“Thou and I are One”: What As You Like It Teaches Us about Friendship

By: E.J. Lawrence

I am currently in the middle of teaching my Shakespeare unit to my students. I suppose that’s why, when the theme of female friendship came up this month, I immediately thought of Rosalind and Celia from Shakespeare’s As You Like It. While this isn’t a play I’ve ever taught before, it is one of my favorites, and one of the reasons I love it so much is because of the beautiful depiction of friendship between these two women.

In this play, Rosalind is a young woman whose father is out of favor with his brother, the treacherous duke–and he is thus exiled–but Celia, the duke’s daughter, so loves her friend that she begs Rosalind be allowed to stay. The duke dotes on his daughter and cannot deny her this request…until he, for no real reason other than mad jealousy, rescinds his offer and tells Rosalind she must leave immediately, on pain of death. Celia tries to beg for her friend and cousin’s life again, but this time, is denied. Rather than stay at home and mourn for her lost companion, Celia chooses to run away with Rosalind, and the two girls escape to the forest where they meet a shepherd, a band of merry men, and their eventual love interests.

When we first meet Rosalind and Celia, Celia is trying to cheer up Rosalind because of her father’s exile. Though Rosalind is initially reticent, the two end that portion of their conversation with an exchange of witty repartee. The wordplay shows both women to be intelligent and quick, treating conversation like a skill they’ve both sharpened on each other for years. It’s a game they enjoy and are both good at, so it makes for not only comedic dialogue, but also shows that the two friends “get” each other. They even often conspire to “outfool the fool” when they make jokes at Touchstone’s (“the fool’s”) expense. While they’re talking about whether Fortune and Nature work together or not, Touchstone enters, and their course of conversation turns to make fun at his expense:


No? when Nature hath made a fair creature, may she
not by Fortune fall into the fire? Though Nature
hath given us wit to flout at Fortune, hath not
Fortune sent in this fool to cut off the argument?


Indeed, there is Fortune too hard for Nature, when
Fortune makes Nature’s natural the cutter-off of
Nature’s wit.


Peradventure this is not Fortune’s work neither, but
Nature’s; who perceiveth our natural wits too dull
to reason of such goddesses and hath sent this
natural for our whetstone; for always the dulness of
the fool is the whetstone of the wits. How now,
wit! whither wander you?1

“Before the Duke’s Palace” (1800)

This joke, which is essentially saying that fools exist to be made fun of, and that must be why Touchstone has arrived, has built for several lines. Such a joke requires the skill and teamwork of two people who have known each other for some time, and thus know how to set each other up for a punchline. We all have someone with whom we share jokes–inside jokes, puns, etc. These “shared” jokes are usually only between those with whom we share more than just jokes. Witty back-and-forths require a connection, and inside jokes–like the one here between Celia and Rosalind–require an “inner circle” connection. We don’t often joke around in this manner with someone we aren’t close to, and we certainly don’t expect mere acquaintances or “friends of circumstances” to deliver when we set them up for a punchline. These two have a friendship built on common intellect, yes, but also on years of close communication.

It’s more than just their sense of humor that cements them as friends. It’s also their willingness to walk through fire for one another. When Rosalind is banished by Celia’s father, she declares she is now alone. Celia responds: “Rosalind lacks then the love/ Which teacheth thee that thou and I am one:/ Shall we be sunder’d? shall we part, sweet girl?/ No: let my father seek another heir.”2 Celia is not banished; she isn’t the one who must leave. She could have provided her friend with some supplies and sent her on her way, choosing to continue her life in comfort. Instead, she dons the clothes of a peasant girl and runs with her cousin into the forest, giving up every scrap of wealth and comfort she had to give her closest companion some comfort.

To me, that’s the greatest depiction of friendship there is. John 15:13 says, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”3 That, essentially, is what Celia does for Rosalind. She risks death and physical discomfort for her closest companion.

