A-The Medieval church down to the time of Reformation.

Before the Reformation the Roman Catholic Church in England and Europe

particularly was a sign of strong monarchy and wealthy territory. It was governed by an

Italian pope who encapsulated judiciousness and heavenliness in all over the kingdoms. The

Royals and clerics also had to follow the rules and orders of the Bishop of Rome; they

therefore did not have the right violate or change the laws. Later on, English clergy laity

called john Wycliffe, a reformer and theologian from 14th century, made critical

commitments to the life and exercises of the Roman Catholic Church. He was considered as

radical opponent of the papacy and is the one who have a significant influence on 16 th

century‘s church.

Years later, the Catholic Church had witnessed a considerable change during the

Reign of Henry the VIII who broke with the Roman papacy and created the independent

church of England, and this brake happened because the pope clement VII refused to favor

the cancellation of Henry ‘s marriage to Catherine of Aragon . In this regard the English

parliament at Henry ‘s request , passed an arrangement of acts that isolated the English

church from the Roman progression , and in 1534 the English king become the head of the

English church . (Britannica )

B-the power of parliament and the act of supremacy.

Parliament was an old institution which had a very powerful influence during the

Tudors time. The parliament had the right to pass acts including the right to grant tax and

the sole right to pass law. If a monarch required taxes to raise its income usually for war or

other emergencies, they were generally summoned to parliament, however, monarchs have

the right to maintain the power to veto to any legislation they did not like, and to appoint or
replace parliament at will. At that time, there have been long stretches of parliament not

meeting at all and, it was not part of daily government. In fact , parliament met only seven

times during the reign of Henry VII and under Henry the V III this pattern persisted in this

time parliament met generally to grant taxation in order to fund the wars of the king . In

1531, Henry the VIII was searching for a way to bring the annulment of his marriage from

Catherine Aragon; he threatened to use parliament as a method of putting pressure on pope

VII in order to take action, but his threatening did not work until the coming of Thomas

Cromwell in 1531. Thomas Cromwell, who was one of Thomas Wolsey advisor, had become

the king’s secretary and he succeeded in doing what Wolsey failed to do. He found a clever

way to complete the divorce while ‘’Wolsey had tried to persuade the pope to agree to a

divorce, Cromwell bypassed the pope completely by declaring that Henry was the only one

who could grant an annulment to a marriage in England’’ Hans Holbein .In this respect ,

Cromwell used parliament to enact laws that would strengthen the king ‘s claim to

supremacy over the church and transforming the divorce into practice .( p 24 from

document Monarchy and gov) .

In 1534, the English parliament declared Henry VIII as the supreme head of the church. As

a consequence, he gained the absolute power over the state and the English church. And

also henry controlled the properties and the wealth of the country. Thomas Cromwell and

Henry VIII together they exploited England‘s foreign policies and diminished church

hegemony ,and for this reason many Catholics had opposed Henry ‘s separation from the

Roman catholic church and among those was sir Thomas More who opposed Henry ‘s

political system in his Utopia . enry VIII by Hans

Holbein
C- Political Idealism in Thomas More Utopia:

More provides his readers with an idealistic depiction of a country that employs an

egalitarian system. Through Raphael Hythloday, More gives a further descriptions and

analysis of the Utopian policies and social ideals and through this depiction the reader may

feel More‘s attitude towards 16th century England . It was a period known by the reign of

Henry VIII, and who completely changed the political system of England especially; when he

broke with Rome. In his Utopia, More provides an alternative where peace and security

replaces king‘s Henry tyranny and dictatorship. He fictionalized an ideal society far from

political unfairness where all people are equal. In his description Hythloday mentions the

Island‘s geographical security as a perfect place where people have a peaceful life: “their

mountain secure them from all invasions, thus they have no wars among them”(32). In

addition to the geographical security the Utopian headship rejects domination and their

leaders are considered as symbols of humility unlike Henry‘s leaders: “the magistrates are

either insolent or cruel to the people, they affect rather to be called fathers” (133). In this

respect, there no conflicts among the Utopians and the appearance of the lawyers in the town

are perceived, and this peace which witnessed in the island is due to their restricted number

and to their righteousness in upholding the regulations of the Island. The Utopians also avoid

clashes and conflicts among themselves and they never establish alliances with other nations

fearing from disloyalty and deception as is the case in More‘s society in which hypocrisy and

manipulation dominated the kingdom of Henry the VIII 3 In this regard , the political

egalitarianism in Utopia and the description of the dignified or responsible leaders is a hit to

