U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th Edition Hook Test Bank All Chapters

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of
World Power 5th Edition Hook Test

Bank
Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://testbankfan.com/product/u-s-foreign-policy-the-paradox-of-world-power-5th-edi
tion-hook-test-bank/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th

Edition Hook Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/u-s-foreign-policy-the-paradox-
of-world-power-5th-edition-hook-solutions-manual/
Social Welfare Policy for a Sustainable Future The U S

in Global Context 1st Edition Wormer Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/social-welfare-policy-for-a-
sustainable-future-the-u-s-in-global-context-1st-edition-wormer-
test-bank/
Media and Crime in the U S 1st Edition Jewkes Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/media-and-crime-in-the-u-s-1st-
edition-jewkes-test-bank/
American Foreign Policy The Dynamics of Choice in the

21st Century 4th Edition Jentleson Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/american-foreign-policy-the-
dynamics-of-choice-in-the-21st-century-4th-edition-jentleson-
test-bank/
U S Banking System 3rd Edition Center-for-Financial-
Training Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/u-s-banking-system-3rd-edition-
center-for-financial-training-test-bank/
Cengage Advantage Books The Politics of United States

Foreign Policy 6th Edition Rosati Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/cengage-advantage-books-the-
politics-of-united-states-foreign-policy-6th-edition-rosati-test-
bank/
Cengage Advantage Books The Politics of United States

Foreign Policy 6th Edition Rosati Solutions Manual
https://testbankfan.com/product/cengage-advantage-books-the-
politics-of-united-states-foreign-policy-6th-edition-rosati-
solutions-manual/
Cengage Advantage American Foreign Policy and Process

6th Edition McCormick Test Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/cengage-advantage-american-
foreign-policy-and-process-6th-edition-mccormick-test-bank/
Contemporary American Foreign Policy Influences

Challenges and Opportunities 1st Edition Mansbach Test
Bank
https://testbankfan.com/product/contemporary-american-foreign-
policy-influences-challenges-and-opportunities-1st-edition-
mansbach-test-bank/
Chapter 07: Public Opinion at Home and Abroad
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. Foreign policy elites are most likely to favor which of the following?
a. Isolationism
b. Multilateral cooperation
c. The delegate model
d. Unilateral action
ANS: B PTS: 1 DIF: Medium
REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism? OBJ: 7.1 COG: Comprehension
2. Studies have shown that which of the following statements is true regarding the “gender gap” in
U.S. foreign policy attitudes?
a. Men favor free-trade and open-market issues more than women do.
b. Men favor military intervention more than women do.
c. Women favor international institutions more than men do.
d. Women favor military intervention more than men do.
REF: Physical Identities: Gender, Race, and Generation OBJ: 7.3
COG: Comprehension
3. Which of the following is not a source for global public opinion?

a. Information technology
b. Issues and problems that cross national borders
c. Public opinion responses linked to political–economic ideologies
d. Growth of foreign civil societies in response to democratic reforms
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: The View from Overseas
OBJ: 7.1 COG: Knowledge
4. In the late 1990s in the midst of the U.S. economic boom, which of the following was the most
common response to the public opinion survey question concerning the biggest foreign policy
problem facing the United States?
a. Don’t know
b. Terrorism
c. The situation in the Middle East
d. Trade restrictions from other countries
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Easy
REF: Public Ambivalence in the Clinton Era OBJ: 7.2
COG: Knowledge
5. Under the Bush administration, public opinion surveys revealed a divine divide in public
opinion, as evidenced by which of the following statements?
a. The belief by frequent Christian churchgoers that Muslims are a generally peaceful
people
b. The belief by Jewish and Muslim Americans that the administration should be more
receptive to open immigration policies
c. The belief by Christians that the United States was “doing the right thing” in foreign
policy
d. The belief by Muslim Americans that the administration should support a two-state
solution in Israel
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
REF: Social Identities: Education, Wealth, and Religion OBJ: 7.3
COG: Application | Analysis
6. According to public opinion polls, which of the following does the general or mass public
support the least?
a. Foreign aid
b. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
c. The Kyoto Protocol
d. The United Nations
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Easy
REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism? OBJ: 7.2 COG: Knowledge
7. What percentage of the population comprises the “attentive public”?