“Rosalind and Celia” (1870)

Once in the forest, Rosalind disguises herself as a man and Celia disguises herself as a peasant, and the two women conceal each other’s identities as they find mischief, mayhem, love, and family in the forest. In the end, in true comedic fashion, everything works out for both women–mostly thanks to Rosalind’s quick-thinking and Celia’s careful protection of her friend’s identity. And while, for me, the play holds many great moments (Jacques’ speeches speak to my soul…which should probably alarm me), my favorite part has always been the beautiful friendship between Celia and Rosalind–their matched wits, their compassion, and the way they protect and look out for each other in the darkest of circumstances.

  1. Shakespeare, William. As You Like It. Act I.Scene 2, http://shakespeare.mit.edu/asyoulikeit/full.html
  2. —. As You Like It. Act I. Scene 2, http://shakespeare.mit.edu/asyoulikeit/full.html
  3. The Bible, King James Version, Bible Gateway, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+15%3A13&version=KJV
  4. Featured Picture: “Rosalind and Celia” (1909)

Blood Monster: When the Serial Killer is a Woman

by K.P. Kulski

When Charlize Theron depicted Aileen Wuornos in the movie 2003 Monster, it was to critical acclaim, eventually winning Theron an Academy Award. Certainly, Theron’s role was a riveting portrayal, but the true story of not only the murders but Wuornos herself is complex, twisted and well… rivetting. We’ve seen the real and made-up faces of male serial killers, but 170px-Monster_moviefew times have we seen a female one. We didn’t know what to expect. There was a nationwide gasp when the beautiful Theron transformed herself into the physicality of Wuornos through the help of make-up, but also through something more, a dark vulnerability.

But Wuornos was the not the first female serial killer, any quick Google search will come up with lists that span the centuries with crimes that will turn your stomach. Ever present on those lists is the infamous Hungarian noble, Elizabeth Bathory of the 17th century, often proclaimed as the most prolific female serial killer in history or romanticized in popular imaginations as a supernatural creature,

Aileen Wuornos

thirsting for blood. The flourish of storytelling that has evolved with time has helped create this image, as well from the relative proximity of the infamous Vlad the Impaler of Romania, later popularized by Bram Stoker as Dracula.

The story of Bathory is much more complex and while you may find Wuornos’s method of murder less heinous, the two woman share the same dark vulnerability despite from being from vastly different time periods, cultures and socio-economic classes.

But why?

Why did they kill?

Wuornos who occasionally worked as a prostitute, targeted men. The calculation behind the murders is uncertain, but she claims to have shot them after they attempted to sexually assault her. Unlike Bathory, we have clearer history of Wuornos’s childhood, one that seemed filled with her experiences of both physical and sexual violence perpetrated by men in her life.

Bathory’s childhood is less certain other than she spent those years mostly the family estate of Ecsed. Rumors abound on the mental health and sexual deviance of her family Bathory Unboundmembers, but there is no definitive evidence to prove them. She married young to Ferenc Nàdasdy. Shortly before at age thirteen, she gave birth to a child most likely fathered by a male of a lower social class, possibly even a servant. It is no surprise that the child was sent away immediately after birth. Bathory was considered a beauty in her time and following the birth of her first child, got into line with social expectations and often capitalizing on them. If anything, she seemed to become acutely aware of appearances.

Wuornos experienced a life where sex was a twisted commodity that both created the “monster” she became, but also provided money and goods. Bathory, as were so many women of her time and of the noble class, was subject to the requirements of propriety and strategic work of creating heirs. Along with that came the work of household management and the growth and/or protection of family power.

When Wuornos shot and killed seven men, most likely actual or potential johns, it was in reaction to either a real or imaged threat of sexual violence. A type of violence she had been, since childhood much too experienced with and familiar.

There is no record of Bathory consuming or bathing in the blood of her victims, but some

Elizabeth Bathory

accounts suggest that she often tortured and murdered after social events that required her to maintain a high level of appearance. Her victims were all girls and young women, some as young as ten, but mostly those at the age of puberty, at or near sexual maturity.

In reaction to societal stressors, both killers seemed driven to take extreme actions that resulted in rebellion. What is particularly striking about these two examples of killers, is that they were not driven to murder only out of sexual deviation or some latent sociopathic fascination. They murdered because they were women, because they had experienced life as women, despite the time period and socio-economic differences.

