Guy FawkesFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThis article is about the historical figure. For other uses, see Guy Fawkes (disambiguation).

Guy Fawkes (/ˈɡaɪ   ˈfɔːks/ ; 13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606),[a]also known as Guido Fawkes, the name he adopted while fighting for the Spanish, was a member of a group of provincialEnglish Catholics who planned the failed Gunpowder Plot of 1605.

Fawkes was born and educated in York. His father died when Fawkes was eight years old, after which his mother married arecusant Catholic. Fawkes converted to Catholicism and left for the continent, where he fought in the Eighty Years' Waron the side of Catholic Spain against Protestant Dutchreformers in the Low Countries. He travelled to Spain to seek support for a Catholic rebellion in England without success. He later met Thomas Wintour, with whom he returned to England.

Wintour introduced Fawkes toRobert Catesby, who planned to assassinate King James I and restore a Catholic monarch to the throne. The plotters leased an undercroft beneath the House of Lords, and Fawkes was placed in charge of thegunpowder they stockpiled there. Prompted by the receipt of an anonymous letter, the authorities searched Westminster Palace during the early hours of 5 November, and found Fawkes guarding the explosives. Over the next few days, he was questioned and tortured, and eventually he confessed. Immediately before his execution on 31 January, Fawkes fell from the scaffold where he was to be hanged and broke his neck, thus avoiding the agony of the mutilation that followed.

Fawkes became synonymous with the Gunpowder Plot, the failure of which has been commemorated in Britain since 5 November 1605. His effigy is traditionally burned on a bonfire, commonly accompanied by a fireworksdisplay.

Gunpowder PlotGuy Fawkes

George Cruikshank's illustration of Guy Fawkes, published in William Harrison Ainsworth's 1840 novel

Details

Parents Edward Fawkes, Edith (néeBlake or Jackson)

Born 13 April 1570 (presumed)York, England

Alias(es) Guido Fawkes, John Johnson

Occupation Soldier; Alférez

Plot

Role Explosives

Enlisted 20 May 1604

Captured 5 November 1605

Conviction(s) High treason

Penalty Hanged, drawn and quartered

Died 31 January 1606 (aged 35)Westminster, London, England

Cause Hanged

Gunpowder PlotFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gunpowder Plot

A late 17th or early 18th century report of the plot

Details

Participants Robert Catesby, John Wright,Thomas Wintour, Thomas Percy,Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes,Thomas Bates, Robert Wintour,Christopher Wright, John Grant,Ambrose Rookwood, Sir Everard Digby and Francis Tresham

Location London, England

Date 5 November 1605

Result Failure, plotters executed

The Gunpowder Plot of 1605, in earlier centuries often called the Gunpowder Treason Plotor the Jesuit Treason, was a failed assassination attempt against King James I of England and VI of Scotland by a group of provincial English Catholics led by Robert Catesby.

The plan was to blow up theHouse of Lords during the State Opening of England's Parliamenton 5 November 1605, as the prelude to a popular revolt in theMidlands during which James's nine-year-old daughter, Princess Elizabeth, was to be installed as the Catholic head of state. Catesby may have embarked on the scheme after hopes of securing greater religious tolerance under King James had faded, leaving many English Catholics disappointed. His fellow plotters wereJohn Wright, Thomas Wintour, Thomas Percy, Guy Fawkes, Robert Keyes,Thomas Bates, Robert Wintour, Christopher Wright, John Grant, Ambrose Rookwood, Sir Everard Digby and Francis Tresham. Fawkes, who had 10 years of military experience fighting in the Spanish Netherlands in suppression of the Dutch Revolt, was given charge of the explosives.

The plot was revealed to the authorities in an anonymous letter sent toWilliam Parker, 4th   Baron Monteagle , on 26 October 1605. During a search of the House of Lords at about midnight on 4 November 1605, Fawkes was discovered guarding 36 barrels of gunpowder—enough to reduce the House of Lords to rubble—and arrested. Most of the conspirators fled from London as they learned of the plot's discovery, trying to enlist support along the way. Several made a stand against the pursuing Sheriff of Worcester and his men at Holbeche House; in the ensuing battle Catesby was one of those shot and killed. At their trial on 27 January 1606, eight of the survivors, including Fawkes, were convicted and sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered.

Details of the assassination attempt were allegedly known by the principalJesuit of England, Father Henry Garnet. Although he was convicted of treasonand sentenced to death, doubt has been cast on how much he really knew of the plot. As its existence was revealed to him through confession, Garnet was prevented from informing the authorities by the absolute confidentiality of the confessional. Although anti-Catholic legislation was introduced soon after the plot's discovery, many important and loyal Catholics retained high office during King James I's reign. The thwarting of the Gunpowder Plot was commemorated for many years afterwards by special sermons and other public events such as the ringing of church bells, which have evolved into theBonfire Night of today.

Theory of monarchy[edit]

James argued a theological basis for monarchy in The True Law of Free

Monarchies.

In 1597–98, James wrote The True Law of Free Monarchies and Basilikon Doron(Royal Gift), in which he argued a theological basis for monarchy. In theTrue Law, he sets out the divine right of kings, explaining that for Biblical reasons kings are higher beings than other men, though "the highest bench is the sliddriest to sit upon".[50] The document proposes an absolutist theory of monarchy, by which a king may impose new laws byroyal prerogative but must also pay heed to tradition and to God, who would "stirre up such scourges as pleaseth him, for punishment of wicked kings"

Gunpowder Plot[edit]Main article: Gunpowder Plot

On the night of 4–5 November 1605, the eve of the state opening of the second session of James's first English Parliament, Catholic Guy Fawkes was discovered in the cellars of the parliament buildings. He was guarding a pile of wood not far from 36 barrels of gunpowder with which Fawkes intended to blow up Parliament House the following day and cause the destruction, as James put it, "not only ... of my person, nor of my wife and posterity also, but of the whole body of the State in general".[78] The sensational discovery of the Gunpowder Plot, as it quickly became known, aroused a mood of national relief at the delivery of the king and his sons which Salisbury exploited to extract higher subsidies from the ensuing Parliament than any but one granted to Elizabeth. [79] Fawkes and others implicated in the unsuccessful conspiracy were executed.

Aftermath[edit]

See also: Gunpowder Plot in popular culture

Greater freedom for Roman Catholics to worship as they chose seemed unlikely in 1604, but the discovery of such a wide-ranging conspiracy, the capture of those involved, and the subsequent trials, led Parliament to consider introducing new anti-Catholic legislation. In the summer of 1606, laws against recusancy were strengthened; the Popish Recusants Actreturned England to the Elizabethan system of fines and restrictions, introduced a sacramental test, and an Oath of Allegiance,[155] requiring Catholics to abjure as a "heresy" the doctrine that "princes excommunicated by the Pope could be deposed or assassinated".[13] Catholic Emancipationtook another 200 years, but many important and loyal Catholics retained high office during King James I's reign.[156] Although there was no "golden time" of "toleration" of Catholics, which Father Garnet had hoped for, James's reign was nevertheless a period of relative leniency for Catholics, and few were subject to prosecution. [157]

The playwright William Shakespeare had already used the family history of Northumberland's family in his Henry IV series of plays, and the events of the Gunpowder Plot seem to have featured alongside the earlier Gowrie conspiracy in Macbeth, written some time between 1603 and 1607.[158]Interest in the demonic was heightened by the Gunpowder Plot. The King had become engaged in the great debate about other-worldly powers in writing hisDaemonology in 1597, before he became King of England as well as Scotland. Inversions seen in such lines as "fair is foul and foul is fair" are used frequently, and another possible reference to the plot relates to the use ofequivocation; Garnett's A Treatise of Equivocation was found on one of the plotters.[159] Another writer influenced by the plot was John Milton, who in 1626 wrote what one commentator has called a "critically vexing poem", In Quintum Novembris. Reflecting "partisan public sentiment on an English-Protestant national holiday", [160] in the published editions of 1645 and 1673 the poem is preceded by five epigrams on the subject of the Gunpowder Plot, apparently written by Milton in preparation for the larger work.[161] The plot may also have influenced his later work, Paradise Lost.[162]

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who was the ruler of England at the time of the Gunpowder Plot?