a. 1 percent
b. 5 percent
c. 15 percent
d. 25 percent
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Easy
REF: Democracy and the Paradox of World Power OBJ: 7.1
COG: Knowledge
8. Which of the following actions by Congress is likely to receive the least public support?
a. Rejecting the Kyoto Protocol on climate change
b. Participating in UN efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons
c. Refusing to endorse the International Criminal Court
d. Launching a unilateral U.S. military attack on Iran’s nuclear weapons program
ANS: B PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism? OBJ: 7.2 COG: Application | Analysis
9. Which of these groups is the least informed and interested in global politics and U.S. foreign
policy?
a. Independents
b. The attentive public
c. The foreign policy elite
d. The mass public
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Figure 7.1
10. President George W. Bush’s policy regarding Iraq best fits which of the following models?
a. Delegate model
b. Latent model
c. Public relations model
d. Trustee model
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership OBJ: 7.2
11. In 2014, approximately what percentage of Americans supported active U.S. participation in
world affairs?
a. About 50 percent
b. About 60 percent
c. About 40 percent
d. About 30 percent
ANS: B PTS: 1 DIF: Easy
REF: Public Opinion since World War II OBJ: 7.2
COG: Knowledge
12. How much of the federal budget does the general public believe is spent on foreign aid?
a. 15 to 20 percent
b. 45 to 50 percent
c. 5 to 10 percent
d. About 1 percent
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: America’s Knowledge Gap
13. Which of the following is not one of the three assumptions of the Almond–Lippmann consensus
discussed in your text with regard to U.S. foreign policy?
a. Critical
b. Volatile
c. Incoherent
d. Irrelevant
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Medium
REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism? OBJ: 7.1 COG: Comprehension
14. Which of the following refers to the president’s ability to manipulate and gauge public opinion?
a. A president who “goes public”
b. An institutional president
c. A public relations presidency
d. An imperial president
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Chapter Introduction
OBJ: 7.1 COG: Comprehension
15. Which of the following best explains how foreign policy makers view international public
opinion?
a. Foreign policy makers are concerned with international public opinion because
many of these global citizens have interests in U.S. economic markets.
b. Foreign policy makers are unconcerned with international public opinion because
they are only responsible to the American electorate.
c. Foreign policy makers are unconcerned with international public opinion because
the Almond–Lippmann consensus identifies how there will always be a level of
anti-American sentiment as long as the United States remains a hegemonic power.
d. Foreign policy makers are concerned with international public opinion because
unfavorable perceptions of the United States can lead to pushback against its
policies.
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Chapter Introduction
16. Which of the following terms describes the group of citizens that is smallest with regard to
opinions but that has the largest impact on foreign policy?
a. Attentive public
b. Disengaged public
c. Foreign policy elite
d. Mass public
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Medium
REF: Democracy and the Paradox of World Power OBJ: 7.1
COG: Comprehension
17. Which of the following best describes the delegate model of political representation?
a. Elected officials use their best judgment and expertise to make policy decisions.
b. Elected officials make decisions based on what the majority of the public desires.
c. Elected officials do not involve the public in decision-making at all.
d. Elected officials defer to bureaucrats for their expertise in decision-making.
COG: Comprehension
18. Which of the following best describes the trustee model of political representation?
a. Elected officials involve and pass authority on to bureaucrats for policy
implementation.
b. Elected officials do not involve the public in decision-making at all.
c. Elected officials make decisions based on what the majority of the public desires.
d. Elected officials use their best judgment and expertise to make policy decisions.
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Medium
COG: Comprehension
19. The Almond–Lippmann consensus holds that public opinion on foreign policy is ______.
a. pragmatic, prudent, and sometimes relevant to the policy-making process
b. volatile, incoherent, and irrelevant to the policy-making process
c. stable, pragmatic, and sometimes relevant to the policy-making process
d. stable, coherent, and relevant to the policy-making process
REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism? OBJ: 7.1 COG: Knowledge
20. Which of the following is not a contemporary challenge to the Almond–Lippmann consensus?
a. Members of the foreign policy elite tend to reach a consensus more easily than
members of the attentive public.
b. Although the mass public tends to be more nationalistic on economic issues, it
favors U.S. engagement in multilateral organizations.
c. Most of the population favors an internationalist foreign policy and only a few
qualify as isolationist.
d. Whereas some citizens believe the United States should pursue a policy of militant
internationalism, others believe it should pursue cooperative internationalism.
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
21. Which of the following societal groups is not an influential source of public opinion for foreign
policy makers?
a. Religious affiliated groups
b. Media rights groups
c. Human rights groups
d. Groups organized around economic causes
COG: Knowledge
22. What is the concept that refers to the U.S. public’s aversion to military activism, coupled with a
sense of defeatism?
a. The diversionary theory of war
b. The isolationism effect
c. The Iraq Syndrome
d. The Vietnam Syndrome
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Easy
REF: Consensus and Discord during the Cold War OBJ: 7.2
COG: Knowledge
23. Which of the following statements best reflects the public’s opinion of U.S. foreign aid?
a. A majority of the public knows the United States spends a small fraction of its
budget on foreign aid and believes it should spend much more.
b. A majority of the public sees foreign aid as the biggest U.S. “soft power” asset and
favors an increase in the amount spent.
c. A majority of the public favors reductions in foreign aid, despite having estimates of
spending that are too high.
d. A majority of the public knows how much the United States spends on foreign aid
but is undecided on whether it is an adequate amount.
REF: America’s Knowledge Gap OBJ: 7.2 COG: Application | Analysis
24. Which of the following statements does not reflect foreign policy attitudes during the Cold
War?
a. Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy faced a backlash from the public because of
U.S. involvement in the Korean War.
b. President Johnson initially enjoyed high levels of support for the war in Vietnam.
c. President Truman sought to rally public support around U.S. actions as the threat of
communism became more visible to the American public.
d. Ongoing domestic and foreign policy issues hampered public support for the
Vietnam War during the Nixon administration.
COG: Comprehension
25. Which of the following statements best describes public opinion at the end of the Cold War?
a. At the end of the Cold War, the public was very concerned about the dissolution of
the Soviet Union and the potential instability posed by emerging states.
b. At the end of the Cold War, there was a considerable ambivalence about foreign
policy issues from both the public and elites, as no one issue dominated the foreign
policy agenda.
c. Both the public and foreign policy elites were primarily concerned with the “pivot to
Asia.”
d. Although foreign policy elites were concerned about emerging powers such as
Russia and China, the American public was more concerned about economic issues.
ANS: B PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
26. President George W. Bush’s rise in public approval in 2001 and 2002 can best be attributed to
which of the following factors?
a. Institutional bargain
b. Latent public opinion
c. The rally-around-the-flag effect
d. Diversionary theory of war
REF: Rallying around the Flag after 9/11 OBJ: 7.2
27. Both the mass public and elites share which of the following attitudes?
a. Declining trust in government
b. Lack of knowledge and facts about international relations
c. Lack of support for military intervention
d. Support for multilateral cooperation
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium
28. Which of the following is not a cause of the growing impact of global public opinion?
a. The advance of information technologies
b. Increased acts of terrorism
c. The widespread growth of civil societies in response to democratic reforms
d. The increase in transnational issues
ANS: B PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: The View from Overseas
29. During the Obama administration, surveys revealed that global public opinion of the United
States had increased in all of the following except ______.
a. Egypt
b. China
c. Japan
d. Mexico
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: The View from Overseas
30. Which of the following best describes the concept of group identity?
a. An established organization through which individuals express their voting
preferences
b. An informal gathering of people that temporarily band together to support specific
causes
c. A sense of common cause with other citizens with shared personal traits
d. A shared sense of the “us versus them” dichotomy
REF: Group Identities and Foreign Policy Views OBJ: 7.3
COG: Comprehension
31. Which of the following is not a concern commonly identified as important to individuals who
identify as conservative?
a. Promoting U.S. business overseas
b. Restricting immigration
c. Strengthening U.S. military power
d. Reducing defense spending
REF: Political Identities: Ideology and Political Party OBJ: 7.3
COG: Knowledge
32. President Clinton’s decision to order the 1999 military intervention in Kosovo without public
(or congressional) support is an example of the president assuming a __________ of political
representation.
a. delegate model
b. latent model
c. public relations model
d. trustee model
COG: Knowledge
33. President Obama’s decision to order a gradual withdrawal of American troops from
Afghanistan due to war weariness is an example of how public opinion may play a role in the
decision-making process, thus contradicting the ______.
a. public relations presidency theory
b. divine divide
c. Almond–Lippmann consensus
d. delegate model of representation
34. Which of the following statements best reflects the overall trend in public opinion since World
War II?
a. Until the end of the Cold War, Americans consistently preferred a passive,
isolationist role for the United States in international politics.
b. Although public opinion varied over time, Americans have consistently preferred an
active role for the United States in world politics.
c. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq reversed a long-term trend in public opinion,
leading more Americans to prefer militant internationalism in global affairs.
d. Public opinion has been too erratic since the end of WWII to conclusively determine
any trends in attitudes regarding the U.S. role in world politics.
REF: Public Opinion since World War II OBJ: 7.2
COG: Comprehension
35. Which of the following statements best describes public opinion at the end of the Cold War?
a. The end of the Cold War was marked with considerable ambivalence among the
public and government leaders about U.S. foreign policy, bringing about new
patterns in public opinion that reflected the demise of superpower tensions and the
birth of U.S. predominance among the great powers.
b. Whereas public opinion remained steadfastly isolationist during the Cold War, the
end of the war resulted in a realization of the new globalized environment,
prompting the majority of Americans to favor cooperative internationalism.
c. Public opinion remained relatively unchanged with the end of the Cold War
regarding U.S. involvement in international politics; however, the majority of
Americans now preferred U.S. focus on growing threats in Asia, not the former
Soviet Union.
d. Public opinion remained too erratic at the end of the Cold War to conclusively
determine any trends in attitudes regarding the U.S. role in world politics.
COG: Comprehension
36. Which of the following statements best describes the importance of public opinion in
evaluations of the Clinton administration?
a. Public opinion surveys frequently demonstrated that the mass public generally
supported President Clinton’s foreign policy agenda, but the lack of support for
Clinton’s domestic agenda and distrust stemming from the scandal and subsequent
impeachment hearing weighed heavily on his approval ratings and the public’s
evaluation of his performance on international issues.
b. Although surveys demonstrated that the public did not think highly of his domestic
policy performance, President Clinton enjoyed high job approval ratings because of
his favorable foreign policy goals.
c. Public opinion surveys demonstrated the mass public’s discontent with U.S.
participation in the Bosnian War, and poor job approval ratings plagued President
Clinton in the remaining years of his presidency because of this intervention.
d. Although surveys demonstrated that the public did not think highly of his foreign
policy performance, President Clinton received the highest approval ratings among
the ten postwar presidents in part because of his sensitivity to public opinion.
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Medium
COG: Comprehension
37. Which of the following statements best describes the importance of public opinion in
evaluations of the George W. Bush administration?
a. Public opinion surveys during the 2000 election demonstrated that foreign policy
issues ranked dead last on the list of voters’ concerns, and foreign policy played only
a nominal role in evaluations of the administration and the president’s job approval
ratings.
b. After the 9/11 attacks, President Bush experienced several short bursts of high
approval ratings due to the rally-around-the-flag effect, but as war fatigue set in and
political violence in places such as Iraq increased, those items caused a significant
decline in his approval ratings in the last years of his presidency.
c. The public was generally dissatisfied with President Bush’s domestic policies and
subsequently were unsupportive of his foreign policy performance, leading to low
approval ratings throughout his presidency.
d. The president’s job approval ratings throughout his presidency reflected the public
strongly supported both his domestic and foreign policy performance.
COG: Comprehension
38. Which of the following was not identified as an example of public preferences shaping the
foreign policy goals of the Obama administration?
a. The administration’s participation in the ISAF mission in Afghanistan
b. The administration’s commitment to multilateral cooperation
c. The administration’s commitment to international law
d. The administration’s participation in international institutions
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: The Onset of War Fatigue
39. Which of the following statements best describes how public opinion on foreign policy issues
affected evaluations of President Obama’s job performance?
a. President Obama’s approval ratings rose consistently after U.S. participation in the
2011 Libyan intervention, and surveys demonstrate that a majority of Americans
believed his dovish approach to foreign policy issues was the best course of action.
b. President Obama’s approval ratings have remained consistently low, and the mass
public has repeatedly called for more hawkish policies in Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and
Iraq.
c. While President Obama started his first term with high approval ratings, public
opinion of his performance dropped in the following years, and surveys reflected
that Americans believed he was acting too passively on foreign policy issues, such
as the rise of the Islamic State.
d. President Obama’s approval ratings continued to fall after U.S. participation in the
2011 Libyan intervention, and surveys demonstrate that a majority of Americans
believed his approach to foreign policy issues was too hawkish.
ANS: C PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: The Onset of War Fatigue
40. Which of the following statements most accurately reflects global public opinions of the Obama
administration?
a. Although the Obama administration has voiced its concern about the U.S. reputation
globally, it has taken very little action to restore its relationships with long-standing
allies and pays little regard to global public opinion in practice.
b. Although the Obama administration claims to pay very little attention to global
public opinion, a decrease in U.S. favorability ratings after it failed to intervene in
the Ukrainian conflict led the United States to lead the charge in the Syrian
intervention.
c. The Obama administration is unconcerned with global public opinion, leading to
favorable attitudes about the United States in countries where the population
believes it is too involved in international affairs.
d. Although the Obama administration has successfully restored the U.S. reputation in
many parts of the world, some countries maintain low levels of satisfaction with the
United States, particularly in regard to the U.S. use of aerial drones.
ANS: D PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: The View from Overseas
41. While the American electorate generally disapproves of foreign policy actions that violate
citizens’ civil liberties and other principles that are the cornerstone of the American political
system, the mass public has made an exception in which of the following areas?
a. The prevention of terrorism
b. Immigration policy
c. The prosecution of international drug cartels
d. The prevention of civil conflicts abroad
ANS: A PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Opinions on War and Peace
42. Characteristics of a given population—such as ethnicity, age, religion, and wealth—that are
known to affect foreign policy opinions are also known as ______.
a. microexpressions
b. societal identities
c. demographics
d. group identities
COG: Comprehension
43. Which of the following statements best describes how wealth affects public opinion?
a. Whereas the mass public tends to favor open trade with other countries, more
affluent responders prefer the United States adopt protectionist policies that support
domestic industry.
b. Whereas the mass public tends to favor militant internationalism, more affluent
responders tend to favor cooperative internationalism.
c. Whereas education and religion play a significant role in the formulation of public
opinions of foreign policy, there are only minor fluctuations in attitudes among
different income levels.
d. Whereas the mass public tends to favor cooperative internationalism, more affluent
responders tend to favor militant internationalism.
COG: Comprehension
COMPLETION
44. The first president to establish an institution of polling and gauging public opinion about the
White House was ________.
ANS: John F. Kennedy
PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