16 th century England , where were the poor were politically ignored as Rger schfield stated : “

the privy council continued to reproach the commissioners for favouring themselves and their

friends , and accused them of growing catalogue of mal practices , all in which undermined
the accuracy of the assessments and the yield of the subsidies to the crown ”(schofield, 1988,

P 239)

The Utopians have their philosophy towards wars. They believe that they should not sacrifice

their lives in war , because they see it as a necessary evil among humanity that is way they

distance themselves from it “while other nations are constantly making treaties ,breaking

them and renewing them ‘’ . Hythloday claims that the Utopians never make treaties in

order to avoid those breaking. As a matter of facts, the utopians strongly rejects the notion

of war “depicting it as an activity fit only for beasts ‘’ and they only go to war for good

reasons for instance for the protection of themselves from a sudden attack, or for the

liberation of others from oppression. In Utopia the human sympathy is so strong and the

interest in money is so weak for instance, when they are cheated by another country. They

simply cut off the trade relations until restitution is made (More P. 66) , because they

believe that solving problems by force is something ridiculous , and have a negative impacts

on human life ( 67) . However, in 1511- 1512 the pretexts for war were different from that of

the Utopians. Henry VIII , for instance , “ wanted a war with France in which he would win

glory on the battle field and regain the crown of France ( Ridley , 1982 , P 40 ) . The same

thing for the English nobles who wished to distinguish themselves in battles with France, as

their ancestors had done ‘’ (Ridley, 1982, p 41). In the other hands, the Utopians attempted

to avoid actual fighting by offering rewards for the capture of enemy leaders, because they

are convinced that the common people do not go to war of will , but are obliged to satisfy

their own rulers . (More P 68) and if the war is unavoidable, the utopians appoint soldiers to

fight for them. Those soldiers are called Zapolets who ‘’live hundred miles east of utopia,

they are rude , wild , and fierce . (146)

 The Zapolets are known for their resistance to cold, warm and tough work. In fact,

they are not involved in economy or political issues, but rather they are involved in primitive

occupation, such as livestock, farming and they also serve the needs of the utopians with

loyalty. Besides the zapolets the Utopian leader do not compel their people to participate in

military actions, but it is up to them to choose. Moreover, the war should not involve

cowardly people, because they have negative effects on the Utopians. Women have also the

right to join their husbands and children in wars in order to support them “the utopians do

not hinder those women who are willing to go along with their husbands in the front of the

army” (149), and this latter shows their unity especially in battleground. In this regard, they

do their best in order to protect themselves and to prevent wars as much as they could, and if

they were obliged to go for war. They select a group of young man to capture their opponents

through effective underground traps by the soldiers themselves and this mission would be

complete without causing damages or destruction : “they never lay their enemies’ country

waste nor their corn, and even in their marches they take possible care that neither horse nor

foot may treat it down” (153) , and once the battle is over the utopians do not slaughter their

rivals and they do not ask for redress or compensation at the expense of their people, but

they attain them from the subjugate , for example, money or agricultural property .(153) In

fact, Utopia is well secured and protected by natural resources such as the mountains and

huge rocks which made it difficult to be conquered by any enemy : “ if any prince that

engages in war with them, they prevent him, and make his country the seat of the war” (154).

In Utopia Thomas More provides a suitable political environment through stability,

peace and security. He indeed was not happy with king‘s Henry tyranny and oppression

against his people and against the Catholics, especially when he breaks with the roman

catholic church. More also stands against his destructive wars which cost England a lot of
money, and as an alternative to Henry VIII political policies he offers the spirit of

righteousness among the Utopian citizens. In this respect, the Utopians are prudent and

constant to their leaders, open minded, brave and peaceful in military fighting’s. In addition,

More depicts the chiefs’ sobriety and moderation, unlike his environment where Henry‘s VIII

avidity and inequality controlled England in 16th century which led to a very negative

consequences to both the people and the kingdom. Since Thomas More was aware of the

Henry‘s unlawful practices and to his political oppression. He writes his famous fiction Utopia

in which he projects a mythical Island based on justice, political stability and equality.

