ENGLAND.................................................................................70 6 THE DAYS AT MILFORD .......................................................................................85 7 EAST HAMPTON, L. I. ...........................................................................................96 8 AMAGANSETT BY THE SEA ................................................................................114 9 STATEN ISLAND AND NEW AMSTERDAM ..........................................................127 10 THE ELIZABETH TOWN PIONEERS ....................................................................138 11 THE BAKERS OF ELIZABETH TOWN AND WESTFIELD ......................................171 12 THE NEIGHBORS AT NEWARK...........................................................................198 13 THE NEIGHBORS AT RAHWAY ...........................................................................208 14 WHO IS JONATHAN BAKER?..............................................................................219 15 THE JONATHAN I. BAKER CONFUSION
  • Domain-Specific Pseudonymous Signatures Revisited

    Domain-Specific Pseudonymous Signatures Revisited

    Domain-Specific Pseudonymous Signatures Revisited Kamil Kluczniak Wroclaw University of Technology, Department of Computer Science [email protected] Abstract. Domain-Specific Pseudonymous Signature schemes were re- cently proposed for privacy preserving authentication of digital identity documents by the BSI, German Federal Office for Information Secu- rity. The crucial property of domain-specific pseudonymous signatures is that a signer may derive unique pseudonyms within a so called domain. Now, the signer's true identity is hidden behind his domain pseudonyms and these pseudonyms are unlinkable, i.e. it is infeasible to correlate two pseudonyms from distinct domains with the identity of a single signer. In this paper we take a critical look at the security definitions and construc- tions of domain-specific pseudonymous signatures proposed by far. We review two articles which propose \sound and clean" security definitions and point out some issues present in these models. Some of the issues we present may have a strong practical impact on constructions \provably secure" in this models. Additionally, we point out some worrisome facts about the proposed schemes and their security analysis. Key words: eID Documents, Privacy, Domain Signatures, Pseudonymity, Security Definition, Provable Security 1 Introduction Domain signature schemes are signature schemes where we have a set of users, an issuer and a set of domains. Each user obtains his secret keys in collaboration with the issuer and then may sign data with regards to his pseudonym. The crucial property of domain signatures is that each user may derive a pseudonym within a domain. Domain pseudonyms of a user are constant within a domain and a user should be unable to change his pseudonym within a domain, however, he may derive unique pseudonyms in each domain of the system.
  • Conversations with Professor Sir John Hamilton Baker Part 3: Published Works by Lesley Dingle1 and Daniel Bates2 Date: 31 March 2017

    Conversations with Professor Sir John Hamilton Baker Part 3: Published Works by Lesley Dingle1 and Daniel Bates2 Date: 31 March 2017

    Conversations with Professor Sir John Hamilton Baker Part 3: Published works by Lesley Dingle1 and Daniel Bates2 Date: 31 March 2017 This is the third interview with the twenty-fifth personality for the Eminent Scholars Archive. Professor Sir John Baker is Emeritus Downing Professor of the Laws of England at the University of Cambridge. The interview was recorded, and the audio version is available on this website. Questions in the interviews are sequentially numbered for use in a database of citations to personalities mentioned across the Eminent Scholars Archive. Interviewer: Lesley Dingle, her questions are in bold type. Professor Baker’s answers are in normal type. Comments added by LD, [in italics]. Footnotes added by LD. 178. Professor Baker, we now come to the point where we can discuss your scholarly works and the research that you have undertaken over the last half a century to produce them. To say that you have been very productive and that your output has been impressive would be to understate your contribution to scholarly legal history. Your CV lists 38 books, 123 chapters in books, 183 articles and notes, 12 pamphlets, 35 book reviews and 97 invited lectures. Also, remembering that you have always had a full academic life of lecturing, administration and activity in learned societies puts these achievements even more clearly into perspective. It would have been impossible for me to have read more than a small percentage of this material and, consequently, I hope you will forgive me for having been very selective in the books and the papers that I have looked at in detail.
  • Towards Formal Definitions

