Mind Your Manners!

Should I have the desire or opportunity to personally address a cardinal, I now know that I’d greet him by saying “Your Eminence.” Should I write him by mail I’d write “Most Rev. John Cardinal Doe” then end said letter with the following words: “I have the honour to remain, My Lord Cardinal, Your Eminence’s devoted and obedient child.”

I also know that, should I be invited to join a game of cards, I should inquire as to whether the game is “serious or social or chatty.” Likewise, I know that kumquats (a small lemon-like fruit that grows on trees belonging to the flowering plant family Rutaceae) are to be “picked up in the fingers, bitten into or eaten whole, depending on the size.”

How on earth do I know such things? How do I know that perfume should be a “subtle, not overpowering reminder of the presence”? Well, I recently inherited a book called Mind Your Manners: A Complete Dictionary of Etiquette for Canadians by Claire Wallace, a Harlequin book that, in 1953, cost fifty cents. This book is a gem. I am absolutely in love, not only with its bewitching “old book smell” but with what the books represents… It provides a kind of portal that transports me to an earlier time. Today I know few women who would inquire (using an alphabetized etiquette dictionary nonetheless) how to eat frogs’ legs, serve fruitcake or candy (note: candy should be served in bon-bon dishes placed between candelabra at a formal dinner.)

While I’ll admit to getting a kick out of this book (who knew that one should pay attention to pedestrians?) this book offers my life a lot more than mere humour. I discovered this book on my dear Aunt Mary’s bookshelf (my great Aunt who, at 97, passed away only last week.) I felt as though I’d found a treasure chest. Why, you ask? Well, my first thought was the following: “this book is going to give me so many ideas for stories!” So I suppose it depends on what “treasure” means to you.

The book’s description begins with: “Every day you meet situations in which you are unsure of yourself.” This book was published to provide women (at least women were the targeted audience, especially considering the book is bright pink and the “i” in “mind” is topped with a curly heart) guidance when navigating everyday social situations. Meanwhile, I was born in 1994 so writing about the fifties is a tad outside my comfort zone.

You often hear people say “write what you know.” As many writers learn, this advice is rarely followed. Sure, I could write about topics I’ve studied or my own personal life, that of my family or friends, but eventually I’ll develop a desire to learn and grow as a writer. Writing what you don’t know, however, requires careful research and genuine curiosity. So while this book was published to guide Canadian women of the fifties, I, too, am benefitted. I am provided with the necessary tools to properly portray how a woman might react in those very “unsure situations” of which the book speaks. Meanwhile, if I may offer one small piece of advise… never underestimate the power of research and for those of you who imagine research as an act conducted solely in libraries and stuffy archive rooms, you are mistaken! This book is proof of that.

I may now write about a particular woman’s garden party, knowing how one should dress, act, eat etc. Thus, this book is, in many senses, a research tool. At the moment, it’s also a reminder of my wonderful Aunt who always dressed and acted in an appropriate, though incredibly loving and genuine, manner. I’m not quite sure what I’d like to write about yet but as I flip through the book’s pages (carefully as it’s beginning to fall apart) I am continually prompted and day-dream of writing a series of short stories about manners misused or parties gone awry.

tableerrors.jpg

Advertisements

Book Burnings

Book burnings…The ritual destruction of written work, tragic acts that are so often conducted communally and en mass. These burnings are the result of heavy censorship and represent an attempt to suppress opposing politics, cultures or religious beliefs. They are a part of our story, the dark underbelly of certain supremacist pursuits.

If you’re unfamiliar with the history of book burning, I’ll start by discussing what is (at least in the western world) the most famous book burnings to have ever taken place…

In May 1933 some 25,000 (perhaps more) so called “un-german” books were burned by German students in Berlin. Approximately 40,000 people gathered as Joseph Goebbels delivered a speech affirming Nazi Germany’s radical right-wing “values.”