Corruption in Julian Barnes England, England

Barnes 1998 novel England, England, unlike Thomas More Utopia has predominantly

been interpreted as a typical postmodern text due to its playful deconstruction of

boundaries between reality and illusion, authenticity and replica 840 . Its title and central plot

assured that, unlike Utopia which focuses on the political stability . England, England in the

other hands focuses on some political issues on the island and on Great Britain itself. The

novel discusses the concept of national identity, corruption with all its kids such theft,

smuggling, sexual scandals and bribery. In this way Barnes provides a critique of 1998 British

leaders. In the second section of the novel the reader encounter dictator businessmen who

wanted to control the island economically and politically by means of domination and

manipulation. In fact, Jack Pitman controls first all the workers of his company and

manipulated them, unlike the island of Utopia which focuses more on the freedom of choice

and equality. However, England, England is based on the dictatorship of jack pitman who

treated his citizens and his employees the way he wants as quoted: “Now this Project is up

and running I don’t need a barrelful of whingers and moaners trying to drag it down. So let
me have the honour to inform you that you are the first two employees I intend to fire. Have

fired. Already. As of now. Consider yourself now fired. And what is more, under the

employment legislation I might or might not put through my tinpot Island Parliament, or for

that matter under new contracts which will be retroactively valid, someone’s working on it,

you will receive no severance pay. You’re fucking fired, you two, and if you can’t get your

things packed by the time the morning ferry leaves I’ll throw all your shit in the harbour

personally ’’ (Barnes, 2012: 175) later on, pitman ‘s tyranny has been repressed for a period

of time by the protagonist Martha and her lover Paul by blackmailing him for his sexual

activities as it is mentioned in the quote bellow : “He was reaching towards the baroque bell-

pull, ready to sluice out of his life this carping bitch and her ninnyish toyboy, when Martha

Cochrane uttered the two words he least expected to hear. ‘Auntie May.’ ‘I beg your pardon.’

‘Auntie May,’ she repeated. And then, looking up at his swaying shape, ‘Titty. Nappy. Poo.’’

Barnes (116) Martha gets what she wants temporarily; she can stay on the island longer and

repress Jack Pitman by limiting his duty only for ceremonial activities instead of the executive

decision. However, Jack Pitman is able to remove the evidence of his past by bribing Paul

who betrayed Martha for taking her position in the company. Through the idea of sexual

scandals of Sir Jack Pitman Barnes depicts 1993 John Major Administration.

In 1993, the British prime Minister John Major was searching for a unifying theme for the

country , he had requested for return to the basics : to self-discipline and respect for the law;

to consideration for others’. No doubt sincerely meant, his call for moral improvement came

back to haunt him. By the time the 1997 general election came, his position had been severely

undermined by a press campaign aimed at exposing leading Conservatives as being accused

of misconduct or 'sleaze' sex scandal. Among the most damaging of the many scandals

exposed was The Heritage Minister, David Mellor, resigned in 1992 over an affair with a
Spanish actress, which, according to The People newspaper, involved his wearing the Chelsea

football team’s strip when making love. And also, The Environment Minister, Tim Yeo,

resigned in 1994 after it was revealed that an affair he had had with a Conservative local

councilor had produced a ‘love child’. In addition to, young Conservative MP, Stephen

Milligan, accidentally throttled himself to death while engaging in an act of sexual self-

strangulation. Young Conservative MP, Stephen Milligan, accidentally throttled himself to

death while engaging in an act of sexual self-strangulation.

Julian Barnes in his novel tackled first some social issues such as corruption. These issues

occurred in the island because of the political mismanagement on the Island. The writer

focused first on the problem of smuggling in England, England which is considered as an

illegal movement of goods into or out of a country. Smuggling occurred in a village called

Thatcham which located in England, England as quoted: “What’s the problem?’