    Towards Formal Definitions

    Covid Notions: Towards Formal Definitions – and Documented Understanding – of Privacy Goals and Claimed Protection in Proximity-Tracing Services Christiane Kuhn∗, Martin Becky, Thorsten Strufe∗z ∗ KIT Karlsruhe, fchristiane.kuhn, [email protected] y Huawei, [email protected] z Centre for Tactile Internet / TU Dresden April 17, 2020 Abstract—The recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic gave rise to they are at risk, if they have been in proximity with another management approaches using mobile apps for contact tracing. individual that later tested positive for the disease), their The corresponding apps track individuals and their interactions, architecture (most protocols assume a server to participate in to facilitate alerting users of potential infections well before they become infectious themselves. Na¨ıve implementation obviously the service provision, c.f. PEPP-PT, [1], [2], [8]), and broadly jeopardizes the privacy of health conditions, location, activities, the fact that they assume some adversaries to aim at extracting and social interaction of its users. A number of protocol designs personal information from the service (sometimes also trolls for colocation tracking have already been developed, most of who could abuse, or try to sabotage the service or its users3). which claim to function in a privacy preserving manner. How- Most, if not all published proposals claim privacy, ever, despite claims such as “GDPR compliance”, “anonymity”, “pseudonymity” or other forms of “privacy”, the authors of these anonymity, or compliance with some data protection regu- designs usually neglect to precisely define what they (aim to) lations. However, none, to the best of our knowledge, has protect. actually formally defined threats, trust assumptions and ad- We make a first step towards formally defining the privacy versaries, or concrete protection goals.
  • Naming the Extrasolar Planets

    Naming the Extrasolar Planets

    Naming the extrasolar planets W. Lyra Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, K¨onigstuhl 17, 69177, Heidelberg, Germany [email protected] Abstract and OGLE-TR-182 b, which does not help educators convey the message that these planets are quite similar to Jupiter. Extrasolar planets are not named and are referred to only In stark contrast, the sentence“planet Apollo is a gas giant by their assigned scientific designation. The reason given like Jupiter” is heavily - yet invisibly - coated with Coper- by the IAU to not name the planets is that it is consid- nicanism. ered impractical as planets are expected to be common. I One reason given by the IAU for not considering naming advance some reasons as to why this logic is flawed, and sug- the extrasolar planets is that it is a task deemed impractical. gest names for the 403 extrasolar planet candidates known One source is quoted as having said “if planets are found to as of Oct 2009. The names follow a scheme of association occur very frequently in the Universe, a system of individual with the constellation that the host star pertains to, and names for planets might well rapidly be found equally im- therefore are mostly drawn from Roman-Greek mythology. practicable as it is for stars, as planet discoveries progress.” Other mythologies may also be used given that a suitable 1. This leads to a second argument. It is indeed impractical association is established. to name all stars. But some stars are named nonetheless. In fact, all other classes of astronomical bodies are named.
  • Relational-Cultural Perspectives of African American Women with Diabetes and Maintaining Multiple Roles

    Relational-Cultural Perspectives of African American Women with Diabetes and Maintaining Multiple Roles

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Doctoral Dissertations Dissertations and Theses November 2017 Relational-Cultural Perspectives of African American Women with Diabetes and Maintaining Multiple Roles Ayesha Ali University of Massachusetts Amherst Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2 Part of the Other Nursing Commons Recommended Citation Ali, Ayesha, "Relational-Cultural Perspectives of African American Women with Diabetes and Maintaining Multiple Roles" (2017). Doctoral Dissertations. 1042. https://doi.org/10.7275/10586793.0 https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2/1042 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Relational-Cultural Perspectives of African American Women with Diabetes and Maintaining Multiple Roles A Dissertation Presented by Ayesha Ali Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY September 2017 College of Nursing © Copyright by Ayesha Ali 2017 All Rights Reserved RELATIONAL-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES OF AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN WITH DIABETES AND MAINTAINING MULTIPLE ROLES A Dissertation Presented By AYESHA ALI Approved as to style and content by: ________________________________________ Cynthia S. Jacelon, Chair ________________________________________ Genevieve E. Chandler, Member ________________________________________ Alexandrina Deschamps, Member ______________________________ Stephen Cavanagh, Dean College of Nursing DEDICATION This is dedicated to my mother and my always supportive husband. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to give a heart-felt thanks to my advisor and chair of my dissertation committee, Cynthia Jacelon.
  • Speakers of the House of Commons