Who originally translated Romeo and Juliet to English?

Explain how the conspirators (Guy Fawkes and his crew) tried to blow up Parliament.

Analyze: what were King James’s views on being a king? What effect might this have on his people?

Hypothesize why King James’s treatment of Catholics might have stirred the conspirators to attack.

Elizabeth I of EnglandElizabeth I (7 September 1533 – 24 March 1603) was Queen ofEngland and Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death. Sometimes called The Virgin Queen, Gloriana or Good Queen Bess, the childless Elizabeth was the fifth and last monarch of the Tudor dynasty.

Elizabeth was the daughter ofHenry VIII and Anne Boleyn, his second wife, who was executed two and a half years after Elizabeth's birth. Anne's marriage to Henry VIII was annulled, and Elizabeth was declared illegitimate. Her half-brother, Edward VI, ruled until his death in 1553, bequeathing the crown to Lady Jane Grey and ignoring the claims of his two half-sisters, Elizabeth and theRoman Catholic Mary, in spite ofstatute law to the contrary. Edward's will was set aside and Mary became queen, deposing Lady Jane Grey. During Mary's reign, Elizabeth was imprisoned for nearly a year on suspicion of supporting Protestant rebels.

In 1558, Elizabeth succeeded her half-sister to the throne and set out to rule by good counsel.[1] She depended heavily on a group of trusted advisers, led by William Cecil, Baron Burghley. One of her first actions as queen was the establishment of an English Protestant church, of which she became the Supreme Governor. This Elizabethan Religious Settlement was to evolve into the Church of England. It was expected that Elizabeth would marry and produce an heir to continue the Tudor line. She never did, despite numerous courtships. As she grew older, Elizabeth became famous for her virginity. A cult grew around her which was celebrated in the portraits, pageants, and literature of the day.

In government, Elizabeth was more moderate than her father and half-siblings had been.[2] One of her mottoes was "video et taceo" ("I see, and say nothing").[3] In religion, she was relatively tolerant and avoided systematic persecution. After the pope declared her illegitimate in 1570 and released her subjects from obedience to her, several conspiracies threatened her life, all of which were defeated with the help of her ministers' secret service. Elizabeth was cautious in foreign affairs, manoeuvring between the major powers of France and Spain. She only half-heartedly supported a number of

ineffective, poorly resourced military campaigns in the Netherlands, France, and Ireland. By the mid-1580s, England could no longer avoid war with Spain. England's defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 associated Elizabeth with one of the greatest military victories in English history.

Elizabeth's reign is known as the Elizabethan era. The period is famous for the flourishing of English drama, led by playwrights such as William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe, and for the seafaring prowess of English

Elizabeth I

The "Darnley Portrait" of Elizabeth I (c. 1575)

Queen of England and Ireland (more...)

Reign 17 November 1558 –24 March 1603

Coronation 15 January 1559

Predecessors Mary I and Philip

Successor James I

Born 7 September 1533Palace of Placentia,Greenwich, England

Died 24 March 1603 (aged 69)Richmond Palace, Surrey, England

Burial 28 April 1603Westminster Abbey

House Tudor

Father Henry VIII

Mother Anne Boleyn

Religion Anglican

Signature

adventurers such as Francis Drake. Some historians depict Elizabeth as a short-tempered, sometimes indecisive ruler,[4] who enjoyed more than her share of luck. Towards the end of her reign, a series of economic and military problems weakened her popularity. Elizabeth is acknowledged as a charismatic performer and a dogged survivor in an era when government was ramshackle and limited, and when monarchs in neighbouring countries faced internal problems that jeopardised their thrones. Such was the case with Elizabeth's rival, Mary, Queen of Scots, whom she imprisoned in 1568 and had executed in 1587. After the short reigns of Elizabeth's half-siblings, her 44 years on the throne provided welcome stability for the kingdom and helped forge a sense of national identity. [2]

Legacy and memoryFurther information: Cultural depictions of Elizabeth I of England

Elizabeth I. The "Rainbow Portrait", c. 1600, an allegorical representation of the

Queen, become ageless in her old age

Elizabeth I, painted after 1620, during the first revival of interest in her reign. Time

sleeps on her right and Death looks over her left shoulder; twoputti hold the crown

above her head.[181]

Elizabeth was lamented by many of her subjects, but others were relieved at her death.[182] Expectations of King James started high but then declined, so by the 1620s there was a nostalgic revival of the cult of Elizabeth.[183]Elizabeth was praised as a heroine of the Protestant cause and the ruler of a golden age. James was depicted as a Catholic sympathiser, presiding over a corrupt court.[184] The triumphalist image that Elizabeth had cultivated towards the end of her reign, against a background of factionalism and military and economic difficulties,[185]was taken at face value and her reputation inflated. Godfrey Goodman, Bishop of Gloucester, recalled: "When we had experience of a Scottish government, the Queen did seem to revive. Then was her memory much magnified."[186] Elizabeth's reign became idealised as a time when crown, church and parliament had worked in constitutional balance.[187]

Henry VIII of EnglandHenry VIII (28 June 1491 – 28 January 1547) was King of England from 21 April 1509 until his death. He was the first English King of Ireland, and continued the nominal claim by English monarchs to the Kingdom of France. Henry was the second monarch of theTudor dynasty, succeeding his father, Henry VII.

Besides his six marriages and many extramarital affairs, as well as his effort to obtain an annulment of his marriage toCatherine of Aragon which lead to conflict with the Pope, Henry is known for his subsequent and consequential role in the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church. His disagreements with the Pope led to his separation of the Church of England from papal authority, with himself, as king, as theSupreme Head of the Church of England and to the Dissolution of the Monasteries. Because his principal dispute was with papal authority, rather than with doctrinal matters, he remained a believer in core Catholic theological teachings despite his excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church.[1]Henry oversaw the legal union ofEngland and Wales with theLaws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542. He is also well known for a long personal rivalry with bothFrancis I of France and the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, with whom he frequently warred.

Domestically, Henry is known for his radical changes to theEnglish Constitution, ushering in the theory of the divine right of kings to England. Besides asserting the sovereign's supremacy over the Church of England, thus initiating theEnglish Reformation, he greatly expanded royal power. Charges of treason and heresy were commonly used to quash dissent, and those accused were often executed without a formal trial, by means of bills of attainder. He achieved many of his political aims through the work of his chief ministers, some of whom were banished or executed when they fell out of his favour. Figures such asThomas Wolsey, Thomas More, Thomas Cromwell, Richard Rich, andThomas Cranmer figured prominently in Henry's administration. An extravagant spender, he used the proceeds from the Dissolution of the Monasteries and acts of the Reformation Parliament to convert money formerly paid to Rome into royal revenue. Despite the influx of money from these sources, Henry was continually on the verge of financial ruin due to his personal extravagance as well as his numerous costly continental wars.

Spanish ArmadaMeanwhile, Sir Francis Drake had undertaken a major voyage against Spanish ports and ships to the Caribbean in 1585 and 1586, and in 1587 had made a successful raid on Cadiz, destroying the Spanish fleet of war ships intended for the Enterprise of England:[115] Philip II had decided to take the war to England.[116]

Portrait of Elizabeth to commemorate the defeat of the Spanish Armada (1588), depicted in the background. Elizabeth's hand

rests on the globe, symbolising her international power.

On 12 July 1588, theSpanish Armada, a great fleet of ships, set sail for the channel, planning to ferry a Spanish invasion force under the Duke of Parma to the coast of southeast England from the Netherlands. A combination of miscalculation,[117]misfortune, and an attack of English fire ships on 29 July off Gravelines which dispersed the Spanishships to the northeast defeated the Armada.[118] The Armada straggled home to Spain in shattered remnants, after disastrous losses on the coast of Ireland (after some ships had tried to struggle back to Spain via the North Sea, and then back south past the west coast of Ireland).[119] Unaware of the Armada's fate, English militias mustered to defend the country under the Earl of Leicester's command. He invited Elizabeth to inspect her troops at Tilbury in Essex on 8 August. Wearing a silver breastplate over a white velvet dress, she addressed them in one of her most famous speeches:

“My loving people, we have been persuaded by some that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourself to armed multitudes for fear of treachery; but I assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people ... I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a King of England too, and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any Prince of Europe should dare to invade the borders of my realm.[120]”

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who ruled England before Queen Elizabeth?