Let’s rewind a bit. Remember Martin Luther? His 95 Theses? Luther is often accredited with having kickstarted the Reformation (though this is a general conception and scholarly debates regarding the Reformation’s genesis persist) but the memory of Luther tacking his Theses to a church door in Wittenberg held strong. The belief that these Theses spurred an intellectual revolution that spread across Europe was reflected in Theses presented by a group of German students. Their hopes were to stimulate a similarly revolutionary “purification.”

Beginning on April 6, 1933, the Nazi German Student Association’s Main Office for Press and Propaganda called for “Action against the Un-German Spirit,” a proclamation that would witness an attempt to “ethnically cleanse” Germany in the following years. On April 8th a group of students drafted their “12 Theses,” a deliberate evocation of Luther’s 95 Theses. In sum, these 12 called for the “purification” of German culture.

Fast-forward to Joseph Goebbels standing in front of 40,000 people in Berlin. He speaks:

“Yes to decency and morality in family and state! I consign to the flames the writings of Heinrich Mann, Ernst Gläser, Erich Kästner.”

The famous burning saw the written works of Ernest Hemingway, Karl Marx, Bertolt Brecht, Thomas Mann and Jack London burst into flames. The list extends far beyond these names. But while Nazi book burning are well known, having been photographed and documented, book burning have lived a much longer history.

To put things in perspective, check out Wikipedia’s list of book burning incidents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_book-burning_incidents

Let’s consider the many complexities that accompany book burning. Obviously they infringe on civil and intellectual freedoms. They represent heavy censorship and in turn, are replaced by myriads of propagandist works. But I want to consider the power of the written word. It’s a topic I’ve thought deeply about and feel needs to be discussed.

I remember hearing kids chant “sticks and stones might break my bones but words will never hurt me.” As a child, unaware of how literacy shapes both an individual and a nation, I agreed. I thought, “sure, words can’t hurt me” and I imagined ghostly letters racing towards me, bursting through my skin, incapable of doing any harm. As I got older I started to consider this chant more critically and began to think “well… I don’t know, words inflict emotional wounds and emotional wounds disperse into people’s lives in varying ways.” So I began to disagree. Upon further thought, I came to consider historical events. Can words hurt a person? Well, yes, I realized, they can. They have. Words are far more powerful than we give them credit for. So powerful, in fact, that rulers have felt the need to burn books throughout history in order to protect given ideologies. That engaging with such works, words, could cost a person their life is proof enough that words can hurt.

I’m currently taking a class in Chinese military strategy. The first week we studied Confucian classics… We spoke about China’s tumultuous military history, the overturning of dynasties and in this conversation we touched on China’s history of book burning. The Qin dynasty controlled China from 221-206 BCE and under Qin rule, massive burnings destroyed nearly all copies of the Confucian classics. Emperor Qin Shi Huang is remembered as the man who unified China and developed one of the world’s first centralized bureaucratic empires. He is also remembered as a paranoid man who was responsible for the death of some 400 scholars and the burning of Confucian works. He feared the written word as he did the enemy’s sword.

Following the Qin dynasty, the Han dynasty was founded and ruled between 206 BCE and 220 CE. During these years, China witnessed a kind of classical revival. The re-introduction of Confucianism influenced educational standards and national values. Confucianism was easily targetable during Qin rule because it appeared to clash with Legalism, which encouraged strict laws and uniform justice in order to maintain civil order. Meanwhile, Confucianism encouraged deep thought and a philosophical approach to civil and military matters. The book ban was lifted in 191 BCE.

Meanwhile, burnings continue to reflect violent attitudes towards politics, religions or cultural ideals. These barbarous acts attempt to smother ideas that espouse beliefs opposing those of the “leaders.” We continue to witness burnings in the contemporary world. ISIS, for example, burned thousands of rare manuscripts in 2015. Ransacking the Mosul Library in Northern Iraq, ISIS proceeded to burn thousands of books, once again casting a light on what is, ultimately, a cultural and intellectual tragedy.

There have been many, many more incidents throughout history. My heart breaks to think of them but I believe that books are stronger than fire for they hold ideas and an idea may be condemned, argued, hated, but it cannot be burned. So despite the heinous nature of these crimes, I have hope that individuals will fight censorship, fight for their intellectual freedom and hold onto valuable ideas whether they exist in print or not.