    Speakers of the House of Commons

    Parliamentary Information List BRIEFING PAPER 04637a 21 August 2015 Speakers of the House of Commons Speaker Date Constituency Notes Peter de Montfort 1258 − William Trussell 1327 − Appeared as joint spokesman of Lords and Commons. Styled 'Procurator' Henry Beaumont 1332 (Mar) − Appeared as joint spokesman of Lords and Commons. Sir Geoffrey Le Scrope 1332 (Sep) − Appeared as joint spokesman of Lords and Commons. Probably Chief Justice. William Trussell 1340 − William Trussell 1343 − Appeared for the Commons alone. William de Thorpe 1347-1348 − Probably Chief Justice. Baron of the Exchequer, 1352. William de Shareshull 1351-1352 − Probably Chief Justice. Sir Henry Green 1361-1363¹ − Doubtful if he acted as Speaker. All of the above were Presiding Officers rather than Speakers Sir Peter de la Mare 1376 − Sir Thomas Hungerford 1377 (Jan-Mar) Wiltshire The first to be designated Speaker. Sir Peter de la Mare 1377 (Oct-Nov) Herefordshire Sir James Pickering 1378 (Oct-Nov) Westmorland Sir John Guildesborough 1380 Essex Sir Richard Waldegrave 1381-1382 Suffolk Sir James Pickering 1383-1390 Yorkshire During these years the records are defective and this Speaker's service might not have been unbroken. Sir John Bussy 1394-1398 Lincolnshire Beheaded 1399 Sir John Cheyne 1399 (Oct) Gloucestershire Resigned after only two days in office. John Dorewood 1399 (Oct-Nov) Essex Possibly the first lawyer to become Speaker. Sir Arnold Savage 1401(Jan-Mar) Kent Sir Henry Redford 1402 (Oct-Nov) Lincolnshire Sir Arnold Savage 1404 (Jan-Apr) Kent Sir William Sturmy 1404 (Oct-Nov) Devonshire Or Esturmy Sir John Tiptoft 1406 Huntingdonshire Created Baron Tiptoft, 1426.
  • Stapylton Final Version

    Stapylton Final Version

    1 THE PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE OF FREEDOM FROM ARREST, 1603–1629 Keith A. T. Stapylton UCL Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2016 Page 2 DECLARATION I, Keith Anthony Thomas Stapylton, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed Page 3 ABSTRACT This thesis considers the English parliamentary privilege of freedom from arrest (and other legal processes), 1603-1629. Although it is under-represented in the historiography, the early Stuart Commons cherished this particular privilege as much as they valued freedom of speech. Previously one of the privileges requested from the monarch at the start of a parliament, by the seventeenth century freedom from arrest was increasingly claimed as an ‘ancient’, ‘undoubted’ right that secured the attendance of members, and safeguarded their honour, dignity, property, and ‘necessary’ servants. Uncertainty over the status and operation of the privilege was a major contemporary issue, and this prompted key questions for research. First, did ill definition of the constitutional relationship between the crown and its prerogatives, and parliament and its privileges, lead to tensions, increasingly polemical attitudes, and a questioning of the royal prerogative? Where did sovereignty now lie? Second, was it important to maximise the scope of the privilege, if parliament was to carry out its business properly? Did ad hoc management of individual privilege cases nevertheless have the cumulative effect of enhancing the authority and confidence of the Commons? Third, to what extent was the exploitation or abuse of privilege an unintended consequence of the strengthening of the Commons’ authority in matters of privilege? Such matters are not treated discretely, but are embedded within chapters that follow a thematic, broadly chronological approach.
  • CHURCH: Dates of Confirmation/Consecration

    CHURCH: Dates of Confirmation/Consecration

    Court: Women at Court; Royal Household. p.1: Women at Court. Royal Household: p.56: Gentlemen and Grooms of the Privy Chamber; p.59: Gentlemen Ushers. p.60: Cofferer and Controller of the Household. p.61: Privy Purse and Privy Seal: selected payments. p.62: Treasurer of the Chamber: selected payments; p.63: payments, 1582. p.64: Allusions to the Queen’s family: King Henry VIII; Queen Anne Boleyn; King Edward VI; Queen Mary Tudor; Elizabeth prior to her Accession. Royal Household Orders. p.66: 1576 July (I): Remembrance of charges. p.67: 1576 July (II): Reformations to be had for diminishing expenses. p.68: 1577 April: Articles for diminishing expenses. p.69: 1583 Dec 7: Remembrances concerning household causes. p.70: 1598: Orders for the Queen’s Almoners. 1598: Orders for the Queen’s Porters. p.71: 1599: Orders for supplying French wines to the Royal Household. p.72: 1600: Thomas Wilson: ‘The Queen’s Expenses’. p.74: Marriages: indexes; miscellaneous references. p.81: Godchildren: indexes; miscellaneous references. p.92: Deaths: chronological list. p.100: Funerals. Women at Court. Ladies and Gentlewomen of the Bedchamber and the Privy Chamber. Maids of Honour, Mothers of the Maids; also relatives and friends of the Queen not otherwise included, and other women prominent in the reign. Close friends of the Queen: Katherine Astley; Dorothy Broadbelt; Lady Cobham; Anne, Lady Hunsdon; Countess of Huntingdon; Countess of Kildare; Lady Knollys; Lady Leighton; Countess of Lincoln; Lady Norris; Elizabeth and Helena, Marchionesses of Northampton; Countess of Nottingham; Blanche Parry; Katherine, Countess of Pembroke; Mary Radcliffe; Lady Scudamore; Lady Mary Sidney; Lady Stafford; Countess of Sussex; Countess of Warwick.
  • DISSERTATION-Submission Reformatted