What major force did Queen Elizabeth defeat?

Describe why Queen Elizabeth was so important to Shakespeare and other artists?

Hypothesize what King Henry VIII was like as a ruler. Do you think he was good or bad? Why?

Evaluate the effect Queen Elizabeth had on both England and the world:

The Tragical History of Romeus and JulietFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Frontispiece of The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet.

The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet is a narrative poem, first published in 1562 by Arthur Brooke, which was the key source for William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Brooke is reported to have translated it from an Italian novella by Matteo Bandello; by another theory, it is mainly derived from a French version which involves a man by the name of Reomeo Titensus and Juliet Bibleotet by Pierre Boaistuau, published byRichard Tottell.

Little is known about Arthur Brooke. He was admitted as a member of Inner Temple on 18 December 1561 under the sponsorship of Thomas Sackville and Thomas Norton.[1] He drowned in 1563 by shipwreck while crossing to help Protestant forces in theFrench Wars of Religion.

The poem's ending differs significantly from Shakespeare's play—the nurse is banished and the apothecary is hanged for their involvement in the deception, while Friar Lawrence leaves Verona to end his days in a hermitage.

London, Chatto and Windus; New York, Duffield and company, 1908. Reprinted in 1978. It was played in 1975 in the city of Chatham in Ontario, Canada.

Arthur Brooke Biography: Arthur Brooke (or Arthur Broke) (d. circa 1563) was an English poet, whose only known work is The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet (1562). The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet IS considered to be William Shakespeare's chief source for his famous play Romeo and Juliet. Though professedly a translation from the Italian of Bandello by way of a French version, the poem by Brooke is a free paraphrase. In 1565, a prose version of Romeo and Juliet (1567) was printed in the second volume of The Palace of Pleasure, a collection of tales, the editor being William Painter, clerk of the armoury to Queen Elizabeth shortly after she came to the throne. Many critics consider Painter’s work inferior to Brooke’s poem, just as Brooke’s poem is thought to be inferior to Shakespeare’s play. Little is known of Arthur Brooke’s life except that he died by shipwreck while traveling to Newhaven in (or before) the year 1563.

This narrative poem, first published in 1562 and the key "source" for Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, can be found complete as:Brooke's 'Romeus and Juliet' Being the Original of Shakespeare's 'Romeo and Juliet' Newly Edited by J.J. Munro. 1908. Rpt. NY: AMS Press, Inc., 1970.or chopped down as The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet. InThe Sources of Ten Shakespearean Plays. Ed. Alice Griffin. NY: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1966. 3-43.

The original publication title page reads only The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Iuliet, written first in Italian by Bandell, and nowe in Englishe by Ar. Br. Very little is known about Arthur Brooke, who is later credited with the work: although see Nina Green, "Who Was Arthur Brooke?" The Oxfordian 3 (2000): 51-70. An Arthur Brooke existed, born about 1544 and drowned early in 1564 on his way to help Protestant forces in France, but many Oxfordians consider this poem a youthful composition by de Vere, who later expanded and revised the story for the stage. See Paul H. Altrocchi, MD, "Shakespeare, Not Arthur Brooke, Wrote Tragicall Historye of Romeus & Juliet." Shakespeare Oxford Newsletter 43.1 (Winter 2007): 22-26.

The poem is a "cautionary tale for young lovers" (Farina 177) and is faulted for its (a) excessive alliteration; (b) frequent classical allusions; (c) a curious form of 'unnatural' natural history ... ; (d)didactic harangues; (e) lengthy soliloquies; (f) balanced antithesis; (g) extravagant description and artificial sentiment" (l-li). The "dullness" of this "long, moralising poem" is supposedly "undisputed" (Farina 175).

Matteo Bandello (French: Mathieu Bandel; c. 1480 – 1562) was an Italian writer, mostly known for his novellas.

Biography[edit]

Castel Goffredo, palace Gonzaga-Acerbi.

Matteo Bandello was born atCastelnuovo Scrivia, near Tortona(current Piedmont), c. 1480. He received a good education, and entered the church, but does not seem to have been very interested intheology. For many years he lived atMantua and Castel Goffredo, and superintended the education of the celebrated Lucrezia Gonzaga, in whose honour he composed a long poem. The decisive Battle of Pavia, as a result of which Lombardy was taken by the emperor, compelled Bandello to flee; his house at Milan was burnt and his property confiscated. He took refuge with Cesare Fregoso, an Italian general in the French service, whom he accompanied into France. [1]

He was later raised to the bishopric of Agen, a town in which he resided for many years before his death in 1562. Bandello wrote a number of poems, but his fame rests entirely on his extensive collection of Novelle, or tales (1554, 1573), which have been extremely popular. They belong to the same genre as Boccaccio’s Decameron and Marguerite de Navarre’s Heptameron. The common origin of them all is to be found in the old French fabliaux, though some well-known tales are evidently Eastern, and others classical. Bandello’s novellas are thought the best of those written in imitation of the Decameron, though Italian critics find fault with them for negligence and inelegance of style.[1]

The stories on which William Shakespeare based several of his plays (Much Ado about Nothing, Romeo and Juliet and Twelfth Night in particular)[2] were supplied by Bandello, probably through Belleforest and Pierre Boaistuauwhose stories were later translated into English by William Paynter and included in his The Palace of Pleasure. Another of his stories includes "The countess of Cellant", a distortion of Challand, a northwest region of Italy.

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who was the original author of Romeo and Juliet?

Who originally translated Romeo and Juliet to English?

Do you think Shakespeare plagiarized Romeo and Juliet? Why? Is this a bad thing?

What did Shakespeare keep the same about Romeo and Juliet (we haven’t read it yet but use what you already know about the story)

Would Romeo and Juliet have been so popular without Shakespeare? Why/Why not?

Roanoke IslandFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaCoordinates:  35°53′N 75°39′W

NASA Geocover 2000 image and USGS Topographic Map

Entrance to Fort Raleigh Outdoor Theater near the north end of

Roanoke Island

Roanoke Island is an island in Dare County on the Outer Banks of North Carolina, United States. It was named after the historical RoanokeCarolina Algonquianpeople who inhabited the area in the 16th century at the time of English exploration.

The First Colony[edit]Main article: Roanoke Colony

Roanoke Island was the site of the 16th-century Roanoke Colony, the firstEnglish colony in the New World. It was located in what was then calledVirginia, named in honor of England's ruling monarch and "Virgin Queen",Elizabeth I. There were two groups of colonists who attempted to establish a colony there, and both groups failed.

The first attempt was headed by Ralph Lane in 1585. Sir Richard Grenvillehad transported the colonists to Virginia and returned to England for supplies as planned. The colonists were desperately in need of supplies and Grenville's return was delayed.[5] While awaiting his return, the colonists relied heavily upon a local Algonquian tribe. [6] In an effort to gain more food supplies, Lane led an unprovoked attack, killing the tribe's chieftain and effectively cutting off the colony's primary food source.[7] As a result, when SirFrancis Drake put in at Roanoke after attacking the Spanish colony of St. Augustine, the entire population abandoned the colony and returned with Drake to England.