“It hardly matters why a library is destroyed: every banning, curtailment, shredding, plunder or loot gives rise (at least as a ghostly presence) to a louder, clearer, more durable library of the banned, looted, plundered, shredded or curtailed.”
Alberto Manguel, The Library at Night

I’ll conclude by encouraging you to acknowledge the power of words, to recognize their strength and use them wisely and bravely. They are a gift, a weapon and a shield. How you use them is up to you. 

 

 

The Great Library of Alexandria

Nowadays, we’re quite familiar with the concept of centralized information. We can browse the web with any given question or visit a public library, returning home with books ranging in topics from Mediterranean style cooking to plant care. We understand that libraries are centres wherein learning is facilitated and encouraged. In many ways, these gifts are a given. While access to information is still an ongoing discussion, especially in reference to politics, we expect access to information. We not only crave it, we see it as a right. Curious about knitting? The nature of fire? Why the sun rises and sets? Today, these questions are easily answerable. In fact, these answers are centralized and categorized within refined search systems in order to enable access.

The city in which I live has 18 public libraries in addition to private libraries, such as the many libraries belonging Calgary’s various educational institutions. When I walk through the library at school, the shelves are filled with volumes exploring every historical era, genetics, the psychology of love… There are more books than one could read in a lifetime. But while libraries are normalized, ingrained in our society, this wasn’t always the case. There were, supposedly, attempts to build such a massive library prior to the Great Library of Alexandria (hereafter referred to as the Great Library) but the near mythic institution built by the ancient Greeks was the first lasting attempt, an attempt that, in its grandness, persists within the cultural consciousness of modern societies. There were other libraries but drawing global works together made this endeavor unique.

The Great Library  is so well known that it’s become enshrouded by myth, even glorified. It’s said that Alexander the Great, upon witnessing the great library of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh (a library established in the 7th Century BCE in Assyria, named after the last great king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire), felt inspired to combine the works belonging to the nations he’d conquered. He would have them translated and centralized. While the desire to consolidate information certainly played a role, the endeavor also speaks to Alexander’s desire to establish a multicultural empire unified under the influence of Hellenism. In other words, he wished to form a library combining the works of various nations as a way to bolster Greek authority.

Unfortunately Alexander died before he could create the Great Library, thus his successor, Ptolemy I, oversaw the beginnings of its creation. The Great  Library was a massive undertaking. For this reason, its construction would extend beyond the influence of a sole ruler. Speculations hold that Ptolemy I (a.k.a Ptolemy Soter) began its construction and his son, Philadelphius, contributed to its continued growth.

In a previous post, I spoke of the the strangeness surrounding book ownership, how some will go so far as to steal books to satisfy an innate craving. The ancient Greeks were no different. The Great Library had between 400,000 and 700,00 rolls in its collection. These rolls, however, were acquired in various ways, some of which might be considered immoral. The first three Ptolemies were bibliomaniacs. They contributed to the growth of the Great Library in ways that are undeniable. The following is one example of the lengths taken to acquire not only books, but the “the best, most original, most authoritative copies.” Under Ptolemy Eurgertes’ reign, the Great Library borrowed the official copies of plays by Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides from Athens. They paid what would today be the equivalent of millions of dollars. Note the word “borrowed.” They paid to borrow the plays, ensuring their return. Scribes working for the Great Library went on to copy the plays using the finest parchment. They returned the newly made copies to Athens and kept the originals for the Great Library.

 

That a library with such a large, unique collection was destroyed is perhaps part of the reason the Great Library is mythicized. The story of the library’s destruction is in fact unknown, leaving four possible stories to account for its ruination. The most popular story involves a massive fire some 2000 years ago that destroyed the Great Library’s many works, including works by the likes of Homer, Socrates and Plato. Because it seems people want someone to blame, many have turned to point a finger at Julius Caesar. In 47 BCE a series of skirmishes were fought between Caesar, who’d entered Alexandria during the Roman Civil War in his pursuit of Pompey, and various figures, including Ptolemy VIII. The Siege of Alexandria ensued. It is around this time that the Library is thought to have been burned (if a burning was, in fact, the cause of destruction.) The story goes on to tell of Caesar’s occupation of Alexandria in 48 BCE wherein he found himself cornered by an Egyptian fleet in the harbour. He ordered his men to set the Egyptian fleet on fire and the fire is said to have lost control and spread into the city, destroying warehouses, depots and, perhaps, the Great Library.