    DISSERTATION-Submission Reformatted

    The Dilemma of Obedience: Persecution, Dissimulation, and Memory in Early Modern England, 1553-1603 By Robert Lee Harkins A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Ethan Shagan, Chair Professor Jonathan Sheehan Professor David Bates Fall 2013 © Robert Lee Harkins 2013 All Rights Reserved 1 Abstract The Dilemma of Obedience: Persecution, Dissimulation, and Memory in Early Modern England, 1553-1603 by Robert Lee Harkins Doctor of Philosophy in History University of California, Berkeley Professor Ethan Shagan, Chair This study examines the problem of religious and political obedience in early modern England. Drawing upon extensive manuscript research, it focuses on the reign of Mary I (1553-1558), when the official return to Roman Catholicism was accompanied by the prosecution of Protestants for heresy, and the reign of Elizabeth I (1558-1603), when the state religion again shifted to Protestantism. I argue that the cognitive dissonance created by these seesaw changes of official doctrine necessitated a society in which religious mutability became standard operating procedure. For most early modern men and women it was impossible to navigate between the competing and contradictory dictates of Tudor religion and politics without conforming, dissimulating, or changing important points of conscience and belief. Although early modern theologians and polemicists widely declared religious conformists to be shameless apostates, when we examine specific cases in context it becomes apparent that most individuals found ways to positively rationalize and justify their respective actions. This fraught history continued to have long-term effects on England’s religious, political, and intellectual culture.
  • Impact Melt Emplacement on Mercury

    Impact Melt Emplacement on Mercury

    Western University Scholarship@Western Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 7-24-2018 2:00 PM Impact Melt Emplacement on Mercury Jeffrey Daniels The University of Western Ontario Supervisor Neish, Catherine D. The University of Western Ontario Graduate Program in Geology A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree in Master of Science © Jeffrey Daniels 2018 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Geology Commons, Physical Processes Commons, and the The Sun and the Solar System Commons Recommended Citation Daniels, Jeffrey, "Impact Melt Emplacement on Mercury" (2018). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 5657. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/5657 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract Impact cratering is an abrupt, spectacular process that occurs on any world with a solid surface. On Earth, these craters are easily eroded or destroyed through endogenic processes. The Moon and Mercury, however, lack a significant atmosphere, meaning craters on these worlds remain intact longer, geologically. In this thesis, remote-sensing techniques were used to investigate impact melt emplacement about Mercury’s fresh, complex craters. For complex lunar craters, impact melt is preferentially ejected from the lowest rim elevation, implying topographic control. On Venus, impact melt is preferentially ejected downrange from the impact site, implying impactor-direction control. Mercury, despite its heavily-cratered surface, trends more like Venus than like the Moon.
  • GREAT Day 2007 Program

    GREAT Day 2007 Program

    Welcome to SUNY Geneseo’s First Annual G.R.E.A.T. Day! Geneseo Recognizing Excellence, Achievement & Talent Day is a college-wide symposium celebrating the creative and scholarly endeavors of our students. In addition to recognizing the achievements of our students, the purpose of G.R.E.A.T. Day is to help foster academic excellence, encourage professional development, and build connections within the community. The G.R.E.A.T. Day Planning Committee: Doug Anderson, School of the Arts Anne Baldwin, Sponsored Research Joan Ballard, Department of Psychology Anne Eisenberg, Department of Sociology Charlie Freeman, Department of Physics & Astronomy Tom Greenfield, Department of English Anthony Gu, School of Business Koomi Kim, School of Education Andrea Klein, Scheduling and Special Events The Planning Committee would like to thank: Stacie Anekstein, Ed Antkoviak, Brian Bennett, Cassie Brown, Michael Caputo, Sue Chichester, Betsy Colon, Laura Cook, Ann Crandall, Joe Dolce, Tammy Farrell, Carlo Filice, Richard Finkelstein, Karie Frisiras, Ginny Geer-Mentry, Becky Glass, Dave Gordon, Corey Ha, John Haley, Doug Harke, Gregg Hartvigsen, Tony Hoppa, Paul Jackson, Ellen Kintz, Nancy Johncox, Enrico Johnson, Ken Kallio, Jo Kirk, Sue Mallaber, Mary McCrank, Nancy Newcomb, Elizabeth Otero, Tracy Paradis, Jennifer Perry, Jewel Reardon, Ed Rivenburgh, Linda Shepard, Bonnie Swoger, Helen Thomas, Pam Thomas, and Taryn Thompson. Thank you to President Christopher Dahl and Provost Katherine Conway-Turner for their support of G.R.E.A.T. Day. Thank you to Lynn Weber for delivering our inaugural keynote address. The G.R.E.A.T. Day name was suggested by Elizabeth Otero, a senior Philosophy major.