45. Foreign policy scholars are interested in both the _________ of public opinion and the
__________ of public opinion on decision-makers.
ANS: sources; effects
PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Chapter Introduction

46. The _________________ of war suggests that presidents may provoke conflicts in order to
boost their approval ratings.
ANS: diversionary theory
PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Rallying around the Flag after 9/11
47. Of all of the different social identities, ___________ and _________ are the most closely
linked, and both have a clear impact on Americans’ foreign policy preferences.
ANS: education; wealth
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Social Identities: Education, Wealth, and Religion
48. Higher levels of support for George W. Bush’s foreign policy from regular churchgoers than
those who go to church less frequently is an example of the _____________ in public opinion.
ANS: divine divide
PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

49. The historic debate about the role of political leadership in democratic governance is related
directly to the two primary bodies of international relations theory: __________ and
____________.
ANS: realism; liberalism
PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

50. ____________ believe citizens may be competent to participate in matters of local governance
but not in foreign policy matters (which are more removed from their daily lives); thus, public
opinion should not be relied on for the formulation of foreign policy.
ANS: Realists
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

51. ___________ have a positive view of the public’s role in foreign policy and argue that foreign
decision-makers should closely follow the reason and judgment of the mass public.
ANS: Liberals

52. _______________ emphasizes coercive measures—including the use of force—over

diplomacy and other peaceful means of statecraft.
ANS: Militant internationalism
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

53. ______________ emphasizes diplomacy and multilateral collaboration rather than military
confrontation.
ANS: Cooperative internationalism

54. When ordinary citizens lack knowledge about a particular U.S. foreign policy, they rely on
_________ from opinion leaders that are often misleading or simply false.
ANS: cues
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

55. The idea that men and women differ in their opinions of U.S. foreign policy is known as the
_______________.
ANS: gender gap
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Physical Identities: Gender, Race, and Generation
SHORT ANSWER
56. What are two of the paradoxes involving public opinion and U.S. foreign policy?
ANS:
Answers should explain that the United States has a large society and access to government
decision-making, but the public is generally not knowledgeable regarding world politics and
global affairs. Another answer could discuss how the public favors an active role for the United
States in world politics, but the public’s focus and major concerns rest with local and domestic
affairs.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium

REF: Chapter Introduction, Democracy and the Paradox of World Power
57. Define and explain the significance of the term public relations presidency.
ANS:
Answers should discuss adjusting the presidency to emphasize communication and
manipulation of public opinion. Answers should address the significance of the president’s and
staff’s greater focus on opinion and mass communication than on governing functions.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Chapter Introduction

58. Identify and explain the Almond–Lippmann consensus.
ANS:
Answers should identify the Almond–Lippmann consensus as the early and dominant theory of
public opinion and U.S. foreign policy. This model emphasizes the volatile, incoherent, and
irrelevant nature of public opinion in terms of U.S. foreign policy.

59. Identify and explain the three categories of individuals that comprise public opinion. Include
which proportion of the public falls into each category.
ANS:
Answers should identify foreign policy elites (1 percent or less of the population), the attentive
public (about 15 percent of the population), and the mass public (the vast majority of citizens)
and also explain the demographics of each group.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Democracy and the Paradox of World Power
60. How do the traditional theories of international relations shape opinions regarding the role of
political leadership in democratic governance?
ANS:
Answers should identify how realists are skeptical of public opinion as a reliable guide to
foreign policy and thus support the trustee model of representation, whereas liberal theories
argue in favor of close adherence to public opinion and support the delegate model of
representation.

61. How did the public’s core beliefs regarding the U.S. use of force affect support for military
interventions in the post–Cold War period?
ANS:
Answers should identify how one of the public’s core beliefs—that U.S. power should be
applied only to repel clear threats to vital national interests—produced support for military
intervention in some situations and calls for restraint in others. Examples of support may
include the Persian Gulf war and the war in Afghanistan. Examples of opposition may include
Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia, and Iraq.

62. Identify and explain the difference between militant internationalism and cooperative
internationalism.
ANS:
Answers should identify militant internationalism as a form of activism in foreign policy that
emphasizes coercive measures (including the use of force) over diplomacy and other peaceful
means of statecraft. Answers should identify cooperative internationalism as a form of activism
that emphasizes diplomacy and multilateral collaboration rather than military confrontation.

63. Identify and explain how cultural detachment affects mass public opinion.
ANS:
Answers should identify how cultural detachment in the United States stems from its
geographic distance from other major powers and ideas regarding American exceptionalism.
Answers should also identify how this detachment has led to major deficiencies in
understanding global events and foreign policy issues in the mass public.
PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

OBJ: 7.2 COG: Application | Analysis
64. Identify the diversionary theory of war.

ANS:
Answers should identify the diversionary theory of war as a possible cause of war in which
political leaders provoke armed conflicts to divert public attention from domestic problems or
to boost their public approval ratings.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Rallying around the Flag after 9/11
65. How do physical identities—such as gender, race, and generation—affect the formation of
public opinion in foreign policy?
ANS:
Answers should identify how physical identities serve as a strong foundation for group
identities, which play a role in public opinion formation. Answers should also identify how
these identities have varying degrees of influence, with generation having a smaller impact than
gender or race.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Physical Identities: Gender, Race, and Generation
66. How do social identities—such as education, wealth, and religion—affect the formation of
ANS:
Answers should identify how social identities serve as a strong foundation for group identities,
which play a role in public opinion formation. Answers should also identify how these identities
have varying degrees of influence, with education and wealth being very important. Answers
may also identify the role of religion in relation to the divine divide, or the phenomenon that
occurs between foreign policy opinions and church attendance.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Social Identities: Education, Wealth, and Religion
67. How do political identities—such as ideology and political party—affect the formation of
ANS:
Answers should identify how political identities serve as a strong foundation for group
identities, which play a role in public opinion formation. Answers should also identify how
these basic attitudes tend to be stable over time and serve as a basis for future opinions.
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Political Identities: Ideology and Political Party
ESSAY
68. Compare and contrast the delegate and trustee models as they relate to the public’s role in U.S.
foreign policy.
ANS:
Answers should identify the delegate model as one in which politicians and officials make
decisions based on the preferences of the majority of their constituents. The trustee model, on
the other hand, should be identified as one in which officials make decisions based on their own
knowledge and experience; this model is based on the legitimacy given to officials by the voting
public. Answers could connect the models to theories of international relations (i.e., the
delegate model relates to liberalism and the trustee model to realism).

69. Explain and discuss the significance of the Vietnam Syndrome. Relate the Vietnam Syndrome
to a current or recent foreign policy situation. Does this concept help to explain public opinion
concerning the current or recent situation? Why or why not?
ANS:
Answers should describe the Vietnam Syndrome as the American public’s reaction to
casualties, news coverage, a corrupt administration, and the long war in Vietnam. Answers
should explain that the Vietnam Syndrome is the public’s general belief that the United States
should not get involved militarily in global affairs unless it is absolutely necessary. Current
examples that could be included in answers as public opinion constraints on foreign policy and
military interventions are Haiti and Kosovo in the 1990s and Iraq in 2003 to 2004.

70. Discuss the concept of the “rally-around-the-flag effect.” Does it apply to President Bush and
the war on terrorism?
ANS:
Answers should explain that public approval ratings tend to rise and spike in favor of the
president during a crisis and give as an example the spike in public approval for President Bush
following the September 11 attacks: President Bush’s approval rating went from the mid-fifties
to the nineties, the highest level for any president. Answers could also discuss the tendency of
other government officials and the news media not to critique the president during crisis
situations. Answers could also explain that presidential approval ratings tend to begin declining
in the middle of the crisis and conflict situation.