Other possible causes of destruction include an event occurring in 272 CE wherein the Emperor Aurelian (the Roman Emperor from 270 to 275 CE) sacked Alexandria during his war with Queen Zenobia (Queen of the Palmyrene Empire in Syria). Another possibility is destruction in 391 CE during a series of religious riots or again, in 415CE during fights between Alexandria’s Jewish and Christian populations. The ultimate cause remains unknown and it is for this reason, perhaps, that the Great Library intrigues us so.

This is a very brief overview of the Great Library. Of course scholars have conducted in-depth research, much of which you can find by accessing online archives and searching various libraries! If you have any questions please comment below and I’ll happily get back to you with an answer. Likewise, if you have any comments or would like to expand on part of the Great Library’s story please feel free to do so.

Main Sources:
Phillips, Heather. “The Great Library of Alexandria?” Library Philosophy and Practice (2010). Academic OneFile (accessed January 23, 2017). http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=ucalgary&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA241615976&sid=summon&asid=f6ffcee5a94e9357cc87f25f7158482b.https://
http://www.ancient.eu/article/207/

Perception and the History of Reading

“The keenest of our senses is our sense of sight”- CICERO

What does it mean to read? Nowadays, the answer might seem obvious. Reading begins with sight. One looks at a page and from that page a new idea, place or story bursts free. Of course we understand that reading and sight are inherently linked but centuries ago humans began to study the relationship between the eye and the page. The link between seeing and reading inspired anatomical advances, cultural and philosophical revolutions.

Today, we understand that seeing and comprehending aren’t synonymous. Reading fits into this notion because it requires comprehension and sight. It requires deciphering, analysis. When a child picks up blocks representing letters of the alphabet they see shapes but perhaps struggle to understand the shapes’ meanings. But as the child begins to understand that the shape represents something more, they may start moving the blocks around. In the same way that writing requires construction, reading relies on deconstruction.

I recently read “A History of Reading” by Alberto Manguel wherein Manguel introduces the reader to optical evolutions. In the fifth century BC, Empedocles, a pre-Socratic Greek philosopher, put forth the idea that fiery light streams from the eye making objects visible. Over a century later, Epicurus built on this idea. He proposed that these flames were in fact sheaths of atoms that ascended from the surface of a given object, thereby entering the eye. Of course these theories were riddled with enigmas. Various philosophers and physicians sought to solve these riddles. Perhaps my favourite theory is that of a Greek physician named Galen. Galen claimed that human senses fed into a general repository. This repository, often called the “common sense,” held memory, fantasy, knowledge and dreams. The medieval idea that the brain was compartmentalized is, actually, quite brilliant.

While a relationship between one’s ability to read and the physical eye grew all the more apparent, Ibn al-Haytham (known to the West as Alhazen), established himself as the father of modern optics. Born in 965 AD in Basra (Iraq), the scientist distinguished between “seeing” and “reading.” He explained that one’s perception of the outside world reached conclusions by drawing on our faculty of judgment. He followed Aristotelian arguments that what we see enters the eye through the air, but Alhazen pushed farther and highlighted the difference between “sensation” and “perception.” The first is involuntary. For instance, we might feel cold, or warm. But the second requires recognition. To take note, for instance, of how snow melts in one’s hand. In the 1980’s, Dr. Merlin C. Wittrock wrote: “to comprehend a text we not only read it, in the nominal sense of the word, we construct a meaning for it.” Alhazen laid the groundwork for Wittrock’s 20th century claim.