Whatever psychosis they most likely had before they experienced the worst of life, it was the worst of their female experiences that they were reacting. Feeling sympathy for figures like these is dangerous and their crimes are very real. Particularly, in the case of Bathory, the crimes were brutal, horrid and filled with the unimaginable, which harnessed a vile concentrated form of rage at some of the darkest parts of the female existence.

To Feed the Enemy: The American Histrio-Myth of Pocahontas

by K.P. Kulski

This is will be my second post on a historical figure featured in Disney films. Maybe I’ve been more influenced by Disney than I’d like to admit. As usual, the film does not follow the history, but serves to heighten the mythological story of a real person.

We don’t know how Pocahontas felt, or her motivations in her story, but what we know pocahontas-dp_5151about her is quite a story unto itself, but she’s become more than just that. She’s a figure of compassion, tragedy and encapsulates the destruction of the Native American peoples’ way of life at the hands of the Europeans. Pocahontas remains a noble figure even in the face of violence and hatred. Somehow she remains personally, above the fray. Her history is obscured by time, but the mythology of the part she played is simultaneously romantic, poetic yet voiceless. There is never a moment in the records that we “hear” Pocahontas speak. But she plays a big role in the awareness of two prominent colonists, John Smith and John Rolfe.

According the famous story put forth by the unreliable John Smith, she saved his life at the very moment her father, the Chief Powhatan had sentenced Smith to death by putting herself between the instruments of death and Smith.

“…as many as could laid hands on him (Smith), dragged him to them, and thereon laid his head, and being ready with their clubs to beat out his brains, Pocahontas, the king’s Four_Pocahontas_paintingdearest daughter, when no entreaty could prevail, got his head in her arms, and laid her own upon his to save his from death.”[1]

There’s a lot doubt surrounding Smith’s story, especially since it grows more elaborate with his own retellings, but there is something that rings true about what we do know about Pocahontas, she had compassion. Well, ok, maybe we can’t even go as far as to say that. Maybe what Pocahontas had was mere curiosity. But just the same, the colonists of Jamestown, who had failed to plant crops in order to survive and instead embarked on rabid searches for gold, recorded a young Pocahontas bringing them gifts of much needed food. Pocahontas, which was a nickname, possibly meaning “little playful one” was only about twelve years old at the time.

Jamestown had an exceedingly difficult start. Much of it had to do with the colonists disinterest in planting crops, as well the swampy mosquito ridden area they had chosen to establish themselves. These things were quite the recipes for disaster. Out of 500 settlers in 1609, only 60 were left by the spring of 1610.

I can only imagine that the Native Americans in the area must have felt a sense of Powhatan-from-Map-of-Virginia-196x300disbelief over the Englishmen’s folly. While the relationship between the settlers and the Powhatans were shaky at best, Pocahontas, young and representing her people arrived with life saving food. She was the face of possibility between the two cultures. There were attempts to garner positive relationships. These often failed, mostly through cultural misunderstandings, external pressures and pure aggression. Nonetheless, Pocahontas was painted as a figure that stood outside of all this. Her gifts of food were seen as acts of kindness.

This compassion would not be rewarded, Pocahontas’s bridge building seemed to be focused on John Smith. Then again, Smith has claimed to be the focal point of many international women. Nonetheless, when he returned to England because of an injury, relations between the settlers and Native Americans turned into openly hostile.

The final chapter of the European recording of Pocahontas’s story was one that united two cultures. Though marriage and the birth of her son Thomas Rolfe, she would embody the possibility of unity. Yet again, this only seems possible through her kidnapping and conversion to Christianity — unity utterly on European terms.

Kidnapped by the settlers who hoped to trade Pocahontas for comrades held by her Pocahontas-at-Court-of-King-James.-Photo-Library-of-Congressfather as well as weapons, her previous kindness was easily forgotten. However, her father the Chief was not interested in a trade of any kind. So Pocahontas remained with the settlers, eventually becoming Christian, adopting an English name (Rebecca), marrying and having a son with the widower John Rolfe.

We don’t know what Pocahontas thought of all this and how willingly she submitted to it. Possibly, it was a choice for personal reasons, perhaps she saw an opportunity for peace between her people and the English, or she could have been forced or coerced into it all.

