Wikipedia #3

Elizabeth I of England
This wikipedia article covers just about anything you would ever want to know about Queen Elizabeth I. It starts with a brief overview of her life, then delves into the more detailed aspects. Along the way it's speckled with fancy speeches made by her and quotes said about her. First starting with her childhood, it then moves into her ascension to Queen and the circumstances that put her there. It then covers her views on religion, or lack of views. She never married and so the next part of the article covers speculations into this and the cult that was established that honored her virginity. Then her foreign policy and issues are covered with Scotland, Spain, France and Ireland. The last part of this article covers her later years, death, and the legacy she left behind.
1. word count: (freakin long) 11,327
2. Searched: Queen Elizabeth I, Got: Elizabeth I of England
3. Disambiguation link:
Queen Elizabeth I of England
Elizabeth I, TV series based on her life
Elisabeth I of Bohemia
Elizabeth I of Russia
Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, who is the first Queen Elizabeth of Scotland
Queen Elizabeth first of series of steam ships
4. discussion link: really, really long. People asking lots and lots of questions and the host of the article did a great job as far as a saw of responding to them. Whenever there was a change made the host talked about it a lot too. Also mentioned on the discussion page was it's a featured article and one of the best sources for info on Queen Elizabeth.
5. last change: 11/15/08, first change: 1/9/04 changes:127
6. external links: 4
7. references: 173
8. further reading: 5
Yes, I would recommend this to anyone interested in Queen Elizabeth I. If you were writing a paper on her you wouldn't need much else. Also the fact that it is a featured article, hasn't had too many changes, and has such a huge discussion page are good signs that it's a good article. I love wikipedia anyways, no matter how many professors scorn it. In fact, I think this is the first class I've been allowed to use it. Yay Wikipedia. :)

Queen Elizabeth I

I liked reading Queen Elizabeth's speech to her troops when the Spanish were invading. After such a riveting, moving speech it's such a buzz kill that the Spanish never came. It's not very often you hear such a battle speech by a woman. In fact, I don't think I've ever heard of a Queen fighting at the front of a battle. Whether or not she actually fought or just put on her armor and rode out in front to give a speech is something I specifically looked for but didn't find. I was kind of put off by the part of the speech where she refers to herself as a "weak and feeble woman" but follows it up with "but I have the heart and stomach of a king." I almost felt like she was saying "because I am a woman I am crap, but look, I can be more like a man." I'm sure she meant it to establish herself as a more powerful ruler but it stinks that she had to do it by putting down the fact that she was a woman. What she could have done is say something like "yes, I am a woman... and look at how much more power I have than you little people!" No, just kidding... that would have probably pissed them off.

Martin Luther

Martin Luther's "Freedom of a Christian" was a bit of an interesting read. He really focused on being a Christian on the inside and not just the outside in what you do . He even went as far as to call those who did all these works in the name of God hypocrites because they didn't have what really mattered: faith. A bit harsh, but he makes sense. It seems like people can get so caught up in what other people see them doing, they can make their religion purely one of "works" and forget what religion is really about. To me Luther was putting the "belief" back in religion, which I can appreciate and agree with. He sure did it in a lot of words, though. :) I was having a hard time keeping my focus because he says a lot of the same stuff, just in a different way. Were people just naturally more wordy back then? I also noticed where Martin said that Christians were above the law and also the part about not getting involved in the world's problems politically or in warfare. I bet that frustrated a bunch of rulers and politics back then. But, hasn't that always been the struggle between church and state that we even deal with today? The real issue being what is above the other: church or state?

Reformers and Anabaptists

After writing for a few weeks about how I think the popes misinterpretted the bible in justification of their power, finally someone agrees with me! It's sad that when the Reformers decided to think for themselves and make their own interpretations of the bible they were punished and often killed for it. I also would have been very disenchanted with the life of luxury and lust for power the popes were living if I had been observing them back then. While I find the Anabaptists to be a bit extreme, I do agree with some elements. I haven't found any scripture saying that babies should be baptized. Baptism should be an informed, adult decision. Jesus himself was baptized this way. I've never understood baby baptism. I also liked their simple, personal approach to faith. I think they got this approach right.