Daniel Lopez

CH 202
Lesson 2 Written Assignment
How, according to John Knox, is the Empire of Women repugnant to
nature?
From the reading itself, John Knox denounces women as they go against Gods will.
He argues that God himself has deprived women of authority and dominion and
that man are naturally the ones that are stronger and that it is themselves only be
logic he should lead (Knox 13). He continues this absurd rant by comparing this with
other illogical comparison such as having the sick nourish, the foolish give counsel
or the blind lead. Furthermore, he all of his claims come from Biblical figures and
expressions and interpreting in a way that says that women is naturally inferior to
man, although he does not provide any biological proof, even though he claims that
this proof directly stems from nature. (Knox 14)
Although Knox was not directly addressing her, Elizabeth Is Golden
Speech can be seen as a response to him. How so?
In the First Speech which can thought of as a preamble to her argument, she
states that her permission comes from one that was ordained from God himself
since she employs the position of Queen under His name (Tudor 15). Here, she
establishes her position as someone who has already bypassed Knoxs argument
that God made women inferior as she employs this office. Once she is in the
Golden Speech, Queen Elizabeth expresses that her sole duty is to provide for the
contentment of her people since she feels that she owes preservation from all the
dishonorable virtues (such as peril, envy shame) to the people (Tudor 16). She then
goes on to state that its through these God given duty that she revels in so much
that she feels the wonder of human kind not as a hierarchy but as equal duty for
everyone. Since shes directly referring to the different ideas of subordination, it
could be argued that this is talking back to Knox.
What are Machiavellis recommendations for governing newly acquired
cities or kingdoms that have previously existed under their own laws?
First in this argument, Machiavelli provides three different ways to absolutely rule
and finds that the last of the three is more effective by going into more detail about
it later; devastate the people, conquer and occupy the people; or let all the people
to continue their regular operations and just tax everything that they do for the
state (Machiavelli 17-18). He argues that destruction might be the better bet,
however, since the memories of the old government will make the people have
hateful feelings towards the newer government. However, the new prince can take
over the people if he just assumes the government and changes it from within since
in the eyes of the people, its the same people.
What is Machiavellis attitude toward religion?

It is evident that Machiavelli found no room for religion and morals thereof to have
any place in the politics of the state and government of the time. (Perry 15)
However, he does find it more of a tool to aid in the unification of the people in the
society. And as this tool, the people of the government could use it to their favor
when trying to persuade the people, whether it be from the acceptance of a new
leader or a new government altogether. (Perry 15) Through this, the text indicate
that he might argue for promoting civic obedience, public spiritedness, and
patriotism. (Perry 15)