Of course our relationship to books has changed as well. It’s no coincidence that some people prefer to curl up by a fire with a hard-copy book instead of, say, a Kobo e-reader. The method of reading can inform our perception. I know that I tend to read PDF documents time after time, reaching the bottom of the page with little understanding. This is because I drift off. I see the words on the document but struggle to process them. Give me a book, however, and I’ll happily read for hours. The brain is a truly curious organ.

Meanwhile, I’ve begun to notice trends in how I read. For instance, I might seek out an article to further support an idea that’s come to me and the sheer fact of my “seeking” that article is likely to inform my ensuing perception of it. The way in which I deconstruct the text’s meaning is shaped by my excavating. This has been going on for ages. Slavery, for example, was long defended because the word “slave” exists in the Bible. Surely scripture did not intend to facilitate mass kidnappings or treacherous migrations but in that act of deciphering, which we’ve established as perception, we interpret.

eyesWhile writing this, I did some additional research on Alhazen and found the following picture. How strange, I thought to myself, that in researching the difference between sight and reading, I find an incredibly beautiful image that is, to me, indecipherable. I could draw meaning based on the fact that I, 1-Google searched it and 2- could interpret the illustration. But in this scenario, my perception was informed by context. If I’d found a flyer floating through the streets with the same image I’d likely have found myself feeling rather confused. Alas! Perception is informed by a great many things.

So here I leave you to ponder what reading means to you. What you read, why you read, where and how you read… Such strange questions to ask yourself and yet the answers might surprise you.

 

A Literary Weapon: The printing press and the dissolution of Catholic culture in 16th Century England

It has been made a Question long agoe, whether more mischief then advantage were not occasion’d to the Christian world by the Invention of Typography.

—Roger L’Estrange ( 1660 )

In 1517, a German Augustinian monk by the name of Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to a church door in the city of Wittenberg.[1] Titled, the “Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of indulgences,” the 95 Theses were written in protest of papal indulgency.[2] In response to Luther’s “protest,” a religious movement known as “Protestantism,” emerged and in the 150 years that followed, Western Europe would suffer as a result of religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants.[3] The 16th century is known as the age of European Reformation, an era defined by violent hostilities between two religious bodies, both of whom fought zealously to protect their beliefs.[4] In considering the hostilities that existed between Catholic and Protestant bodies, physical warfare is most commonly discussed. However, in the wake of stirring dissension, the printing press played a vital role in shaping public attitudes toward Protestantism. Concepts pertaining to intellectual freedom and the emergence of news reporting infiltrated cities and the minds of Europeans. The invention of Johannes Gutenberg’s printing press in the 15th century sparked intense political debate pertaining to doctrinal authority in early modern Europe by promoting and enabling the circulation of reformist literature. The propagation of anti-Catholic writings distributed by the press perpetuated the cultural and political upheaval that defined Europe’s social landscape in the 16th century.

The European Reformation was, therefor, more than just a religious revolution. It was a literary revolution. It paralleled an intellectual revolution that transformed European cities and ultimately pervaded the minds of citizens. The press itself could be seen as a major propagandist in the wake of mass textual distribution.

Protestantism was the first religious movement to fully exploit the printing press. Reformers distributed anti-Catholic pamphlets, cartoons and writings at an unprecedented rate and used the new presses for “overt propaganda,” which would ultimately agitate public opinion.[5] Protestant incendiaries used the press to print disparaging and often satirical caricatures of Catholic figures. One 16th century print depicts the pope with several cardinals and bishops, all of whom have had their heads replaced by those of wolves, ducks or geese.[6]

Satire played an important role in the spread of propagandist pamphleteering, which gained particular momentum in Elizabethan England when an event known as the Marprelate controversy unfolded in 1589.[7] A collection of Puritan writers published a series of “satirical tracts” under the pseudonym “Martin Marprelate.” The pamphlets were written in support of Presbyterian beliefs and were an outright attack on episcopal hierarchy.[8] The pamphlets published slanderous writings that attacked Anglican bishops, vilifying them as “profane, proud, paltry, popish, pestilent, pernicious” and “presumptuous prelates.”[9] In response, the government condemned a suspected man named John Penry, a Welsh Puritan sometimes referred to as the “hot-headed Welshman.”[10] He was charged with “inciting rebellion,” and was hung in 1593.[11]