In 1587, the English tried to settle in Roanoke Island again. John White, father of the colonistEleanor Dare and grandfather toVirginia Dare, the first English child born in the New World, left the colony to return to England for supplies. He expected to return to Roanoke Island within three months. Instead, with England at war with Spain, all ships were confiscated for use of the war efforts. White's return to Roanoke Island was delayed until 1590, by which time all the colonists had disappeared. The settlement was left abandoned. The only clue White found was the word "CROATOAN" carved into a tree.[8][9]Before leaving the colony three years earlier, White had left instructions that if the colonists left the settlement, they were to carve the name of their destination, with a Maltese cross if they left due to danger.[10] There are many theories on what danger caused the English to leave. However, the most probable theory is that they were killed by the Native Americans. To support this theory, dead bodies were found and it was announced it was the work of the Native Americans.[11] Also, the Native Americans could have felt threatened that the English were settling in on their territory, eating their food, and using their resources.The most plausible reason that Native Americans killed the colonists is that the colonists antagonized the Indians using such tactics as kidnapping them and holding them hostage in exchange for information and food.[12]

"CROATOAN" was the name of an island to the south (modern-day Hatteras Island), where a native tribe, friendly to the English was known to live. Colonists might have tried to reach that island. However, foul weather kept White from venturing south to search on Croatoan for the colonists, so he returned to England. White never returned to the New World. Unable to determine exactly what happened, people referred to the abandoned settlement as "The Lost Colony."

Roanoke ColonyFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"Lost Colony" redirects here. For other uses, see Lost Colony (disambiguation).

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: General c/e to MoS and overlinkingPlease help improve this article if you can.(December 2015)

Coordinates:  35°55′42″N 75°42′15″W

The Roanoke Colony, also known as the Lost Colony,was established on Roanoke Island in what is today's Dare County, North Carolina,United States. It was a late 16th-century attempt byQueen Elizabeth I to establish a permanent English settlement. The colony was founded by Sir Walter Raleigh.

The colonists disappeared during the Anglo-Spanish War, three years after the last shipment of supplies fromEngland. Their disappearance gave rise to the nickname "The Lost Colony." To this day, there has been no conclusive evidence as to what happened to the colonists.

Background[edit]

The enterprise was originally financed and organized by Sir Humphrey Gilbert, who drowned in 1583 during an aborted attempt to colonize St. John's, Newfoundland. Sir Humphrey Gilbert's half-brother Sir Walter Raleigh later gained his brother's charter from the Queen and subsequently executed the details of the charter through his delegates Ralph Lane and Richard Grenville, Raleigh's distant cousin.[1]

The Lost Colony[edit]

Roanoke Colony

Colony of the Kingdom of England

1585–1590

Virginea Pars map, drawn by John White during his initial visit in 1585. Roanoke is the small pink island in the middle

right of the map.

History

 • Sir Walter Raleighestablishes colony

1585

 • birth of Virginia Dare August 18, 1587

 • abandoned sometime before August 1590

1587–1590

 • Found abandoned August 18, 1590

Baptism of Virginia Dare, the first English child born in North America. Lithograph, 1880

In 1587, Raleigh dispatched a new group of 115 colonists to establish a colony onChesapeake Bay. They were led by John White, an artist and friend of Raleigh who had accompanied the previous expeditions to Roanoke. White was later appointed Governor and Raleigh named 12 assistants to aid in the settlement. They were ordered to travel to Roanoke to check on the settlers, but when they arrived on July 22, 1587, they found nothing except a skeleton that may have been the remains of one of the English garrison.[8]

When they could find no one,[8] the fleet's commander Simon Fernandezrefused to let the colonists return to the ships, insisting that they establish the new colony on Roanoke.[7]:215 His motives remain unclear.

White re-established relations with the Croatan and other local tribes, but those with whom Lane had fought previously refused to meet with him. Shortly thereafter, colonist George Howe was killed by a native while searching alone for crabs in Albemarle Sound.[11]:120–23

Fearing for their lives, the colonists persuaded Governor White to return to England to explain the colony's desperate situation and ask for help.[11]:120–23Left behind were about 115 colonists – the remaining men and women who had made the Atlantic crossing plus White's newly born granddaughterVirginia Dare, the first English child born in the Americas.[12]:19

Hypotheses about the disappearance[edit]

The end of the 1587 colony is unrecorded, leading to the colony being referred to as the "Lost colony", with multiple hypotheses existing as to the fate of the colonists.

Reports of John Smith and William Strachey regarding the "Lost Colony"[edit]

Once the Jamestown settlement was established in 1607, efforts were undertaken by the English to acquire information from the Powhatan tribe about the 1587 Lost Colony. The first definitive information concerning the fate of the Lost Colony came from Captain John Smith, leader of the Jamestown Colony from 1608 to 1609. According to chronicler Samuel Purchas, Smith learned from Powhatan, known to the English as Chief Powhatan, that he had personally conducted the slaughter of the Lost Colonists. This shocking information was reported to England and by the spring of 1609, King James and the Royal Council were convinced that Chief Powhatan was responsible for the slaughter of the Lost Colony.

The second source of Chief Powhatan’s involvement in the fate of the Lost Colony was William Strachey, Secretary of the Jamestown colony in 1610-11. Strachey’s The Historie of Travaile Into Virginia Britannia seemed to confirm Smith’s report and provided additional information: The colonists had been living peacefully among a group of natives (see Chesepians below) beyond Powhatan’s domain for more than twenty years when they were massacred. Furthermore, Powhatan himself seemed to have directed the slaughter because of prophecies by his priests, and the slaughter took place about the same time that Christopher Newport arrived at the Chesapeake Bay with the Jamestown settlers on April 26, 1607. Rumors about possible survivors of the massacre led to several search expeditions, but no trace of the colonists has ever been found.

The information from these two sources, John Smith and William Strachey, provides the basis for the established conviction that the Lost Colony was slaughtered by Chief Powhatan, and versions of the Powhatan-Lost Colony-slaughter scenario have persisted for more than 400 years. Recent re-examination of the Smith and Strachey sources advanced by researcher Brandon Fullam has suggested that there actually were two slaughters described in Strachey’s Historie and that the 1587 Lost Colony was not involved in any way with either one.

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Where is Roanoke located?

Do we know for sure what happened to the colony?

Explain some of the events leading up to the colony being lost.

This was the first attempt at an English colony in the new world – how do you think future colonists felt about coming to America to try and settle after hearing these stories? Do you think it would have much of an impact?

Hypothesize what you think may have happened to the colonists!

Spanish ArmadaThe Spanish Armada(Spanish: Grande y Felicísima Armada, literally "Great and

Spanish ArmadaPart of the Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604) and theEighty Years' War

The Spanish Armada and English ships in August 1588, (unknown, 16th-century, English School)

Date 8 August 1588Location North-west EuropeResult Decisive Spanish defeat[1][2][3]

Militarily indecisive[4][5][6]

Spanish invasion failure[7][8]

Protestant propaganda victory[9][10]

Commanders and leaders

 Lord Howard of Effingham

 Francis Drake

 John Hawkins

 Justinus van Nassau

 Duke of Medina Sidonia

 Juan Martínez de Recalde

 Duke of Parma

Strength34 warships[11]

163 armed merchant vessels(30 over 200 tons)[11]

30 flyboats

22 galleons of Portugal and Castile,108 armed merchant vessels (including 4 war galleasses of Naples)[12]

Casualties and lossesBattle of Gravelines:50–100 dead[13]

400 wounded8 fireships burnt[14]

Disease:6,000–8,000 dead

Battle of Gravelines:Over 600 dead800 wounded[15]

397 captured5 ships sunk or captured[16]

Overall:~35 ships lost[17][18] (10 scuttled)[19]

20,000 dead[20][21]

Background[edit]

Henry VIII began the English Reformation as a political exercise over his desire to divorce his first wife, Catherine of Aragon. Over time it became increasingly aligned with the Protestant reformation taking place in Europe, especially

The Spanish Armada(Spanish: Grande y Felicísima Armada, literally "Great and

during the reign of Henry's son, Edward VI. Edward's death without an heir led to Henry's daughter Mary I taking the throne. A devout Catholic, Mary and her co-monarch, Philip II of Spain, began to reassert Roman influence over church affairs. Her attempts led to over 260 people being burned at the stake, earning her the nickname Bloody Mary.