Still, American imaginations have been enticed by the story of Pocahontas, both history and mythology. While we will never know exactly what she thought of the things she experienced, we continue to be curious and remain fascinated by her.

John Rolfe said, “I utter the effects of this setled and long continued affection (for Pocahontas)…”[2]

Us too John, us too.


[1] “Captain John Smith is Saved by Pocahontas, 1608,” Eyewitness to History, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/johnsmith.htm (2003).

[2] “Letter of John Rolfe, 1614,” Virtual Jamestown, http://www.virtualjamestown.org/exist/cocoon/jamestown/fha/J1047.

Marguerite de Navarre, Renaissance (Wo)man

By Michael K. Ingram

The daughter of a king, the sister of a king, the wife of a king, Marguerite de Navarre was by virtue of her parentage and offspring, one of the most notable women of the 16th century, but in character and accomplishments, she was far more than the inheritor and ancestor of great European dynasties. A queen, author, intellectual, diplomat, polyglot, patron of the arts, and humanist, Marguerite’s abilities challenged and transcended the social expectations of a noble woman of her time, and in so doing presaged the changing roles of women in the realm of intellectual pursuits.

One might say that, gender pronounsclipart-inkwell-8 notwithstanding, Marguerite de Navarre was the archetypal “Renaissance Man.” Though born at a time when even the most talented women were unlikely to be recognized for their artistic and intellectual contributions, history remembers her not only for her hereditary place in the history of European royalty, but for her art, and for the support and protection that she provided for some of the great other great thinkers and artists of the Renaissance.

Born to the heir to the French throne (and the sister to the future King Francis I), Marguerite was connected to some of the most important people and events of the 16th century. Though she was given an excellent education, as a member of the famous and prestigious House of Valois, she began her adult life just as many noble women of her time–as a diplomatic chip to be bartered in marriage.

536px-Coat_of_Arms_of_Marguerite_of_Angouleme,_Queen_Consort_of_Navarre.svgHistorically speaking, she dodged a bullet when negotiations failed that would have her marry England’s Prince of Wales, who would go on to rule as King (and serial wife-decapitator) Henry VIII. Instead, she was married to the Duke of Alençon, who was captured (along with her brother Francis I, and future husband Henry II of Navarre) during the French debacle at the battle of Pavia in 1525 and died not long after. According to accounts Marguerite, a notable diplomat in her own right, rode day and night into Spanish territory to secure her brother’s release.

After being widowed, Marguerite, still a young woman, was married to Henry II of Navarre. Henry was in many ways a king in name only, as most of his kingdom had been absorbed by Ferdinand II of Aragon over twenty years prior. Still, her marriage to a wealthy and well-connected nobleman afforded an opportunity to devote herself to her passions of art and learning. Her renowned salon, dubbed “New Parnassus” was famous across Europe, and Marguerite hosted and corresponded with some of the most notable thinkers of her day, including Leonardo da Vinci and Desiderius Erasmus.

Marguerite was a devoted humanist, and was the patron to many Renaissance artists and figures of the reformation, providing protection for artists and thinkers that might otherwise have been suppressed or persecuted in other, less tolerant realms. Notably, under Marguerite’s protection, François Rabelais wrote the controversial Gargantua and Pantagruel, the third book of which is dedicated to the Queen of Navarre.

800px-Hinchliff_-_Marguerite_Queen_of_Navarre_cropThough her first marriage was childless, Marguerite’s lone surviving child would go on to cement important place in history. Her daughter Jeanne III was an important figure in the Huguenot movement, and the mother of Henry IV of France, the first of the Bourbon line of French kings. The loss of her only son as an infant is often suggested to be the inspiration for her controversial poem Miroir de l’âme pécheresse (“The Mirror of the Sinful Soul”), a devotional and personal work that caused outrage in some religious circles.

Ironically, for all Marguerite accomplished as a patron and artist in her lifetime, the unfinished Heptaméron is often considered the best, and certainly the most well-known, of her work. Written in the style of Bocaccio’s Decameron (whom Marguerite greatly admired), the book is a collection of short stories linked with a framing narrative. Originally planned to be a collection of ten stories per day over ten days (in the style of Bocaccio), Marguerite’s death in 1549 left the book unfinished with only 73 entries.