The Marprelate tracts are a compelling example of how “populist” literature vehemently deliberated on the era’s most important controversies.[12] They sparked heated debate and considerations pertaining to the nature of printed works and the role of the printing press in England.[13] The controversy’s ensuing response included the emergence of Marprelate antagonists such as the brothers Richard and Gabriel Harvey and anti-Martinist writers like Thomas Nashe. Nashe relied on the use of a “Martin-esque scurrilous voice”[14] in his counter-attacks and the development of varying literary voices forced writers to examine their positions in the industry as well as those of their rivals. (44).

The press was gaining popularity, and “populist” works spread quickly. The public was impressionable and the pamphlets had proved to be an incredibly strong weapon in swaying public opinion. For this very reason, Gabriel Harvey deeply objected to defamatory anti-Martinist writing. He argued that the proliferate nature of the press “attracted an indescrimante readerships which sought controversy for its own sake.”[15]  Harvey’s apprehension grew from the fact that the market for printed works was flourishing at a revolutionary rate.[16] Furthermore, populist writing in Elizabethan England was seen as a form of writing that pre-meditatively conjured scandalous stories in an attempt to capture the interest of a “fickle public.”[17] As the press expanded, opportunities arose and populist literature was fuelled by the emergence of a market that deployed non-academic writing.[18] As the literary scene developed, so too did public opinion. The scale on which information was distributed forever changed, and in turn, the social landscape changed too, giving impetus to riots, libel and a splintered belief system.

Propagandist works infiltrated many public institutions. Although the fortunes of printing industries across Europe varied in reasons for their success, religion played an inherent role in the thriving nature of certain printing enterprises. The first export industry in Geneva, for instance, was developed by religious French refugees.[19]

John Calvin, a French Theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation helped reform the Church in Geneva and the city’s disposition was greatly altered. At the time of his death in 1564, the only exportable product in Geneva was the printed book, and was considered a “religious as well as economic enterprise.”[20] The influx of French refugees into Calvinist Geneva further precipitated changes to the city’s professional structure.[21] The number of printers and book vendors increased from somewhere around six, to three hundred or more.[22] In the 1550’s numerous French printing companies began to fail. Prior to the printing boom in Geneva, the movement of workers between Lyons and Geneva had gone two-ways, but following the rapid expansion of Geneva’s press traffic flooded out of Lyon, and some other regions of France, and into Geneva.

The fate of Protestant printers and booksellers in Lyon and other French cities was precarious. They were frequently the target of attacks by Catholic mobs.[23] In 1562, Protestant forces took control of Lyon, but the city was later re-taken by Catholic forces in 1567.[24] The banks of the Rhone were flooded by celebrations which entailed the burning of heretical books.[25] Such celebrations greatly characterize the attitudes and behaviour that defined social life in France as a result of controversies highlighted in the press. Similarly, the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacres in 1572 were characterized by attacks on printers in cities including, but not limited to Lyon, Paris, Orleans and Rouen.[26]

Not only did the press affect the demographic of different cities as industries boomed and collapsed, but systems of trade influenced flourishing communities.[27] The demand for “vernacular Scriptures, Psalters and service books” among Protestant enclaves fostered reciprocal relationships between printers and “communities of strangers.”[28] Supplying minority groups with service books not only led these minorities to develop affiliations with foreign traders, but it also brought about an awareness of existing nuances in the Christian approach to liturgy.[29]

In considering the printing press, Luther described it as “God’s highest and extremest act of grace, whereby the business of the Gospel is driven forward.”[30] Protestant reformers were well aware of the press’ importance in their writing and it is increasingly evident to the modern historian that the anti-papist cartoons and writings produced by Lutheran exponents aroused passionate discourse in the 16th century.[31]

Meanwhile, the press’ massive impact on social life may be noted in the number of distributed works. Between 1517 and 1520, Luther’s thirty publications likely sold over 300,000 copies.[32] Without the press, a revolution of such magnitude may never have come into existence. For the first time in human history, the works of writers and cartoonists reached an emerging class of literate individuals. These individuals would judge the “validity of revolutionary ideas,”[33] sparking a religious and political revolution that extended beyond the clergy, the monarchy or the opinions of aristocrats. The changing political and social landscape would henceforth be equally manipulated by commoners. The printing press ultimately came to be recognized as an important instrument in overcoming a societal structure that had been monopolized by the Church for ages. Propagandist works, distributed by members of opposing religious parties, shaped the political and religious landscape of the 16th century, all the while, wielding printed work like a whetted sword.