71. Identify and explain the difference between militant internationalism and cooperative
internationalism. How do these concepts align with traditional theories of international
relations? Do these perspectives represent larger trends in public opinion?
ANS:
Answers should identify militant internationalism, aligned with realism, as a form of activism
in foreign policy that emphasizes coercive measures, including the use of force, over diplomacy
and other peaceful means of statecraft. Answers should identify cooperative internationalism,
aligned with liberalism, as a form of activism that emphasizes diplomacy and multilateral
collaboration rather than military confrontation. Answers should also identify how militant and
cooperative internationalism represents a more subtle difference in the level of international
trust felt by individuals and explain the consequences of a lack of international trust by the
majority of Americans.

72. What is the “knowledge gap” in U.S. foreign policy? How does this gap impact public opinion
on foreign policy issues? What roles do the U.S. educational system and policy elites play in
widening or narrowing the gap?
ANS:
Answers should identify the knowledge gap as the common understanding that American
citizens are largely detached from politics, lacking both extensive knowledge of and interest in
government at any level. Answers should also identify that the gap shapes and leads citizens to
form opinions based on inaccurate or incomplete information. Answers should acknowledge
the ongoing difficulties within the educational system that are widening the information gap.
Answers should also acknowledge how citizens end up relying on elites for “cues” to form their
opinions, thus widening the gap further and preventing necessary scrutiny from being cast on
legislators’ actions.

73. How do attitudes regarding U.S. foreign aid reflect the knowledge gap in U.S. foreign policy?
How do these attitudes shape the behavior of members of Congress? Does this impact the
foreign policy bureaucracy?
ANS:
Answers should discuss how, due to the knowledge gap, the mass public tends to overestimate
the amount of money budgeted for U.S. foreign aid. This leads voters to believe the United
States is spending “too much” on foreign aid and demand the money be reallocated to domestic
causes. Because members of Congress are highly subject to electoral factors (Chapter 5), they
incorrectly assume voters prefer unilateralism. Examples of how this affects the foreign policy
bureaucracy will vary but may address how Congress may choose to defund certain foreign
policy agencies (Chapter 6).

74. How did public opinion of U.S. foreign policy change from the Clinton, Bush, and Obama
administrations? In what ways did foreign policy impact presidential approval ratings and
presidential behavior?
ANS:
Answers should identify how public opinion of the Clinton administration’s performance on
foreign policy issues was low, but presidential approval ratings remained high. In addition,
answers should identify the ways in which Clinton seemingly made foreign policy decisions
based on public opinion. Responses should identify high evaluations of Bush’s foreign policy
after the 9/11 attacks and acknowledge how it dropped in responses to the Iraq war and
mishandling of foreign affairs. Answers should also acknowledge how Bush sometimes
seemingly ignored public opinion (such as when he decided to invade Iraq without a UN
Security Council Resolution). Lastly, answers should identify how public opinion reflects that
many citizens feel the Obama administration has been too passive on foreign policy crises and
how presidential approval ratings have decreased over his term. Answers may identify cases
such as Syria as reflections of how public opinion may have impacted Obama’s
decision-making.
PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: Multiple sections

75. How has public opinion on U.S. foreign policy issues evolved during the Obama
administration? What evidence, if any, indicated that the Obama administration considered
public attitudes and/or changed its actions as a response to public opinion?
ANS:
Answers should detail how, over the course of the Obama administration, public opinion of
U.S. foreign policy issues has fallen, with many citizens believing that Obama was too passive
on foreign policy crises such as the Islamic State. Answers may identify cases such as the U.S.
withdrawal of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan as reflections of how public opinion may have
impacted Obama’s decision-making.
PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: The Onset of War Fatigue

76. What role does global public opinion play in U.S. foreign policy decision-making and
American policy makers’ interactions with other countries? What observable trends exist in
post–Cold War global opinion?
ANS:
Answers should acknowledge how U.S. policy makers pay attention to global public opinion
and try to rally support for their policies and actions abroad. Answers should also acknowledge
the growing impact of public opinion, stemming from several sources: the advance of
information technologies, the widespread growth of civil societies in response to democratic
reforms, and the wider array of issues and problems that cross national borders. Answers
regarding observable trends in the post-Cold War period may vary but include relatively
favorable views of the United States in the first ten years after the war, followed by rising
anti-Americanism during the Iraq war due to the U.S. penchant for favoring military over
diplomatic solutions and unwillingness to consider the perspectives of other countries. Recent
trends indicated more favorable opinions in some regions (Western Europe, for example) but
remained low in others (Middle East and North Africa, for example).
PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Multiple sections

77. Describe the three main types of group identities examined in the text, providing examples of
each. Are some of these characteristics more influential on foreign policy opinions than others?
Why is it important to understand the demographics of public opinion?
ANS:
Answers should identify and describe physical traits (such as gender, age, and race), social
associations (such as education, wealth, and religion), and belief systems (including ideology
and political party). Answers regarding the importance of understanding demographics will
vary but should acknowledge how these demographics allow policy makers to make reliable
predictions about different groups on a variety of foreign policy issues.

78. In what ways does public opinion on foreign policy after the Cold War support or contradict the
idea that the mass public is inconsistent? Be specific in your answer and provide examples if
appropriate.
ANS:
Answers will vary widely but should trace the evolution of public opinion since the end of the
Cold War during the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations. Answers may also draw on the
literature regarding group identities to establish the ways in which people form opinions that
remain consistent over time.
PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: Multiple sections

79. How does contemporary research on public opinion and foreign policy support or contradict the
Almond–Lippmann consensus? Be sure to identify the principle assumptions of the Almond–
Lippmann consensus in your answer.
ANS:
Answers should identify the Almond–Lippmann consensus as a dominant theory of public
opinion and U.S. foreign policy that emphasizes the volatile, incoherent, and irrelevant nature
of public opinion in terms of U.S. foreign policy. Answers should also address how recent
contemporary research contradicts or challenges the fundamental assumptions of the Almond–
Lippmann consensus and provide examples of this research as appropriate.

