Archaeological Evidence for the Elite Settlement in Western Britain and Scotland Free Essay Example, 2500 words

Generally speaking, the archaeology of the peasants dating to the fourth and fifth century indicated enclosures or ladder field mechanisms dominance. This receives a connection to extended families. In the west of England and Scotland, the hefty usage of buildings and farmsteads built using timber. This indicates a small amount of roman building mechanisms incorporation in comparison to the small group of elite s houses. Settler evidenceAnglo-Saxon community is under confirmation to have been federate troops or foederati. This is due to the Anglo-Saxon burial site excavations that revealed them wearing military equipment. This equipment receives tracing back to Roman forces from Roman contexts like Colchester and Winchester cemeteries. It is also evident in cemeteries like Mucking or Essex, which is a purely rural Anglo-Saxon area. The Anglo-Saxon community sites receive the distribution in close proximity to the ones occupied by the Roman settlers. This indicates that the first An glo-Saxon settlers were under the control of the Romano-British. Some archaeologists refer to all early Anglo-Saxon settlers as federate troops; however, this concept may not be true. Some different relationships may have existed between the Romano-British and the Anglo-Saxon settlers. We will write a custom essay sample on Archaeological Evidence for the Elite Settlement in Western Britain and Scotland or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page However, it is not correct to assume all these warriors fought for the Romano-British and guarded this community. It is possible that some like the later Viking settler begun differently as pirates or raiders .

Exploring The Alienation Theme Of V.s. Naipaul s A...

I propose to analyze the alienation theme of V.S. Naipaul’s â€Å"A House for Mr. Biswas† with an angle from cultural criticism which questions traditional value hierarchies and takes a cross disciplinary approach to works traditionally marginalized by aesthetic ideology of white European males or females. Instead of more attention to canon, cultural studies examine works by minority working ethnic groups and post-colonial writer, and the products of the folks, urban and mass culture, Popular literature, soaps, opera, rocks, rap music, cartoons, professionals, wrestling, food etc.----all within the domain of cultural criticism. I am focusing on it particularly as it concerns questioning the ways western cultural tradition expressed in literature defines itself partly by shifting the voices of oppressed groups or even by demonizing those groups. I will focus on how literary tradition was constructed against oppositional literary identities as alienation and how differen t communities of readers might interpret the same text differently due to varied value system of cultural conflict. V.S. Naipaul reflects, â€Å"Suppose that at one word I could just disappear from this room, what could remain to speak of me? A few clothes, a few books. The shouts and thumps in the hall would continue; the puja would be done; in the morning the Tulsi store would open its door.† V.S. Naipaul is a prolific Writer of fiction, stories and commentaries on contemporary events. Similarly writing on theShow MoreRelatedSir Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul was born in Chaguanas, Trinidad, on seventeen August 1932, the3000 Words   |  12 PagesSir Vidiadhar Surajprasad Naipaul was born in Chaguanas, Trinidad, on seventeen August 1932, the eldest son of a second-generation Indian. He was educated at Queens Royal college, Trinidad, and, once winning a government scholarship, in European nation at University college, Oxford. He worked shortly for the BBC as a author and editor for the Caribbean Voices programme. hes a Noble Prize-winning British author acknowledged for the comic early novels of island, the bleaker later novels of the