Mary's death in 1558 led to her sister,Elizabeth I, taking the throne. Unlike Mary, Elizabeth was firmly in the reformist camp, and quickly reimplemented many of Edwards' reforms. Philip, no longer co-regent, deemed Elizabeth a heretic and illegitimate ruler of England. Under Roman law, Henry had never officially divorced Catherine, making both Edward and Elizabeth illegitimate. It is alleged that Phillip supported plots to have her overthrown in favour of her Catholic cousin and heir presumptive,Mary, Queen of Scots; however these were thwarted when Elizabeth had the Queen of Scots imprisoned and finally executed in 1587. Elizabeth retaliated by supporting the Dutch revolt against Spain, as well as funding privateers to raids Spanish ships across the Atlantic. In retaliation, Philip planned an expedition to invade England in order to overthrow Elizabeth and reinstate Catholicism.[26] Through this, it would end the English material support for theUnited Provinces – the part of the Low Countries that had successfully seceded from Spanish rule – and cut off English attacks on Spanish trade and settlements[27] in the New World. The King was supported by Pope Sixtus V, who treated the invasion as a crusade, with the promise of a subsidy should the Armada make land.[28] A raid on Cadiz, led by Francis Drake in April 1587, had captured or destroyed some thirty ships and great quantities of supplies, setting preparations back by a year.[29] Philip initially favoured a triple attack, starting with a diversionary raid on Scotland, while the main Armada would capture the Isle of Wight, or Southampton, to establish a safe anchorage in the Solent. The Duke of Parma would then follow with a large army from the Low Countries crossing the English Channel. Parma was uneasy about mounting such an invasion without any possibility of surprise. He was also alarmed by the costs that would be incurred, and advised Philip to postpone or abandon it. The Armada's appointed commander was the highly experienced Álvaro de Bazán, Marquis of Santa Cruz, but he died in February 1588, and the Duke of Medina Sidonia, a high-born courtier, took his place. While a competent soldier and distinguished administrator, Medina Sidonia had no naval experience. He wrote to Philip expressing grave doubts about the planned campaign but this was prevented from reaching the King by courtiers on the grounds that God would ensure the Armada's success.[30]

Battle of Gravelines[edit]

Sir Francis Drake in 1591

The small port of Gravelines was then part ofFlanders in the Spanish Netherlands, close to the border with France and the closest Spanish territory to England. Duke Medina Sidonia tried to re-form his fleet there and was reluctant to sail further east knowing the danger from the shoals off Flanders, from which his Dutch enemies had removed thesea marks. The English had learned more of the Armada's strengths and weaknesses during the skirmishes in the English Channel and had concluded it was necessary to close within 100 yards to penetrate the oak hulls of the Spanish ships. They had spent most of their gunpowder in the first engagements and had, after the Isle of Wight, been forced to conserve their heavy shot and powder for a final attack near Gravelines. During all the engagements, the Spanish heavy guns could not easily be run in for reloading because of their close spacing and the quantities of supplies stowed between decks, as Francis Drake had discovered on capturing the damaged Rosario in the Channel.[40] Instead the gunners fired once and then jumped to the rigging to attend to their main task as marines ready to board enemy ships, as had been the practice in naval warfare at the time. In fact, evidence from Armada wrecks in Ireland shows that much of the fleet's ammunition was never spent. [41] Their determination to fight by boarding, rather than cannon fire at a distance, proved a weakness for the Spanish; it had been effective on occasions such as the battles of Lepanto and Ponta Delgada (1582), but the English were aware of this strength and sought to avoid it by keeping their distance.

With its superior manoeuvrability, the English fleet provoked Spanish fire while staying out of range. The English then closed, firing repeated and damaging broadsides into the enemy ships. This also enabled them to maintain a position to windward so that the heeling Armada hulls were exposed to damage below the water line. Many of the Spanish gunners were killed or wounded by the English broadsides, and the task of manning the cannon often fell to the regular foot soldiers on board, who did not know how to operate the guns. The ships were close enough for sailors on the upper decks of the English and Spanish ships to exchange musket fire. After eight hours, the English ships began to run out of ammunition, and some gunners began loading objects such as chains into cannons. Around 4:00 pm, the English fired their last shots and were forced to pull back.[42]

Return to Spain[edit]Main article: Spanish Armada in Ireland

The wrecking of Girona (ship)

In September 1588 the Armada sailed around Scotland and Ireland into the North Atlantic. The ships were beginning to show wear from the long voyage, and some were kept together by having their hulls bundled up with cables. Supplies of food and water ran short. The intention would have been to keep well to the west of the coast of Scotland and Ireland, in the relative safety of the open sea. However, there being at that time no way of accurately measuring longitude, the Spanish were not aware that the Gulf Stream was carrying them north and east as they tried to move west, and they eventually turned south much further to the east than planned, a devastating navigational error. Off the coasts of Scotland and Ireland the fleet ran into a series of powerful westerly winds, which drove many of the damaged ships further towards the lee shore. Because so many anchors had been abandoned during the escape from the English fireships off Calais, many of the ships were incapable of securing shelter as they reached the coast of Ireland and were driven onto the rocks. Local inhabitants looted the ships. The late 16th century, and especially 1588, was marked by unusually strong North Atlantic storms, perhaps associated with a high accumulation of polar ice off the coast of Greenland, a characteristic phenomenon of the "Little Ice Age."[44] As a result, more ships and sailors were lost to cold and stormy weather than in direct combat.

Following the gales it is reckoned that 5,000 men died, by drowning, starvation and slaughter at the hands of English forces after they were driven ashore in Ireland.[45] Reports of the passage around Ireland abound with strange accounts of hardship and survival.[46]

In the end, 67 ships and fewer than 10,000 men survived.[47] Many of the men were near death from disease, as the conditions were very cramped and most of the ships ran out of food and water. Many more died in Spain, or on hospital ships in Spanish harbours, from diseases contracted during the voyage. It was reported that, when Philip II learned of the result of the expedition, he declared, "I sent the Armada against men, not God's winds and waves". [48]

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who did the Spanish Armada try to invade?

Who won when the Spanish Armada attacked?

Explain how the English were able to overcome the Armada despite being significantly underprepared.

Hypothesize what type of effect this would have had on the English people:

Consider the effect this victory would have on the world powers: Spain used to be a major power because of their control over the seas and England was not. Now who has the upper hand? Why is this important?

English ReformationFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The English Reformation was a series of events in 16th-century England by which the Church of England broke away from the authority of the Pope and theRoman Catholic Church. These events were, in part, associated with the wider process of the European Protestant Reformation, a religious and political movement that affected the practice of Christianity across all of Europe during this period. Many factors contributed to the process: the decline of feudalismand the rise of nationalism, the rise of the common law, the invention of the printing pressand increased circulation of the Bible, the transmission of new knowledge and ideas among scholars, the upper and middle classes and readers in general. However, the various phases of the English Reformation, which also covered Wales and Ireland, were largely driven by changes in government policy, to which public opinion gradually accommodated itself.Based on Henry VIII's desire for an annulment of his marriage (first requested of Pope Clement VII in 1527), the English Reformation was at the outset more of a political affair than a theological dispute. The reality of political differences between Rome and England allowed growing theological disputes to come to the fore. [1] Until the break with Rome, it was the Pope and general councils of the Church that decideddoctrine. Church law was governed by the code of canon law with final jurisdiction in Rome. Church taxes were paid straight to Rome, and the Pope had the final word in the appointment of bishops.

The break with Rome was effected by a series of acts of Parliament passed between 1532 and 1534, among them the 1534 Act of Supremacy which declared that Henry was the "Supreme Head on earth of the Church of England".[2] (This title was renounced by Mary I in 1553 in the process of restoring papal jurisdiction; when Elizabeth I reasserted the royal supremacy in 1559 her title was Supreme Governor.)[2] Final authority in doctrinal and legal disputes now rested with the monarch, and the papacy was deprived of revenue and the final say on the appointment of bishops.

The theology and liturgy of the Church of England became markedly Protestant during the reign of Henry's son Edward VI largely along lines laid down by Archbishop Thomas Cranmer. Under Mary, the whole process was reversed and the Church of England was again placed under papal jurisdiction. Soon after, Elizabeth reintroduced the Protestant faith but in a more moderate manner. The structure and theology of the church was a matter of fierce dispute for generations.