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Whatever outward respect Charles may have voluntarily offered to
the prejudices and observances of Spanish ceremony, he, and
perhaps the blushing Infanta, thought it very cumbersome love-work
for young hearts. Words had passed between them, it is true, but
only through the medium of an interpreter, and always in the
presence of the king, for Philip “sat hard by, to overhear all,” and
understand if he could, the interpretations made by Lord Bristol.
Weary of this restraint, the prince soon found means, or rather an
opportunity, to break through the pompous obstacles which opposed
the good old plan of love-making, and he, with Endymion Porter to
attend him, did not fail to profit by the occasion. Near the city, but
across the river, the king had a summer-house, called Casa di
Campo. Charles discovered that the Infanta was accustomed to go
very often of a morning to gather May-dew. The knight and esquire,
accordingly, donning a silken suit for a spring morning, went out
betimes, and arrived without let or hindrance at the Casa di Campo.
Their quality was a sure passport, and doors, immovably closed to
all others, opened to them. They passed through the house into the
garden, but to their wonder and disappointment, the “light of love”
was not visible. The Infanta had not arrived, or had fled, and
disappointment seemed likely to be the probable reward of their
labor. The garden was divided from an adjoining orchard by a high
wall; the prince heard voices on the other side, perhaps heard the
voice, and hastened to a door which formed the only communication
of the two divisions. To try this outlet was the work of a moment; to
find it most vexatiously locked, was the conviction of the next. The
lover was at bay, and Endymion’s confused brain had no resource to
suggest. They looked at the wall. It was high, undoubtedly; but was
ever such a barrier too high for a king’s son—a knight and a gallant,
when it stood between him and such a “star” as the muse of De
Vega made of the Infanta? Charles was on the summit of the wall
almost as soon as the thought of climbing it had first struck him; with
the same eagerness he sprang lightly down on the other side, and
hastily made toward the object of his temerity. Unfortunately there
was an old “duenna” of a marquis with her in quality of guardian, and
the Infanta, who perchance expected to see the intruder, was
constrained, for the sake of appearances, to scream with well-
dissembled terror. “She gave a shriek and ran back.” Charles
followed, but the grim marquis interfered his unwelcome person
between the lovers. “Turning to the prince, he fell on his knees,
conjuring his highness to retire;” he swore by his head, that if he
admitted the prince to the company of the Infanta, he, the grisly
guardian of the dove, might pay for it with his head. As the lady,
meanwhile, had fled, and did not return, Charles was not obdurate.
Maria, though she had escaped (because seen) could not but be
pleased with the proof he had given of his devotion, and as the old
marquis continued to talk of his head, the prince, whose business lay
more with the heart, turned round and walked slowly away. He
advanced toward the door, the portal was thrown open, and thus, as
Mr. Howell pithily says, “he came out under that wall over which he
had got in.” Endymion was waiting for him, and perhaps for his story,
but the knight was sad, and his squire solemn. Charles looked an
embodying of the idea of gloom, and Master Porter, with some ill-will,
was compelled to observe a respectful silence.
The Infanta and her governor hurried back to the palace, while her
suitor and his followers were left to rail in their thoughts against the
caprice of the ladies, and the reserve of royal masters; and so ends
a pretty story of “how a princess went to gather May-dew.”
This solitary and unsuccessful love-passage was the last effort which
Charles made to engage the good-will of Maria. He, at once, retired
to his apartments in the palace; whence he seldom went abroad,
except for the purpose of attending a bull-fight. Buckingham was sick
a-bed, his offended nobility lay ill-disposed at court, and the palace
residence was gradually becoming irksome to all parties. Charles
could only have bedchamber prayers, and not possessing a room
where he might have attended the service of his own church, the
sacred plate and vestments he had brought over were never used.
Moreover, the Knights of the Garter, Lords Carlisle and Denbigh, had
well nigh set the palace on fire, through leaving their lighted pipes in
a summer-house. The threatened mischief, however, was prevented
by the activity of Master Davies, my Lord of Carlisle’s barber, who
“leapt down a great height and quenched it.” Perhaps a more
unfortunate accident than this, in the eyes of a Catholic population,
was a brawl within the royal precinct between Ballard, an English
priest, and an English knight, Sir Edmund Varney. The prince had a
page named Washington, lying mortally ill; to save his soul the
anxious priest hastened to the death-bed of the page; here, however,
he met Sir Edmund, an unflinching pillar of the English church. An
unseemly scene ensued; and while knight and priest passed from
words to blows, the poor suffering page silently died, and soon after
was consigned to the earth under a fig-tree in Lord Bristol’s Garden.
In the meantime, the Princess Infanta was publicly addressed as
Princess of Wales, and as an acquaintance with the English
language was a possession much to be desired by the bearer of so
proud a title, the Lady Maria began “her accidence,” and turned her
mind to harsh declensions and barbarous conjugations. Though
enthusiasm had somewhat cooled, the business continued to
proceed; the most serious interruption was occasioned by the death
of the Pontiff, as it entailed many of the ensuing obstacles which at
once began to rise. The unfinished work of Gregory was thought to
require a da capo movement from his successor Urban, and the new
Hierarch commenced a string of objections and proposals, which
were of no other effect than to produce mistrust and delay.
Buckingham too, recovering from his sickness, longed to return to
England, where it was now understood that the Pope’s tardiness was
founded on hopes of the prince’s conversion. The people of England
were alarmed and clamorous. Charles and the duke discontented
and impatient. The latter urged a return, and the prince, in
expressing his wishes to Philip, stated as his reasons, his father’s
age and infirmities, the murmurs of his people, and the fact that a
fleet was at sea to meet him. He added, a most close argument, that
the articles which had been signed in England bore, as a proviso,
that if he did not return by a specified month, they should be of no
validity. It honorably belied the suspicions against the Spanish
Cabinet, that not the slightest opposition was made to the return;
proxies were named, and on the termination of affairs with the Pope,
Maria was to follow Charles to England. The lady is said to have
remarked, that if she was not worth waiting for she was not worth
having. Charles must have felt the remark, but the duke was
paramount, and the wind, which favored their departure, as speedily
blew away the popularity of a prince whose knightly bearing, modest
gallantry, and high virtues, so particularly formed him for the favorite
of a romantic nation. The treaty for the Spanish match was broken.
The secret history of the French match possesses an equal interest
with that of the Spanish; but Charles only wrote to his bride on this
occasion, and met her, on her way to him, at Canterbury.
As a further instance of the chivalrous gallantry of Charles I., it
deserves to be recorded, that he it was who suggested a revival of
the custom of inviting the ladies to participate in the honors of the
Garter. I have elsewhere said, that at one time, the ladies were
regularly admitted, but nothing is known as to when this gallant
custom was first introduced. Dr. Barrington, in his excellent “Lectures
on Heraldry,” says, that “in the earliest notice of the habit of the order
having been issued to the ladies, immediately after the accession of
Richard II.,” they are said to have been “newly received into the
Society of the Garter,” and were afterward called “Ladies of the
Fraternity of St. George.” Who were admitted to this distinguished
order, or how long the practice continued, does not appear, though it
is probable it had fallen into disuse in the time of Henry VIII. Charles
remained content with merely suggesting the revival of the custom,
and “nothing,” says Dr. Barrington, “seems to have been done to
carry this suggestion into effect. If any one period,”—adds the doctor,
most appropriately—“if any one period were more fit than another for
doing it, it must surely be the present, when a lady is the sovereign
of the order.”
THE KINGS OF ENGLAND AS KNIGHTS.
FROM STUART TO BRUNSWICK.
Charles II. loved the paraphernalia of courts and chivalry. He