Penal Laws Essay

Question: Describe about the Penal Laws and Issue? Answer: Definition: In according with the section 377A of the Singapore Penal code, if any man, in open consign or in confidential performs any activity of coarse licentiousness along with another person of male gender, then both of the individuals shall be penalized in terms of incarceration or imprisonment for a term that might be sentenced upto two years. This meticulous provision of the disquiet statute comprised with the act relating to sexual activity among men that is gay sex. This provision does not applicable to female persons. Acts relating to homosexuality is a crime in accordance with the Singapore penal statute. The scope of this section also contains the acts relating to oral sex. Women are totally excused from this section of the concern statute (Ben-Naim, 2010). Issues: In respect of section 377A of the Penal Code of Singapore a moral question always comes into the mind of the adjudicators that whether the homosexuals in the society should have the right to do sex in private place or not. Some supplementary issues occurs in this regard like the actual value or role of sexual activity in our society, the personal rights of the individuals ought to be interfered or not, is it acceptable for the society that human beings are going against the rule of the nature. These vulnerable issues are not going be solve by restricting ourselves within the territory of legal phenomena (Chan, Wright and Yeo, 2011). From the ethical point of view it may be observed that performing any act for own pleasure by going against the rule of the nature ought not to be the ethical perspective of a human being. But on the other hand it may be an appreciable ethic of a human being that not to make any interference to the personal life of another person (McSherry, Norrie and Bronitt, 2009). From the social perspective it can be originated that a person is at a liberty to do or perform anything without infringing any of the right of any other person of the society. In a nation like USA homosexuality has been legally recognized but in the current social phenomena of Singapore homosexuality has not been adapted yet. The concern provision regulates the sexual orientation of a large number of persons in the society preferring homosexuality. But if the concern section of the statute is not applied to the society then it may change the present scenario of the society (Pieth and Aiolfi, 2004). Arguments for upholding Sec. 377A: The submissions against the section 377A have been rejected by the highest court of Singapore, on the ground that Sec. 377A is a contradictory provision to that of the law of the land that is the Constitution of the country. The Ld. Court of law in its 101 page judgment unambiguously mentioned that sec. 377A does not contravene the provisions of the constitution so it is not unconstitutional, as it does not disobey Art. 9 and Art 12 of the constitution of Singapore (Pieth and Aiolfi, 2004). The Ld. Court focused upon the legal principles and lawfulness of the concern provision. The court of law has avoided those portions of the submission which included the moral and social ethics. The Ld. Court of law held that the concern section is not violating to that of the Art 9 of the constitution as in this article the right of a person relating to life and liberty is mentioned that signifies the right of a person from any illegal internment, it does not mean that a person shall be at a libe rty of personal autonomy (Ginsburg and Moustafa, 2008). The Honorable Court of law also held that the Art 12 of the constitution does not consist within its purview the scope of section 377A, as the said article concerns with the discrimination made depending upon race, religion, and place of birth, that is clearly mentioned in that article and there is nothing specifies in relation to the sexual orientation or gender discrimination. The Ld. Court of law with three adjudicators has observed that section 377A of the Penal code does not infringe any of the provisions laid down in the laws relating to human rights of the country and this provision of penal statute is completely constitutional. Homosexuality is at the present time an escalating hazard for the conventional society of Singapore and it ought not be abided and the ruling should be compassionate to the ethical principles of more persons not the smaller ones, and the edicts are enacted by taking into consideration of the inte rests of the persons. As on 29th October, 2014, section 377A has been declared constitutional and totally valid by the appellate court of Singapore (Miller, 2005). Arguments against upholding sec. 377A: The constitution of the country promotes equality among all the citizens and mentions that there shall be no discrimination among the public. Section 377A makes discrimination among men and women of the same society as this section is applicable only upon the male members of the society. Sec. 377A has been challenged before the court of law for the first time by Tan Eng Hong as he was caught red handed in the course of doing oral sex in a public toilet. After two years of this incident a gay couple namely Kenneth Che and Gary Lim challenged this provision before the court of law. The argument made by them that Art 9 of the constitution ensures the right of a person to life and liberty and Art 12 of the constitution ensures equality before the law and equal protection of law among all the citizens of the country, whilst section 377A not only infringes the right to life and personal liberty of the citizens but it also violates the right to equality before the law as it is promoting sex ual discrimination among the citizen because this section is applicable only upon the men not upon the women of the society. Apart from that section 377A also violates the provisions of human rights, these rights are ensured by various international conventions. Criminalization of a person depending upon the sexual orientation is violating the human rights provided by the UN (Langwith, 2008). References Ben-Naim, A. (2010).Discover entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. Singapore: World Scientific. Chan, W., Wright, B. and Yeo, S. (2011).Codification, Macaulay and the Indian Penal Code. Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate. Ginsburg, T. and Moustafa, T. (2008).Rule by law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Langwith, J. (2008).Human rights. Detroit, Mich.: Greenhaven Press. McSherry, B., Norrie, A. and Bronitt, S. (2009).Regulating deviance. Oxford: Hart Pub. Miller, D. (2005).Black Hat physical device security. Rockland, MA: Syngress. Pieth, M. and Aiolfi, G. (2004).A comparative guide to anti-money laundering. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar Pub. Pieth, M. and Aiolfi, G. (2004).A comparative guide to anti-money laundering. Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar Pub.