The violent aspect of these disputes, manifested in the English Civil Wars, ended when the last Roman Catholic monarch, James II, was deposed, and Parliament asked William and Mary to rule jointly in conjunction with theEnglish Bill of Rights in (the "Glorious Revolution") in 1688, from which emerged a church polity with an established church and a number of non-conformist churches whose members at first suffered various civil disabilitiesbut which were removed over time. The legacy of the past Roman Catholic Establishment remained an issue for some time, and still exists today. A substantial minority remained Roman Catholic in England, and in an effort to disestablish it from British systems, their church organisation remained illegaluntil the 19th century.

Henry VIII: marriages and desire for a male heir[edit]

Henry VIIIascended the English throne in 1509 at the age of 17. He made a dynastic marriage withCatherine of Aragon, widow of his brother Arthur, in June 1509, just before his coronation on Midsummer's Day. Unlike his father, who was secretive and conservative, the young Henry appeared the epitome of chivalry and sociability. An observant Roman Catholic, he heard up to five masses a day (except during the hunting season); of "powerful but unoriginal mind," he let himself be influenced by his advisors from whom he was never apart, by night or day. He was thus susceptible to whoever had his ear.[3]

This contributed to a state of hostility between his young contemporaries and the Lord Chancellor, Cardinal Thomas Wolsey. As long as Wolsey had his ear, Henry's Roman Catholicism was secure: in 1521, he had defended theRoman Catholic Church from Martin Luther's accusations of heresy in a book he wrote—probably with considerable help from the conservative Bishop of Rochester John Fisher[4]—entitled The Defence of the Seven Sacraments, for which he was awarded the title "Defender of the Faith" (Fidei Defensor) byPope Leo X. (Successive English and British monarchs have retained this title to the present, even after the Anglican Church broke away from Roman Catholicism, in part because the title was re-conferred by Parliament after the split.) Wolsey's enemies at court included those who had been influenced by Lutheran ideas,[5] among whom was the attractive, charismatic Anne Boleyn.

Anne arrived at court in 1522, from years in France where she had been educated by Queen Claude of France, as maid of honour to Queen Catherine, a woman of "charm, style and wit, with will and savagery which made her a match for Henry."[6] By the late 1520s, Henry wanted his marriage to Catherine annulled. She had not produced a male heir who survived into adulthood, and Henry wanted a son to secure the Tudor dynasty.

Before Henry's father (Henry VII) ascended the throne, England had been beset by civil warfare over rival claims to the English crown. Henry wanted to avoid a similar uncertainty over the succession. [7] Catherine's only surviving child was Princess Mary.

Henry claimed that this lack of a male heir was because his marriage was "blighted in the eyes of God." [8]Catherine had been his late brother's wife, and it was therefore againstbiblical teachings for Henry to have married her (Leviticus 20:21);[9] a special dispensation from Pope Julius II had been needed to allow the wedding in the first place.[10] Henry argued that this had been wrong and that his marriage had never been valid. In 1527 Henry asked Pope Clement VII to annul the marriage, but the Pope refused. According to Canon Law the Pope cannot annul a marriage on the basis of a canonical impediment previously dispensed. Clement also feared the wrath of Catherine's nephew, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, whose troops earlier that year had sacked Rome and briefly taken the Pope prisoner.[11]

The combination of his "scruple of conscience" and his captivation by Anne Boleyn made his desire to rid himself of his Queen compelling.[12] The indictment of his chancellor Cardinal Wolsey in 1529 for praemunire (taking the authority of the Papacy above the Crown), and subsequent death in November 1530 on his way to London to answer a charge of high treason[13]left Henry open to the opposing influences of the supporters of the Queen and those who sanctioned the abandonment of the Roman allegiance, for whom an annulment was but an opportunity.

Legacy[edit]

Main article: English Civil War

By the time of Elizabeth's death a third party had emerged, "perfectly hostile" to Puritans but not adherent to Rome. It preferred the revised Book of Common Prayer of 1559, which was without some of the matters offensive to Roman Catholics.[89] The recusants had been removed from the centre of the stage. The new dispute was now between the Puritans (who wished to see an end of the prayer book and episcopacy), and this third party (the considerable body of people who looked kindly on the Elizabethan Settlement, who rejectedprophesyings, whose spirituality had been nourished by the Prayer Book and who preferred the governance of bishops). [90]

It was between these two groups that, after Elizabeth's death in 1603, a new, more savage episode of the Reformation was in the process of gestation. During the reigns of the Stuart kings, James I and Charles I, the battle lines were to become more defined, leading ultimately to the English Civil War, the first on English soil to engulf parts of the civilian population. The war was only partly about religion, but the abolition of prayer book and episcopacy by a Puritan Parliament was an element in the causes of the conflict. As historian MacCulloch has noted, the legacy of these tumultuous events can be recognised, throughout the Commonwealth (1649–60) and the Restorationthat followed it, and beyond. This third party was to become the core of the restored Church of England, but at the price for further division.

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who was the king who wanted to split from the Catholic church?

What was the one thing the Catholic church did not allow the king to do?

Explain why the King wanted to split from the church.

Take the King’s side for a minute – why would it be so important for this split to happen? What did he need to continue his family’s line on the throne? Why is this important?

Consider the effect this split had on the people in England and around the world. Were they happy? Why/Why not? How could this impact world relations, especially those between England and catholic countries?

Essex's RebellionFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia  (Redirected from Essex's rebellion)

The Earl of Essex

Essex's Rebellion was an unsuccessful rebellion led by Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex in 1601 against Elizabeth I of England and the court faction led by Sir Robert Cecil to gain further influence at court.[1]

Rebellion[edit]

The Earl's London residence, Essex House, became a focal point for people who were upset with Elizabeth’s government. On Tuesday, February 3, 1601, five of the conspiracy leaders met at Drury House, the lodging of the Earl of Southampton. Hoping to avoid suspicion, Devereux himself was not present. The group discussed Devereux’s proposals for seizing the court, the tower and the city. Their goal was to force the Queen to change the leaders in her government, particularly Robert Cecil, even if this attempt meant causing harm to the Queen’s people.[5]

Three days later, some of Devereux’s followers went to the Globe Theatre to ask the Lord Chamberlain's Men to stage a special performance of Richard IIwith the deposition scene included. The company was hesitant to perform such a controversial play, but eventually agreed once they were promised a payment of 40 shillings "more than their ordinary".[6] On February 7, the council summoned Devereux to appear before them, but he refused. He had lost his chance to take the court by surprise, so he fell back on his scheme to rouse the city of London in his favour with the claim that Elizabeth’s government had planned to murder him and had sold out England to Spain. [7]

Essex and his followers hastily planned the rising. At about 10am the next morning (February 8), Lord Keeper Thomas Egerton and three others came to Essex in the name of the Queen. Devereux captured the four messengers and kept them hostage while he and his followers (about 200 people) made their way to the city. Meanwhile, Robert Cecil sent a warning to the mayor and the heralds denouncing Devereux as a traitor. Once the word traitor was used, many of Devereux's followers disappeared, and none of the citizens joined him as he had expected. Devereux's position was desperate, and he decided to return to Essex House. When he got there, he found the hostages gone. The Queen’s men, under Lord High Admiral The Earl of Nottingham, besieged the house. By that evening, after burning incriminating evidence, Devereux surrendered. Devereux, the Earl of Southampton and the other remaining followers were placed under arrest.[8]

Less than two weeks after the aborted rebellion, Essex and Southampton were tried for treason. The trial lasted only a day, and the guilty verdict was a foregone conclusion. Though Devereux had burnt incriminating evidence to save his followers prior to his arrest, he was convinced by Reverend Abdy Ashton to purge his soul of guilt: in turn Devereux confessed everyone who was involved including his sister Penelope on whom he put a great deal of the blame, although no action was taken against her.[9]

Essex's RebellionFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia  (Redirected from Essex's rebellion)