even designed to create two new orders of knighthood—namely “the
Knights of the Sea,” a naval order for the encouragement of the sea-
service; and “the Knights of the Royal Oak,” in memory of his
deliverance, and for the reward of civil merit. He never went much
farther than the intention. He adopted the first idea at another’s
suggestion, and straightway thought no more of it. The second
originated with himself, and a list of persons was made out, on which
figured the names of the intended knights. The matter never went
further.
At Charles’s coronation, the knights of the Bath were peculiarly
distinguished for their splendor. They were almost too gorgeously
attired to serve as waiters, and carry up, as they did the first course
to the king’s own table, at the coronation banquet, after a knight of
the Garter had been to the kitchen and had eaten a bit of the first
dish that was to be placed before his Sacred Majesty.
If the king was fond of show, some at least of his knights, shared in
the same feeling of vanity. The robes in recent times were worn only
on occasions of ceremony and service. The king revived a fashion
which his knights followed, and which sober people (who were not
knights) called a ridiculous humor. They were “so proud of their
coats,” as the expression went, that they not only wore them at
home, but went about in them, and even rode about the park with
them on. Mr. Pepys is particularly indignant on this matter especially
so, when told that the Duke of Monmouth and Lord Oxford were
seen, “in a hackney-coach, with two footmen in the park with their
robes on; which,” adds the censor, “is a most scandalous thing, so
as all gravity may be said to be lost, among us.” There was more
danger of what Pepys calls “gravity” being lost, when the Order, at
command of the Sovereign head, elected such men as the Elector of
Saxony, who had no other distinction but that of being a good
drinker.
I do not know what the rule now may be in St. George’s Chapel, but
in the reign of Charles II., a singular regulation is noticed by Pepys.
He went in good company to the royal chapel, where he was placed,
by Dr. Childe, the organist, “among the knights’ stalls, and pretty the
observation,” he adds, “that no man, but a woman, may sit in a
knight’s place, where any brass plates are set.” What follows is also,
in some degree, germane to our purpose. “Hither come cushions to
us, and a young singing boy to bring us a copy of the anthem to be
sung. And here, for our sakes, had this anthem and the great service
sung extraordinary, only to entertain us. Great bowing by all the
people, the poor knights particularly, toward the altar.”
Charles II. was the first monarch who allowed the Knights of the
Garter to wear, as at present, the star of the order on the breast of
the coat. Our present queen has renewed in her gracious person,
the custom that was once observed, if we may believe Ashmole, by
the ladies, that is, the wives of Knights of the Garter—namely, of
wearing the symbol of the order as a jewelled badge, or a bracelet,
on the arm. This is in better taste than the mode adopted by Lady
Castlereagh, at the gay doings attendant upon the sitting of the
Congress of Vienna; where the noble lady in question appeared at
court with her husband’s jewelled garter, as a bandeau, round her
forehead!
James II. has had not merely his apologists but his defenders. He
had far more of the knightly character than is commonly supposed.
For a long time he labored under the disadvantage of being
represented, in England, by historians only of the Orange faction.
Poor Richard the Third has suffered by a similar misfortune. He was
wicked enough, but he was not the monster described by the Tudor
historians and dramatists.
James, in his youth, had as daring and as crafty a spirit as ever
distinguished the most audacious of pages. The tact by the
employment of which he successfully made his escape from the
republican guards who kept him imprisoned at St. James’s, would
alone be sufficient proof of this. When Duke of York, he had the
compliment paid to him by Condé, that if ever there was a man
without fear it was he. Under Turenne he earned a reputation of
which any knight might be proud; and in the service of Spain, he won
praise for courage, from leaders whose bravery was a theme for
eulogy in every mouth.
Partisans, not of his own faction, have censured his going publicly to
mass soon after his accession; but it must be remembered that the
Knights of the Garter, in the collar of their order, complacently
accompanied him, and that the Duke of Norfolk was the only knight
who left him at the door of the chapel.
He had little of the knight in him in his method of love, if one may so
speak. He cared little for beauty; so little, that his brother Charles
remarked that he believed James selected his mistresses by way of
penance. He was coarsely minded, and neither practised fidelity nor
expected it in others. Whatever he may have been in battle, there
was little of the refinement of chivalry about him in the bower. It was
said of Louis XIV. and his successor, that if they were outrageously
unfaithful to their consorts, they never failed to treat them with the
greatest politeness. James lacked even this little remnant of
chivalrous feeling; and he was barely courteous to his consort till
adversity taught him the worth of Mary of Modena.
He was arrogant in prosperity, but the slightest check dreadfully
depressed him, and it is hardly necessary to say that he who is
easily elated or easily depressed, has little in him of the hero. His
conduct when his throne was menaced was that of a poor craven. It
had not about it the dignity of even a decent submission. He rose
again, however, to the heroic when he attempted to recover his
kingdom, and took the field for that purpose. This conduct has been
alluded to by a zealous and impartial writer in the “Gentleman’s
Magazine,” for November, 1855. “After the battle of the Boyne,” he
says, “the Orange party circulated the story that James had acted in
the most cowardly manner, and fled from the field before the issue
was decided. Not only was this, in a very short time believed, but
even sensible historians adopted it, and it came down to us as an
historical fact. Now in the secret archives of France there are several
letters which passed between Queen Mary and the Earl of
Tyrconnel, and these together with some of the secret papers,
dispose at once of the whole story. It has now been placed beyond a
doubt, that the king was forced from the field. Even when the day
was lost and the Dutch veterans had routed the half-armed and
undisciplined Irish, James rallied a part of the French troops, and
was leading them on, when Tyrconnel and Lauzun interposed,
pointed out the madness of the attempt, and seizing the reins of his
horse, compelled him to retreat.”
This is perhaps proving a little too much, for if the day was lost, it
was not bravery, but rashness, that sought to regain it; and it is the
first merit of a knight, the great merit of a general, to discern when
blood may be spilled to advantage. As for the archives in France,
one would like to know upon what authority the papers preserved
there make their assertions. Documents are exceedingly valuable to
historians, but they are not always trustworthy. The archives of
France may contain Canrobert’s letter explaining how he was
compelled to put constraint upon the bravery of Prince Napoleon,
and send him home, in consequence of severe indisposition. And yet
the popular voice has since applied a very uncomplimentary
surname to the Prince—quite as severe, but not so unsavory, as that
which the people of Drogheda still apply to James. In either case
there is considerable uncertainty. I am inclined to believe the best of
both of these illustrious personages, but seeing that the uncertainty
is great, I am not sure that Scarron was wrong when he said that the
best way of writing history was by writing epigrams, pointed so as to
prick everybody.
Cottington (Stafford’s Letters) tells us of a domestic trouble in which
James was concerned with one of his knights. The king’s perplexities
about religion began early. “The nurse is a Roman Catholic, to whom
Sir John Tunston offered the oath of allegiance, and she refused it;
whereupon there grew a great noise both in the town and court; and
the queen afflicted herself with extreme passion upon knowledge of
a resolution to change the woman. Yet after much tampering with the
nurse to convert her, she was let alone, to quiet the queen.” The
dissension is said to have so troubled the nurse, as also to have
injured the child, and never had knight or king more difficult task than
James, in his desire to please all parties.
It was one of the characteristics of a knight to bear adversity without
repining; and if Dodd may be believed, James II. was distinguished
for this great moral courage in his adversity. The passage in Dodd’s
Church History is worth extracting, though somewhat long: “James
was never once heard to repine at his misfortune. He willingly heard
read the scurrilous pamphlets that were daily published in England
against him. If at any time he showed himself touched, it was to hear
of the misfortunes of those gentlemen who suffered on his account.
He would often entertain those about him with the disorders of his
youth, but it was with a public detestation of them, and an
admonition to others not to follow his example. The very newspapers
were to him a lesson of morality; and the daily occurrences, both in
the field and the cabinet, were looked upon by him, not as the result
of second causes, but as providential measures to chastise both
nations and private persons, according to their deserts. He would
sometimes say that the exalted state of a king was attended with this
great misfortune, that he lived out of the reach of reproof, and
mentioned himself as an example. He read daily a chapter in the
Bible, and another in that excellent book, ‘The Following of Christ.’ In
his last illness he publicly forgave all his enemies, and several of
them by name, especially the Prince of Orange, whom he
acknowledged to be his greatest friend, as being the person whom
Providence had made use of to scourge him and humble him in the
manner he had done, in order to save his soul.” As something very
nearly approaching to reality, this is more pleasing than the details of
dying knights in romance, who after hacking at one another for an
hour, mutually compliment each other’s courage, and die in the
happiest frame of mind possible. Some one speaking of this king,
and of Innocent II., made an apt remark, worth the quoting; namely,
that “he wished for the peace of mankind that the pope had turned
papist, and the king of England, protestant!” How far the latter was
from this desired consummation is wittily expressed in the epitaph on
James, made by one of the poet-chevaliers, or, as some say, by one
of the abbés who used to lounge about the terrace of St. Germains.
“C’est ici que Jacques Second,
Sans ministres et sans maitresses,
Le matin allait à la messe,
Et le soir allait au sermon.”
I have noticed, in a previous page, the very scant courtesy which the
queen of Charles I. met with at the hands of a Commonwealth
admiral. The courtesy of some of the Stuart knights toward royal
ladies was not, however, of a much more gallant aspect. I will
illustrate this by an anecdote told by M. Macaulay in the fourth
volume of his history. The spirit of the Jacobites in William’s reign
had been excited by the news of the fall of Mons.... “In the parks the
malcontents wore their biggest looks, and talked sedition in their
loudest tones. The most conspicuous among these swaggerers was
Sir John Fenwick, who had in the late reign been high in favor and
military command, and was now an indefatigable agitator and
conspirator. In his exaltation he forgot the courtesy which man owes
to woman. He had more than once made himself conspicuous by his
impertinence to the queen. He now ostentatiously put himself in her
way when she took her airing, and while all around him uncovered
and bowed low, gave her a rude stare, and cocked his hat in her
face. The affront was not only brutal but cowardly. For the law had
provided no punishment for mere impertinence, however gross; and
the king was the only gentleman and soldier in the kingdom who
could not protect his wife from contumely with his sword. All that the
queen could do was to order the park-keepers not to admit Sir John
again within the gates. But long after her death a day came when he
had reason to wish that he had restrained his insolence. He found,
by terrible proof, that of all the Jacobites, the most desperate
assassins not excepted, he was the only one for whom William felt
an intense personal aversion.”
The portrait of William III. as drawn by Burnet, does not wear any
very strong resemblance to a hero. The “Roman nose and bright
sparkling eyes,” are the most striking features, but the “countenance