For a modern observer, what Marguerite de Navarre accomplished was nothing short of stunning. Not only did she create an artistic and intellectual legacy for herself, and foster clipart-inkwell-8the development of countless Renaissance artists, she did so while somehow maintaining her own reputation in her own era. History is littered with woman of talent and drive who succeeded only in retrospect, who are appreciated only posthumously for their contributions, and in their own time ignored or even scored for the audacity to aspire to “men’s work.” Marguerite was a unique artifact of history; she was the personal embodiment of arts and intellectual endeavors, who perfectly reflected the changing face of Western society. Her direct and indirect contributions to the arts, religious discourse, and humanist thought earn her a well-deserved reputation as the first “modern woman,” and heralded the rise of women authors and scholars that came after her.

Works Cited

“Biography of Marguerite de Navarre, author of the Heptameron.” Heptameron.info, 30 July, 2017. http://www.heptameron.info/navarre.html.

Fabbri, Kimberly. Marguerite, Queen of Navarre. Kings College, Dec. 2005, http://departments.kings.edu/womens_history/margueritN.html.

“Marguerite de Navarre.” Poetry Foundation, 30 July, 2017. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/marguerite-de-navarre.

Beautiful or Nothing at all

By: Kourtnea Zinov’yevna Hogan

Countess Elizabeth Bathory de Ecsed became fully invested in her search for beauty in 1585. Over 400 years ago. You’ve probably heard of the brutal murders she committed, considering that she’s been labelled as the most prolific female serial killer. Though her kill-count isn’t set in stone, it is estimated to be close to 650.

The Son of Sam was driven to murder by the Devil. Carl Panzram was driven by a deep hatred for humanity. But Elizabeth was driven by something quite different. The desire to be young and beautiful and to stay that way. And, of course, there is no better way to reduce crow’s feet than by bathing in the blood of virgins.

Considering that the modern cosmetic industry wasn’t invented until the 20th century (about the 1920’s), Bathory was ahead of the curve. I think we tend to view the past victim-2through rose colored lenses. It’s hard to picture such a heavy focus on beauty before the makeup industry came along (an industry I’ve known and felt forced to be subservient to for my entire life). People often hold up the art of the renaissance as a time where women were not shamed for their bodies. The women in the paintings look real, are modeled after real women, are unaltered by photoshop or airbrush. But the renaissance was running its course at the same time of Bathory’s vicious murders. Maybe being held up to the impossible standards of goddesses and angels wore women down long before film, magazines, models, and porn ever worked their way into the main thread of society.

To think that someone, many someones, could be driven to hate the natural folds and lines of their bodies is unsettling to say the least. Women are held to strict standards that blur from person to person (or man to man). Too much makeup is for whores and sluts. Louis_Bataille,_'Deux_cas_d'anorexie_hysterique'_Wellcome_L0020548_(backcropped)Who are you trying to look good for? She’s asking for it. Too little makeup is off putting, because the natural face is not what “natural” looks like in magazines and film. You look tired. Are you feeling well?

Thankfully, positive movements have sprung up from the depths of the internet. Countless women have come forward to tell their stories about the struggle of learning to love their body. Women are clearly broadcasting that the way they look is not for men, and are supporting one another for their outfits, their choice to wear makeup or not, for expressing their sexual desires in whatever way they see fit.

But positivity is slow moving. The backlash against women has had its own revival. How can boys grow up to be men who support women when the President is man who once told a woman that it must be a pretty sight to see her on her knees? Or who is quoted as saying that it doesn’t matter what you do as long as you have a young and beautiful downloadwoman attached to you? “But she’s got to be young and beautiful.” And how can girls grow into women who love themselves when they grow up hearing their mothers call themselves fat and ugly? When nearly every representation of a beautiful woman is one that is photoshopped?

We live in a world where you are nothing if you are not beautiful. No matter how smart, talented, or good-hearted you may be, if you are not physically appealing it will be brought up. And if you are beautiful that will be all that will be brought up about you too. Beauty is an inescapable vice with very strict criteria. No wonder someone would be driven to kill for it.