The Earl of Essex

Essex's Rebellion was an unsuccessful rebellion led by Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex in 1601 against Elizabeth I of England and the court faction led by Sir Robert Cecil to gain further influence at court.[1]

Rebellion[edit]

The Earl's London residence, Essex House, became a focal point for people who were upset with Elizabeth’s government. On Tuesday, February 3, 1601, five of the conspiracy leaders met at Drury House, the lodging of the Earl of Southampton. Hoping to avoid suspicion, Devereux himself was not present. The group discussed Devereux’s proposals for seizing the court, the tower and the city. Their goal was to force the Queen to change the leaders in her government, particularly Robert Cecil, even if this attempt meant causing harm to the Queen’s people.[5]

Three days later, some of Devereux’s followers went to the Globe Theatre to ask the Lord Chamberlain's Men to stage a special performance of Richard IIwith the deposition scene included. The company was hesitant to perform such a controversial play, but eventually agreed once they were promised a payment of 40 shillings "more than their ordinary".[6] On February 7, the council summoned Devereux to appear before them, but he refused. He had lost his chance to take the court by surprise, so he fell back on his scheme to rouse the city of London in his favour with the claim that Elizabeth’s government had planned to murder him and had sold out England to Spain. [7]

Essex and his followers hastily planned the rising. At about 10am the next morning (February 8), Lord Keeper Thomas Egerton and three others came to Essex in the name of the Queen. Devereux captured the four messengers and kept them hostage while he and his followers (about 200 people) made their way to the city. Meanwhile, Robert Cecil sent a warning to the mayor and the heralds denouncing Devereux as a traitor. Once the word traitor was used, many of Devereux's followers disappeared, and none of the citizens joined him as he had expected. Devereux's position was desperate, and he decided to return to Essex House. When he got there, he found the hostages gone. The Queen’s men, under Lord High Admiral The Earl of Nottingham, besieged the house. By that evening, after burning incriminating evidence, Devereux surrendered. Devereux, the Earl of Southampton and the other remaining followers were placed under arrest.[8]

Less than two weeks after the aborted rebellion, Essex and Southampton were tried for treason. The trial lasted only a day, and the guilty verdict was a foregone conclusion. Though Devereux had burnt incriminating evidence to save his followers prior to his arrest, he was convinced by Reverend Abdy Ashton to purge his soul of guilt: in turn Devereux confessed everyone who was involved including his sister Penelope on whom he put a great deal of the blame, although no action was taken against her.[9]

Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex[edit]

The 2nd Earl of Essex, Robert Devereux (1565-1601) was the main leader of Essex's Rebellion in 1601. The main tensions that led to the rebellion began in 1599, when Devereux was given the position of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.[2]He was sent to Ireland with the mission of subduing the revolts led by the Earl of Tyrone, leading one of the largest expeditionary forces ever sent to Ireland. It was expected that he would crush the rebellion immediately, however instead Devereux fought a series of inconclusive battles, squandered his funds, and was unable to face the rebels in any sort of engagement.[3] In this dilemma, Devereux eventually made a truce with the rebels. This truce was seen as a disgrace to England and a detriment to the authority of those in power. He proceeded to leave Ireland and returned to England. His time spent as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland proved disastrous to him; his return was in express defiance of the orders of the Queen. She spoke out on his behavior, calling it “Perilous and contemptable”.[4] Devereux was deprived of his offices in June of 1600 and promptly placed under house arrest. In disgrace as well as in political and financial ruin, Devereux wrote several letters of submission to the Queen, and by August of 1600 he was able to move freely except to return to court. He spent further time sending letters in an attempt to gain permission to do so. In November of 1600, Queen Elizabeth refused to renew his monopoly on sweet wine, an action that placed Devereux in even deeper financial ruin. He began to create plans to seize the court by force.[1]

Conclusion[edit]

On February 25, 1601, Devereux was beheaded in the confines of the Tower. [10] Southampton, however, survived the Tower, to be freed upon the accession of James VI of Scotland as James I of England. Sir Christopher Blount, Sir Gelli Meyrick, Sir Henry Cuffe, Sir John Davies, and Sir Charles Danvers all stood trial for high treason on 5 March 1601 and were all found guilty. Davies was allowed to leave, but the other four were executed. There were no large-scale executions, however; the other members of the conspiracy were fined. [11]

Richard II (play)From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first page of Richard II, printed in the First Folioof 1623

King Richard the Second is a history playby William Shakespearebelieved to have been written in approximately 1595. It is based on the life of King Richard II of England (ruled 1377–1399) and is the first part of a tetralogy, referred to by some scholars as theHenriad, followed by three plays concerning Richard's successors:Henry IV, Part 1; Henry IV, Part 2; and Henry V.

Elizabeth I of EnglandFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia"Elizabeth I", "Elizabeth of England", and "Elizabeth Tudor" redirect here. For other uses, see Elizabeth I (disambiguation), Elizabeth of England (disambiguation), and Elizabeth Tudor (disambiguation).

Elizabeth I (7 September 1533 – 24 March 1603) was Queen ofEngland and Ireland from 17 November 1558 until her death. Sometimes called The Virgin Queen, Gloriana or Good Queen Bess, the childless Elizabeth was the fifth and last monarch of the Tudor dynasty.

Elizabeth I

The "Darnley Portrait" of Elizabeth I (c. 1575)

Queen of England and Ireland (more...)

Reign 17 November 1558 –24 March 1603

Coronation 15 January 1559

Predecessors Mary I and Philip

Successor James I

Born 7 September 1533Palace of Placentia,Greenwich, England

Died 24 March 1603 (aged 69)Richmond Palace, Surrey, England

Burial 28 April 1603Westminster Abbey

House Tudor

Father Henry VIII

Mother Anne Boleyn

Religion Anglican

Signature

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who did Essex try to overthrow?

Which one of Shakespeare’s plays did they try to use as a cover up for their plan?

Summarize what happened in Essex’s life:

Hypothesize why Essex may have wanted to overthrow Queen Elizabeth:

Was this a smart plan by Essex? Why/Why not? Did he plan it well?

Lord Chamberlain's MenFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Lord Chamberlain's Men was a company of actors, or a "playing company" as it would have been known, for which Shakespeare wrote for most of his career. Richard Burbage played most of the lead roles, includingHamlet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth, while Shakespeare himself performed some secondary roles. Formed at the end of a period of flux in the theatrical world of London, it had become, by 1603, one of the two leading companies of the city and was subsequently patronized by James I.It was founded during the reign of Elizabeth I of England in 1594 under thepatronage of Henry Carey, 1st Baron Hunsdon, then the Lord Chamberlain, who was in charge of court entertainments. After Carey's death on 23 July 1596, the company came under the patronage of his son, George Carey, 2nd Baron Hunsdon, for whom it was briefly known as Lord Hunsdon's Men. When George Carey in turn became Lord Chamberlain on 17 March 1597, it reverted to its previous name. The company became the King's Men in 1603 when King James ascended the throne and became the company's patron. The company held exclusive rights to perform Shakespeare's plays.

Playhouses[edit]

Print, based on Hollar's 1644 Long View of London, of the 1614 secondGlobe Theatre.

From 1594 the players performed atThe Theatre, in Shoreditch. Problems with the landlord caused the company to move to the nearby Curtain Theatrein 1597. On the night of 29 December 1598, The Theatre was dismantled by the Burbage brothers, along with William Smith, their financial backer,Peter Street, a carpenter, and ten to twelve workmen. The beams were then carried south of the river toSouthwark to form part of their new playhouse, the Globe Theatre. Built in 1599, this theatre was destroyed in a fire on 29 June 1613. The Globe was rebuilt by June 1614 and finally closed in 1642. The company also toured Britain, and visited France and Belgium.

A modern reconstruction of the original Globe, named "Shakespeare's Globe", opened in 1997 near the site of the original theatre.