composed of gravity and authority,” has more of the magistrate than
the man at arms. Nevertheless, and in despite of his being always
asthmatical, with lungs oppressed by the dregs of small-pox, and the
slow and “disgusting dryness” of his speech, there was something
chivalrous in the character of William. In “the day of battle he was all
fire, though without passion; he was then everywhere, and looked to
everything. His genius,” says Burnet in another paragraph, “lay
chiefly in war, in which his courage was more admired than his
conduct. Great errors were often committed by him; but his heroical
courage set things right, as it inflamed those who were about him.” In
connection with this part of his character may be noticed the fact that
he procured a parliamentary sanction for the establishment of a
standing army. His character, in other respects, is not badly
illustrated by a remark which he made, when Prince of Orange, to Sir
W. Temple, touching Charles II. “Was ever anything so hot and so
cold as this court of yours? Will the king, who is so often at sea,
never learn the word that I shall never forget, since my last passage,
when in a great storm the captain was crying out to the man at the
helm, all night, ‘Steady, steady, steady!’” He was the first of our kings
who would not touch for the evil. He would leave the working of all
miracles, he said, to God alone. The half-chivalrous, half-religious,
custom of washing the feet of the poor on Maundy Thursday, was
also discontinued by this prince, the last of the heroic five Princes of
Orange.
Great as William was in battle, he perhaps never exhibited more of
the true quality of bravery than when on his voyage to Holland in
1691, he left the fleet, commanded by Sir Cloudesley Shovel and Sir
George Rooke, and in the midst of a thick fog attempted, with some
noblemen of his retinue, to land in an open boat. “The danger,” says
Mr. Macaulay, who may be said to have painted the incident in a few
words, “proved more serious than they had expected.” It had been
supposed that in an hour the party would be on shore. But great
masses of floating ice impeded the progress of the skiff; the night
came on, the fog grew thicker, the waves broke over the king and the
courtiers. Once the keel struck on a sandbank, and was with great
difficulty got off. The hardiest mariners showed some signs of
uneasiness, but William through the whole night was as composed
as if he had been in the drawing-room at Kensington. “For shame,”
he said to one of the dismayed sailors, “are you afraid to die in my
company?” The vehis Cæsarem was, certainly, not finer than this.
The consort of Queen Anne was of a less chivalrous spirit than
William. Coxe says of him, that even in the battle-field he did not
forget the dinner-hour, and he appears to have had more stomach
for feeding than fighting. Of George I., the best that can be said of
him in his knightly capacity, has been said of him, by Smollet, in the
remark, that this prince was a circumspect general. He did not,
however, lack either courage or impetuosity. He may have learned
circumspection under William of Orange. Courage was the common
possession of all the Brunswick princes. Of some of them, it formed
the solitary virtue. But of George I., whom it was the fashion of poets,
aspiring to the laureatship, to call the great, it can not be said, as
was remarked of Philip IV. of Spain, when he took the title of “Great,”
“He has become great, as a ditch becomes great, by losing the land
which belonged to it.”
One more custom of chivalry observed in this reign, went finally out
in that of George II. I allude to the custom of giving hostages.
According to the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, “two persons of rank were
to reside in France, in that capacity, as sureties to France that Great
Britain should restore certain of its conquests in America and the
West Indies.” The “Chevalier,” Prince Charles Edward, accounted
this as a great indignity to England, and one which, he said, he
would not have suffered if he had been in possession of his rights.
The age of chivalry, in the old-fashioned sense of the word, went out
before Burke pronounced it as having departed. I do not think it
survived till the reign of George II. In that reign chivalry was defunct,
but there was an exclusive class, whose numbers arrogated to
themselves that nice sense of honor which was supposed, in olden
times, to have especially distinguished the knight. The people
alluded to were par excellence, the people of “fashion.” The
gentlemen who guarded, or who were supposed to guard, the
brightest principle of chivalry, were self-styled rather than universally
acknowledged, “men of honor.”
The man of honor has been painted by “one of themselves.” The
Earl of Chesterfield spoke with connoissance de fait, when he
treated of the theme; and his lordship, whose complacency on this
occasion, does not permit him to see that his wit is pointed against
himself, tells a story without the slightest recollection of the pithy
saying of the old bard, “De te fabula narratur.”
“A man of honor,” says Lord Chesterfield, “is one who peremptorily
affirms himself to be so, and who will cut anybody’s throat that
questions it, even upon the best grounds. He is infinitely above the
restraints which the laws of God or man lay upon vulgar minds, and
knows no other ties but those of honor, of which word he is to be the
sole expounder. He must strictly advocate a party denomination,
though he may be utterly regardless of its principles. His expense
should exceed his income considerably, not for the necessaries, but
for the superfluities of life, that the debts he contracts may do him
honor. There should be a haughtiness and insolence in his
deportment, which is supposed to result from conscious honor. If he
be choleric and wrong-headed into the bargain, with a good deal of
animal courage, he acquires the glorious character of a man of
honor; and if all these qualifications are duly seasoned with the
genteelest vices, the man of honor is complete; anything his wife,
children, servants, or tradesmen, may think to the contrary,
notwithstanding.”
Lord Chesterfield goes on to exemplify the then modern chivalrous
guardian of honor, by drawing the portrait of a friend under an
assumed name. He paints a certain “Belville” of whom his male
friends are proud, his female friends fond, and in whom his party
glories as a living example—frequently making that example the
authority for their own conduct. He has lost a fortune by
extravagance and gambling; he is uneasy only as to how his honor is
to be intact by acquitting his liabilities from “play.” He must raise
money at any price, for, as he says, “I would rather suffer the
greatest incumbrance upon my fortune, than the least blemish upon
my honor.” His privilege as a peer will preserve him from those
“clamorous rascals, the tradesmen”; and lest he should not be able
to get money by any other means, to pay his “debts of honor,” he
writes to the prime minister and offers to sell his vote and conscience
for the consideration of fifteen hundred pounds. He exacts his money
before he records his vote, persuaded as he is that the minister will
not be the first person that ever questioned the honor of the
chivalrous Belville.
The modern knight has, of course, a lady love. The latter is as much
like Guinever, of good King Arthur’s time, as can well be; and she
has a husband who is more suspicious and jealous than the founder
of the chivalrous Round Table. “Belville” can not imagine how the
lady’s husband can be suspicious, for he and Belville have been
play-fellows, school-fellows, and sworn friends in manhood.
Consequently, Belville thinks that wrong may be committed in all
confidence and security. “However,” he writes to the lady, “be
convinced that you are in the hands of a man of honor, who will not
suffer you to be ill-used, and should my friend proceed to any
disagreeable extremities with you, depend upon it, I will cut the c
——’s throat for him.”
Life in love, so in lying. He writes to an acquaintance that he had
“told a d——d lie last night in a mixed company,” and had challenged
a “formal old dog,” who had insinuated that “Belville” had violated the
truth. The latter requests his “dear Charles” to be his second—“the
booby,” he writes of the adversary who had detected him in a lie,
“was hardly worth my resentment, but you know my delicacy where
honor is concerned.”
Lord Chesterfield wrote more than one paper on the subject of men
of honor. For these I refer the reader to his lordship’s works. I will
quote no further from them than to show a distinction, which the
author draws with some ingenuity. “I must observe,” he says, “that
there is a great difference between a Man of Honor and a Person
of Honor. By Persons of Honor were meant, in the latter part of
the last century, bad authors and poets of noble birth, who were but
just not fools enough to prefix their names in great letters to the
prologues, epilogues, and sometimes even the plays with which they
entertained the public. But now that our nobility are too generous to
interfere in the trade of us poor, professed authors” (his lordship is
writing anonymously, in the World), “or to eclipse our performances
by the distinguished and superior excellency and lustre of theirs; the
meaning at present of a Person of Honor is reduced to the simple
idea of a Person of Illustrious Birth.”
The chivalrous courage of one of our admirals at the close of the
reign of George II., very naturally excited the admiration of Walpole.
“What milksops,” he writes in 1760, “the Marlboroughs and
Turennes, the Blakes and Van Tromps appear now, who whipped
into winter quarters and into ports the moment their nose looked
blue. Sir Cloudesley Shovel said that an admiral deserved to be
broken who kept great ships out after the end of September; and to
be shot, if after October. There is Hawke in the bay, weathering this
winter (January), after conquering in a storm.”
George III. was king during a longer period than any other sovereign
of England; and the wars and disasters of his reign were more
gigantic than those of any other period. He was little of a soldier
himself; was, however, constitutionally brave; and had his courage
and powers tested by other than military matters. The politics of his
reign wore his spirit more than if he had been engaged in carrying on
operations against an enemy. During the first ten years after his
accession, there were not less than seven administrations; and the
cabinets of Newcastle and Bute, Grenville and Rockingham, Grafton
and North, Shelburne and Portland, were but so many camps, the
leaders in which worried the poor monarch worse than the Greeks
badgered unhappy Agamemnon. Under the administration of Pitt he
was hardly more at his ease, and in no degree more so under that of
Addington, or that of All the Talents, and of Spencer Perceval. An
active life of warfare could not have more worn the spirit and health
of this king than political intrigues did; intrigues, however, be it said,
into which he himself plunged with no inconsiderable delight, and
with slender satisfactory results.
He was fond of the display of knightly ceremonies, and was never
more pleased than when he was arranging the ceremonies of
installation, and turning the simple gentlemen into knights. Of the
sons who succeeded him, George IV. was least like him in good
principle of any sort, while William IV. surpassed him in the
circumstance of his having been in action, where he bore himself
spiritedly. The race indeed has ever been brave, and I do not know
that I can better close the chapter than with an illustration of the
“Battle-cry of Brunswick.”
THE BATTLE-CRY OF BRUNSWICK.
The “Battle-cry of Brunswick” deserves to be commemorated among
the acts of chivalry. Miss Benger, in her “Memoirs of Elizabeth,
Queen of Bohemia,” relates that Christian, Duke of Brunswick, was
touched alike by the deep misfortunes, and the cheerful patience of
that unhappy queen. Indignant at the neglect with which she was
treated by her father, James I. of England, and her uncle, Frederick
of Denmark, Duke Christian “seemed suddenly inspired by a
sentiment of chivalric devotion, as far removed from vulgar gallantry
as heroism from ferocity. Snatching from her hand a glove, which he
first raised with reverence to his lips, he placed it in his Spanish hat,
as a triumphal plume which, for her sake, he ever after wore as a
martial ornament; then drawing his sword he took a solemn oath
never to lay down arms until he should see the King and Queen of
Bohemia reinstated in the Palatinate. No sooner had Christian taken
this engagement than he eagerly proclaimed it to the world, by
substituting on his ensign, instead of his denunciation of priests, an
intelligible invocation to Elizabeth in the words ‘For God and for her!’
Fur Gott und fur sie!”
“Flash swords! fly pennons! helm and shield