‘They’re smuggling.’ Martha suppressed, with great difficulty, the carefree, innocent, pure,

true laugh that lay within her, something as incorporeal as the breeze, a freak moment of

nature, a freshness long forgotten; something so untainted as to induce hysteria. Instead, she

gravely asked for details. There were three smugglers’ villages on the Island, and reports had

been coming in of activities at Lower Thatcham incompatible with Project principles. Visitors

to Lower, Upper, and Greater Thatcham were able to observe at close hand aspects of the

Island’s traditional trade: the false-bottomed barrels, coins sewn into garment hems, lumps

of tobacco disguised as Jersey potatoes’’(Barnes ,130) . Barnes also stress on the political

decline in the Island through the actors who are hired to play a certain role prescribed by the

minds behind the project. This actors loss their identity through time: “They were happy to be

who they had become, and didn‘t wish to be other’’ (129)

although project managers pay a great deal of attention to controlling these actors' behaviors 

And keeping them within limits, the actors are transcending these limitations in interesting 
Ways The actor who plays Samuel Johnson must change his Name: Martha called up Dr

Johnson‘s contract of employment. Of course: it should have been an early warning.

Whatever the actor‘s original name, he had long ago changed it by deed-poll to Samuel

Johnson. They had engaged Samuel Johnson to play Samuel Johnson. Perhaps this explained

things. (137)

Later on, in the story the actors were corrupted and started to act in an imbalanced way,

Robin Hood and his Merrie Men turn into mischievous characters creating chaos on the

island. The King of England sexually harasses the actor playing Nell Gwynn and tries to

justify his actions by using his position as the King. The actors playing threshers, shepherds,

smugglers, or fighters in the Battle of Britain all over-identify with their assigned jobs.

-political discourse in Julian Barnes England, England .

Julian Barnes fiction is widely believed to reflect the cultural and political state of a nation.

That is post-war, post imperial and postmodern. While much has been written about how the

early work of Barnes in particular responds and involves in the 1980S ruling political

discourse Of Thatcherism analysis of how Thatcherism’s revenants the work of Barnes from

1998 onwards. Thatcherism is more than a simple reference point in Barnes work which

provides a nuanced understanding of how Thatcher’s reworking of English repertoires-

representational, political and cultural endeavor-continues beyond her tenure in office.

Barnes has reached the same conclusion as political and cultural critics: Thatcher and

Thatcherism have refreshed not only the current political and cultural worlds but also the

population and ultimately the English themselves.

Barnes’s England, England address the inevitability debate that has become connected to

Contemporary embodiments of English politics and society, both in terms of its predictable
demise and its belated celebration.

In England, England Barnes view towards the politics of his country is clear; he supports

Blaire because he favors a dynamic nation’s over a static government. Yet his evaluation of

Thatcherism is straightforward. It is not shocking in this way that England, England, records

The frustration with the promise of something better that seemed to be on the horizon and that

Seemed likely to overtake the Tories relentless perpetuation of Thatcherism in the next

election. (Barnes “introduction xi”).

Instead of his overt appeal to his reader England, England acts as a correction to the

Path that the contemporary nation appeared to go a function he made clear by describing the

novel as a- letter to my own country- in overt homage the title of his collection of columns.

(Barnes qtd. in Guignery 105 )

Critics who ponder the political implications of Barnes novel focused on the Thatcherism

Overtones of pitman’s entrepreneur and on the heritage venture that England represents. For

Bentley, Barnes‘s depiction is tongue-in-cheek. Jack Pitman is a ―parody of Thatcherite

entrepreneur‖ . England, England, is also a conservative country itself. Although the

legitimate political government gives a way to corporate oligarchy when the country is under

Martha and Paul’s influence and ultimately autocracy, but when pitman regains the control of

the island, the consevativatism of the public life of a nation that is heralded by the relocation

of the conservative daily and by the bastion of Englishness, nevertheless, the latter’s depiction

of old England as a nation that- had slowly shed control, territory, resources, prestige and

Population- comes to form the basis of England, England’s own sense of identity.