Playing companyFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Renaissance London, playing company was the usual term for a company of actors. These companies were organized around a group of ten or so shareholders (or "sharers"), who performed in the plays but were also responsible for management.[1] The sharers employed "hired men" — that is, the minor actors and the workers behind the scenes. The major companies were based at specific theatres in London; the most successful of them,William Shakespeare's company the King's Men, had the open-air Globe Theatre for summer seasons and the enclosed Blackfriars Theatre in the winters. The Admiral's Men occupied the Rose Theatre in the 1590s, and theFortune Theatre in the early 17th century.

Less fortunate companies spent most of their existences touring the provinces; when Worcester's Men gained official permission to perform in London in 1602, they were, in a manner of speaking, "coming in from the cold" of a life of constant touring.

Repertory and performances[edit]

Shakespeare's work undoubtedly formed the great bulk of the company's repertory. In their first year of performance, they may have staged such of Shakespeare's older plays as remained in the author's possession, includingHenry VI, part 2, Henry VI, part 3, as well as Titus Andronicus. A Midsummer Night's Dream may have been the first play Shakespeare wrote for the new company; it was followed over the next two years by a concentrated burst of creativity that resulted in Romeo and Juliet, Love's Labours Lost, The Merchant of Venice, and the plays in the so-called second tetralogy. The extent and nature of the non-Shakespearean repertory in the first is not known; plays such as Locrine, The Troublesome Reign of King John, andChristopher Marlowe's Edward II have somewhat cautiously been advanced as likely candidates. The earliest non-Shakespearean play known to have been performed by the company is Ben Jonson's Every Man in His Humour, which was produced in the middle of 1598; they also staged the thematic sequel, Every Man Out of His Humour, the next year.

On the strength of these plays, the company quickly rivalled Alleyn's troupe for preeminence in London; as early as 1595 they gave four performances at court, followed by six the next year and four in 1597. These years were, typically for an Elizabethan company, also fraught with uncertainty. The company suffered along with the others in the summer of 1598, when the uproar over The Isle of Dogs temporarily closed the theatres; records fromDover and Bristol indicate that at least some of the company toured that summer. The character of Falstaff, though immensely popular from the start, aroused the ire of Lord Cobham, who objected to the use of the character's original name (Oldcastle), which derived from a member of Cobham's family.

In the last years of the century, the company continued to stage Shakespeare's new plays, including Julius Caesar and Henry V, which may have opened the Globe, and Hamlet, which may well have appeared first at the Curtain. Among non-Shakespearean drama, A Warning for Fair Womenwas certainly performed, as was the Tudor history Thomas Lord Cromwell, sometimes seen as a salvo in a theatrical feud with the Admiral's Men, whose lost plays on Wolsey date from the same year.

In 1601, in addition to their tangential involvement with the Essex rebellion, the company played a role in a less serious conflict, the so-called War of the Theatres. They produced Thomas Dekker's Satiromastix, a satire on Ben Jonson that seems to have ended the dispute. Somewhat uncharacteristically, Jonson does not appear to have held a grudge against the company; in 1603, they staged his Sejanus, with dissatisfying results. They also performed The London Prodigal, The Merry Devil of Edmonton, and The Fair Maid of Bristow, the last a rarity in that it is a Chamberlain's play that has never been attributed in any part to Shakespeare.

Shakespeare's GlobeFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaCoordinates:  51°30′29″N 0°5′50″W

Shakespeare's Globe

The Globe

Shakespeare's Globe in August 2014

Shakespeare's Globe is the complex housing a reconstruction of theGlobe Theatre, an Elizabethan playhouse in the London Borough of Southwark, on the south bank of the River Thamesthat was originally built in 1599, destroyed by fire in 1613, rebuilt in 1614, and then demolished in 1644. The modern Globe Theatre reconstruction is an academic approximation based on available evidence of the 1599 and 1614 buildings. It is considered quite realistic, though contemporary safety requirements mean that it accommodates only 1400 spectators compared to the original theatre’s 3000.[1][2] It was founded by the actor and director Sam Wanamaker, built about 230 metres (750 ft) from the site of the original theatre and opened to the public in 1997, with a production of Henry V. The site also includes the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse, an indoor theatre which opened in January 2014. This is a smaller, candle-lit space based on the indoor playhouses of Jacobean London. The Sackler Studios, an educational and rehearsal studio complex, is situated just around the corner from the main site. There is also an Exhibition about Shakespeare's life and work, and regular tours of the two theatres.

In roughly the last decade of Elizabeth's reign, 1594–1603, there were 64 theatrical performances at Court, for an average of 6 or 7 a year:

Chamberlain's Men 32

Admiral's Men 20

other adult companies 5

boys' companies 7

The Elizabethan Age[edit]

The explosion of popular drama that began when James Burbage built the first fixed and permanent venue for drama, The Theatre, in 1576 was the one great step away from the medieval organizational model and toward the commercial theatre; but that evolution was, at best, a "work in progress" throughout the English Renaissance. Throughout this period, troupes of actors needed to maintain the patronage of a noble household. The prevailing legal system in England[12] defined "masterless men" who traveled about the country as vagabonds, and subjected them to treatments of varying harshness. Local authorities tended to be more hostile than welcoming toward players; the Corporation of London, from the Lord Mayor and aldermen down, was famously hostile to acting troupes, as were the Puritans. Noble patronage was, at the very least, the legal fig leaf that allowed professional players to function in society.

In some cases, more so toward the end of the period, noble patronage was nothing more than that legal fig leaf; a company of actors was an independent entity, financially and otherwise. Conversely, some noblemen were beneficent patrons of their players. The Lords Hunsdon — Henry Carey, 1st Baron Hunsdon (c. 1524–96), and his son George Carey, 2nd Baron Hunsdon(1547–1603) — were valuable protectors of their own company, and, when they served in the office of Lord Chamberlain (1585–96 and 1597–1603 respectively), of English drama as a whole.

That company of Hunsdon's, known to posterity as The Lord Chamberlain's Men, was organized somewhat like a modern joint-stock commercial company (the concept of which was just beginning to evolve in this era) at its re-formation in 1594, after the long plague closure. The company had a small number of partners or shareholders, who pooled their funds to pay expenses and in turn shared the profits, in what was largely a de facto democratic way (at least for the sharers, if not for the hired men and apprentices they employed). Their main rivals, the Admiral's Men, suffered in contrast under a less ideal version of capitalist organization: Philip Henslowe functioned more like a blend of big-business autocrat, landlord, and loan shark. He managed multiple companies of actors and built and owned several theatres, and controlled players (sharers included) and playwrights by doling out payments and loans. (The silver lining in this cloud is that Henslowe's surviving financial records provide a wealth of detailed knowledge about the theatre conditions in his era that is unparalleled by any other source.) Other companies varied between these extremes of organization. (Francis Langley, builder of theSwan Theatre, operated much as Henslowe did, though less successfully, and for a shorter time.)

Drama in the age of Elizabeth was at best an organized disorder; suppression of individual companies, and even the profession as a whole, for political reasons was not unknown. [See: The Isle of Dogs.] Local residents sometimes opposed theatres in their neighborhoods. Individual companies of actors struggled and failed and recombined; tracking the changes has been the obsession of scholars and the bane of students.

Yet the drama was also enormously popular, from the Queen and Court down to the commonest of the common people; indeed, the odd polarity of the theatre audience in this period, with the High and the Low favoring the drama, and the middle class generally more hostile with the growth of Puritan sentiments, is a surprising and intriguing phenomenon. Theatres proliferated, especially (though not exclusively) in neighborhoods outside the city's walls and the Corporation's control — in Shoreditch to the north, or the Banksideand Paris Garden in Southwark, on the southern bank of the River Thames: the Curtain, the Rose, the Swan, the Fortune, the Globe, the Blackfrairs — a famous roster.

Name_______________________________________________Period______________Date_______________

Questions – Answer with Complete Sentences

Who was the main writer for the Lord Chamberlain’s Men?

Where did the Lord Chamberlain’s Men usually perform?

Name a few of the more famous shows that the Lord Chamberlain’s Men performed.

Compare and contrast how the actors in the Lord Chamberlain’s men worked compared to actors in modern times.

Hypothesize why the Lord Chamberlain’s Men were so popular with Queen Elizabeth and all of England!