Go glittering forth in proud array!
Haste knight and noble to the field,
Your pages wait, your chargers neigh.
Up! gentlemen of Germany!
Who love to be where strife is seen,
For Brunswick leads the fight to-day,
For God and the Queen!
“Let them to-day, for fame who sigh,

And seek the laurels of the brave;
Or they who long, ’ere night, to lie
Within a soldier’s honored grave,
Round Brunswick’s banner take their stand;
’Twill float around the bloody scene,
As long as foeman walks the land,
’Gainst God and the Queen.
“Draw, Barons, whose proud homes are placed

In many a dark and craig-topped tower;
Forward, ye knights, who have been graced
In tourney lists and ladies’ bower.
And be your country’s good the cause
Of all this proud and mortal stir,
While Brunswick his true sabre draws
For God and for her!
“To Him we look for such good aid

As knights may not be shamed to ask,
For vainly drawn would be each blade,
And weakly fitted to its task,
Each lance we wield, did we forget
When loud we raise our battle-cry,
For old Bohemia’s Queen, to set
Our hopes with God on high.”
The original superscription on the banner of Brunswick was the very

energetic line: “Christian of Brunswick, the friend of God and the
enemy of priests.” Naylor, in his “Civil and Military History of
Germany,” says, that the Duke imprinted the same legend on the
money which he had coined out of the plate of which he had
plundered the convents, and he adds, in a note derived from Galetti,
that “the greater part of the money coined by Christian was derived
from twelve silver statues of the apostles, which the bigotry of
preceding ages had consecrated, in the cathedral of Munster.” When
the Duke was accused of impiety by some of his followers, he
sheltered himself under the authority of Scripture; and pretended to
have only realized the ancient precept: “Go hence, into all parts of
the earth!”
Having seen the English Kings as knights, let us look at a few of the
men whom they knighted.
RECIPIENTS OF KNIGHTHOOD.
“The dew of grace bless our new knights to-day.”
Beaumont and Fletcher.
The Conquest was productive of a far more than average quantity

of knights. Indeed, I think it may be asserted without fear of
contradiction, that the first and the last William, and James I. were
more addicted to dubbing knights than any other of our sovereigns.
The good-natured William IV. created them in such profusion that, at
last, gentlemen at the head of deputations appeared in the royal
presence with a mysterious dread lest, in spite of themselves, they
should be compelled to undergo a chivalric metamorphosis, at the
hands of the “sea king.” The honor was so constantly inflicted, that
the recipients were massed together by “John Bull” as “The
Thousand and one (K)nights!”
William the Conqueror was not so lavish in accolades as his
descendant of remoter days, nor was he so off-handed in the way of
administering the distinction. He drew his sword with solemnity, laid it
on the shoulder before him with a sort of majestic composure, and
throughout the ceremony looked as calm as dignity required. William
is said to have ennobled or knighted his cook. He does not stand
alone in having so acted: for, unless I am singularly mistaken, the
great Louis tied some small cross of chivalry to the button-hole of the
immortal Vatel. William’s act, however, undoubtedly gave dignity to
that department in palaces, whence many princes have derived their
only pleasure. It was from him that there passed into the palace of
France the term “Officiers de Service,” a term which has been
appropriated by others of less elevated degree than those whom it
originally served to distinguish. The term has led to a standing joke
in such dwellings. “Qui vive?” exclaims a sentinel in one of the base
passages, as one of these officials draws near at night. “Officier,” is
the reply of the modest official in question. “Quel officier?” asks the
guard. “Officier de service!” proudly answers he who is thus
questioned; whereupon the soldier smilingly utters “Passe, Caramel!”
and the royal officer—not of the body-guard, passes, as smilingly, on
his way.
But, to return from Caramel to the Conqueror, I have to observe, that
the cook whom William knighted bore an unmusical, if not an
unsavory, name. The culinary artist was called Tezelin. The service
by which he had won knighthood consisted in the invention of a
white soup for maigre days. The hungry but orthodox William had
been accustomed to swallow a thin broth “à l’eau de savon;” but
Tezelin placed before him a tureen full of an orthodox yet appetizing
liquid, which he distinguished by the name of Dillegrout. The name is
not promising, particularly the last syllable, but the dish could not
have been a bad one. William created the inventor “chevalier de
l’office,” and Sir Caramel Tezelin was farther gratified by being made
Lord of the Manor of Addington. Many a manor had been the wages
of less honest service.
The Tiercelins are descendants of the Tezelins; and it has often
struck me as curious that of two recently-deceased holders of that
name, one, a cutler in England, was famous for the excellence of his
carving-knives; and the other, an actor in France, used to maintain
that the first of comic parts was the compound cook-coachman in
Molière’s “Avare.” Thus did they seem to prove their descent from
the culinary chivalry of William of Normandy.
But there are other samples of William’s knights to be noticed.
Among the followers who landed with him between Pevensey and
Hastings, was a Robert who, for want of a surname, and because of
his sinews, was called Robert le Fort, or “Strong.” It would have gone
ill with William on the bloody day on which he won a throne, had it
not been for this Robert le Fort, who interposed his escu or shield,
between the skull of the Norman and the battle-axe of a Saxon
warrior. This opportune service made a “Sieur Robert” of him who
rendered it, and on the coat-of-arms awarded to the new knight was
inscribed the device which yet belongs to the Fortescues;—“Forte
Scutum Salus Ducum,”—a strong shield is the salvation of dukes—
or leaders, as the word implies. The Duke of Normandy could not
have devised a more appropriate motto; but he was probably helped
to it by the learning and ready wit of his chaplain.
The danger into which William rushed that day was productive of
dignity to more than one individual. Thus, we hear of a soldier who,
on finding William unhorsed, and his helmet beaten into his face,
remounted his commander after cleverly extricating his head from
the battered load of iron that was about it. William, later in the day,
came upon the trusty squire, fainting from the loss of a leg and a
thigh. “You gave me air when I lacked it,” said the Conqueror, “and
such be, henceforth, thy name; and for thy lost leg and thigh, thou
shalt carry them, from this day, on thy shield of arms.” The maimed
knight was made lord of broad lands in Derbyshire; and his
descendants, the Eyres, still bear a leg and a thigh in armor, for their
crest. It is too pretty a story to lose, but if the account of these knight-
makings be correct, some doubt must be attached to that of the
devices, if, as some assert, armorial bearings were not used until
many years subsequent to the battle of Hastings. The stories are, no
doubt, substantially true. William, like James III. of Scotland, was
addicted to knighting and ennobling any individuals who rendered
him the peculiar pleasures he most coveted. Pitscottie asserts that
the latter king conferred his favors on masons and fiddlers; and we
are told that he not only made a knight of Cochrane, a mason, but
also raised him to the dignity of Earl of Mar. Cochrane, however, was
an architect, but he would have been none the worse had he been a
mason—at least, had he been a man and mason of such quality as
Hugh Millar and Allan Cuningham.
Although it has been often repeated that there were no knights, in
the proper sense of that word, before the period of William the
Conqueror, this must be accepted with such amount of exception as
to be almost equivalent to a denial of the assertion. There were
knights before the Conquest, but the systems differed. Thus we
know from Collier’s Ecclesiastical History that Athelstan was
knighted by Alfred; and this is said to have been the first instance of
the performance of the ceremony that can be discovered. Here
again, however, a question arises. Collier has William of Malmesbury
for his authority. The words of this old author are: “Athelstane’s

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th Edition Hook Test Bank All Chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th Edition Hook Test Bank All Chapters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th Edition Hook Test Bank All Chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of

World Power 5th Edition Hook Test

U S Foreign Policy The Paradox of World Power 5th

Social Welfare Policy for a Sustainable Future The U S

Media and Crime in the U S 1st Edition Jewkes Test Bank

American Foreign Policy The Dynamics of Choice in the

Cengage Advantage Books The Politics of United States

Cengage Advantage Books The Politics of United States

Cengage Advantage American Foreign Policy and Process

Contemporary American Foreign Policy Influences

3. Which of the following is not a source for global public opinion?

7. What percentage of the population comprises the “attentive public”?

ANS: John F. Kennedy

PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

ANS: sources; effects

PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Chapter Introduction

ANS: diversionary theory

ANS: education; wealth

ANS: divine divide

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

ANS: realism; liberalism

PTS: 1 DIF: Easy REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

52. _______________ emphasizes coercive measures—including the use of force—over

ANS: Militant internationalism

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

ANS: Cooperative internationalism

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Chapter Introduction

58. Identify and explain the Almond–Lippmann consensus.

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Rival Views of Political Leadership

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Mood Swings or Pragmatism?

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

64. Identify the diversionary theory of war.

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: America’s Knowledge Gap

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: Multiple sections

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: The Onset of War Fatigue

PTS: 1 DIF: Medium REF: Multiple sections

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium REF: Multiple sections

PTS: 1 DIF: Hard | Medium

Charles II. loved the paraphernalia of courts and chivalry. He

“Flash swords! fly pennons! helm and shield

“Let them to-day, for fame who sigh,

“Draw, Barons, whose proud homes are placed

“To Him we look for such good aid

The original superscription on the banner of Brunswick was the very

The Conquest was productive of a far more than average quantity

You might also like