Social Criticism In Literature, As Found In George Orwells Animal Farm

"Social Criticism in Literature, As Found in George Orwell's Animal Farm and Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities." Many authors receive their inspiration for writing their literature from outside sources. The idea for a story could come from family, personal experiences, history, or even their own creativity. For authors that choose to write a book based on historical events, the inspiration might come from their particular viewpoint on the event that they want to dramatize. George Orwell and Charles Dickens wrote Animal Farm and A Tale of Two Cities, respectively, to express their disillusionment with society and human nature. Animal Farm, written in 1944, is a book that tells the animal fable of a farm in which the farm animals revolt against their human masters. It is an example of social criticism in literature in which Orwell satirized the events in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution. He anthropomorphises the animals, and alludes each one to a counterpart in Russian history. A Tale of Two Cities also typifies this kind of literature. Besides the central theme of love, is another prevalent theme, that of a revolution gone bad. He shows us that, unfortunately, human nature causes us to be vengeful and, for some of us, overly ambitious. Both these books are similar in that both describe how, even with the best of intentions, our ambitions get the best of us. Both authors also demonstrate that violence and the Machiavellian attitude of "the ends justifying the means" are deplorable. George Orwell wrote Animal Farm, ". . . to discredit the Soviet system by showing its inhumanity and its back-sliding from ideals [he] valued . . ."(Gardner, 106) Orwell noted that " there exists in England almost no literature of disillusionment with the Soviet Union.' Instead, that country is viewed either with ignorant disapproval' or with uncritical admiration.'"(Gardner, 96) The basic synopsis is this: Old Major, an old boar in Manor Farm, tells the other animals of his dream of "animalism": " . . . Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own. Almost overnight we would become rich and free.'" (Orwell, 10) The other animals take this utopian idea to heart, and one day actually do revolt and drive the humans out. Two pigs emerge as leaders: Napoleon and Snowball. They constantly argued, but one day, due to a difference over plans to build a windmill, Napoleon exiled Snowball. Almost immediately, Napoleon established a totalitarian government. Soon, the pigs began to get special favours, until finally, they were indistinguishable from humans to the other animals. Immediately the reader can begin to draw parallels between the book's characters and the government in 1917-44 Russia. For example, Old Major, who invented the idea of "animalism," is seen as representing Karl Marx, the creator of communism. Snowball represents Trotsky, a Russian leader after the revolution. He was driven out by Napoleon, who represents Stalin, the most powerful figure in the country. Napoleon then proceeded to remove the freedoms of the animals, and established a dictatorship, under the public veil of "animalism." Pigs represent the ruling class because of their stereotype: dirty animals with insatiable appetites. Boxer, the overworked, incredibly strong, dumb horse represents the common worker in Russia. The two surrounding farms represent two of the countries on the global stage with Russia at the time, Germany and England. Orwell begins his book by criticizing the capitalists and ruling elite, who are represented in Animal Farm by Mr. Jones, the farmer. He is shown as a negligent drunk, who constantly starved his animals. "His character is already established as self-indulgent and uncaring." (King, 8) Orwell shows us how, "if only animals became aware of their strength, we should have no power over them, and that men exploit animals in much the same way as the rich exploit the proletariat."(Gardner, 97) What was established in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution was not true communism ("animalism"), which Orwell approved of, where the people owned all the factories and land. Rather, "state communism" was established, where a central government owned them. Orwell thought that such a political system, "state communism," was open to exploitation by its leaders. Napoleon, after gaining complete