 

 

Bibliography

“The Scottish Reformation.” BBC Scotland. 2014. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/articles/scottish_reformation/.

Mullett, Michael. “Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses: Michael Mullett Defines the Role of the 95 Theses in the Lutheran Reformation.” Academic OneFile. Accessed March 29, 2016. http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ps/i.do?id=GALE|A111646883&sid=summon&v=2.1&u=ucalgary&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=b3fb5b277ced8e642a591734273817c6.

Petheram, John. The Marprelate Controversy. 2nd ed. London, 1843. Accessed April 1, 2016. https://books.google.ca/books?id=5oXYAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false.

Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London. New York: Routledge, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary/detail.action?docID=10837880

“Marprelate Controversy”. 2015. In The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia with Atlas and Weather Guide. Abington: Helicon. http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://literati.credoreference.com/content/entry/heliconhe/marprelate_controversy/0

Pamphlet. (2015). In The Hutchinson unabridged encyclopedia with atlas and weather guide. Abington, United Kingdom: Helicon. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://literati.credoreference.com/content/entry/heliconhe/pamphlet/0

Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London. New York: Routledge, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary/detail.action?docID=10837880

McLeod, Jane. Licensing Loyalty: Printers, Patrons, and the State in Early Modern France. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011.

Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. https://books.google.ca/boo

Footnotes

[1] “The Scottish Reformation.” BBC Scotland. 2014. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/articles/scottish_reformation/.[2] Mullett, Michael. “Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses: Michael Mullett Defines the Role of the 95 Theses in the Lutheran Reformation.” Academic OneFile. Accessed March 29, 2016. http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ps/i.do?id=GALE|A111646883&sid=summon&v=2.1&u=ucalgary&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=b3fb5b277ced8e642a591734273817c6.[3] Ibid.[4] Ibid.[5] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 165.[6] Eisenstein, The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 166.[7] Pamphlet. (2015). In The Hutchinson unabridged encyclopedia with atlas and weather guide. Abington, United Kingdom: Helicon. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://literati.credoreference.com/content/entry/heliconhe/pamphlet/0[8] “Marprelate Controversy”. 2015. In The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia with Atlas and Weather Guide. Abington: Helicon. http://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://literati.credoreference.com/content/entry/heliconhe/marprelate_controversy/0[9] Ibid.[10] Petheram, John. The Marprelate Controversy. 2nd ed. London, 1843. Accessed April 1, 2016. https://books.google.ca/books?id=5oXYAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false.Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London. New York: Routledge, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary/detail.action?docID=10837880[11] “Marprelate Controversy”. 2015. In The Hutchinson Unabridged Encyclopedia with Atlas and Weather Guide. Abington: Helicon.[12] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London. New York: Routledge, 2016. Accessed April 1, 2016. http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary/detail.action?docID=10837880[13] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 44.[14] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 44.[15] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 44.[16] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 45.[17] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 45.[18] Bayman, Anna. Thomas Dekker and the Culture of Pamphleteering in Early Modern London, 45.[19] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 192.[20] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 192.[21] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 192.[22] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 192.[23] McLeod, Jane. Licensing Loyalty: Printers, Patrons, and the State in Early Modern France. (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2011) 25.[24] McLeod, Jane. Licensing Loyalty, 26.[25] McLeod, Jane. Licensing Loyalty, 26.[26] McLeod, Jane. Licensing Loyalty, 26.[27] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 202.[28] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 202.[29] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 202.[30] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 165.[31] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe, 165.[32] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.) https://books.google.ca/books. 303.[33] Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, 303.