Revolt: Morisco Women on the Way to Alpujarras

by K.P. Kulski

During and following the Reconquista of Spain and Portugal, Morisco women donned traditional veils and heavy layers of clothing reminiscent of their Moorish roots and appeared to go about their lives as newly minted Catholics. But their existence was much like their clothing, shrouded from full view, at once both familiar and foreign. Their presence reminded the Castilians that there were limits to the control of Morisco cultural and religious devotion. It was an idea that both attracted and repelled, creating with it a sort of mystique.tapadas

Encapsulated in Morisco veiling, Castilian women took up the practice, adopting it to their own uses evolving into tapadas, a type of veiling that covered the entire face, leaving only a single eye exposed.1 Interestingly enough, Castilian women who popularized the style embraced the same two-fold experience, becoming enticingly exotic yet threatening. More importantly, women dressed in tapadas found freedom in the act of veiling, a sense that through hiding they maintained an internal freedom. Morisco women found much the same sense of internal sovereignty with the act of covering their bodies and faces, which reflected their hidden lives.

Their internal worlds became the singular authentic place of existence for Morisco culture.

It was also a rejection of patriarchal power by disrupting male view and judgment of female appearance. More importantly, it provided a limited but hidden space for the continuation of Morisco culture and religious practice. What was once the inner space of women, in the absence of the male outer space, became the container of Morisco will, identity and rebellion. Morisco women created internal sanctuaries not only within themselves, but their homes, families and communities. Their internal worlds became the singular authentic place of existence for Morisco culture.

DoorOnce part of the dominant ruling culture of the region, Morisco’s came to occupy a peripheral existence that inspired an excess of suspicion and hostility from Castilian Catholics. The suspicion was not entirely unfounded. Within the home, Morisco mothers continued to teach traditions as well as the Arabic language. Publicly, the adherence to Christian practices took the place of Muslim worship, but not necessarily within the home. But this activity came with great risk. Under the culture of the Inquisition, Moriscos who were found to practice Islam were questioned, usually under torture and executed. It went beyond mere religion, reading and writing in Arabic and later donning traditional Morisco clothing could result in execution. By the mid-16th century, Morisco society could only exist in increasingly smaller confines. The dwindling space had occurred slowly with the erosion of the Caliphate. It was a reflection of the very space of an empire turned kingdom, then eaten up by Christendom until it no longer existed at all. Even before the completion of the Reconquista, the sense of Moorish loss resounded in the formerly great Caliphate as a harbinger of Morisco fate.

Those radiant cheeks are veiled in woe,

A shower descends from every eye,

And not a starting tear can flow,

That wakes not an attending sigh.

Fortune, that whilom owned my sway,

And bowed obsequious to my nod,

Now sees me destined to obey,

And bend beneath oppression’s rod.2

Despite the greater loss, Morisco culture dug in stubbornly and grew into active revolt. When the second rebellion at Alpujarra begun in 1568, Morisco women continued to play a significant role. Mary Elizabeth Perry discusses the amazonian presence of Zarcamodonia, a Morisco woman who worked as an envoy between Morisco and Ottoman forces, “it shows how women played many active roles as wartime overturned the gender order.”3 In fact, the Morisco female warrior identity was prevalent at Alpujarra. Just as Morisco women maintained culture and community, their participation in the rebellion exemplified the rebellion of an entire people. They had, after all, maintained the heart of Morisco culture under threat of torture and execution. Why stop there? In the absence of weapons, women used whatever they could find to arm themselves, stones and roasting spits were documented by Christians.4

They were the great mosques, palaces and artwork of places like Cordoba, gobbled up, kept alive and vivid within the flesh of womanhood. All-Ways-Spain-CM2-Mosque-Cathedral-Cordoba-1920x750

I’ve come to see Zarcamodonia and the Morisco women like her, as more than women, but the living remnants of Moorish Spain. They were the former Caliphate and the echo of the greatness of the Islamic Empire. They were the great mosques, palaces and artwork of places like Cordoba, gobbled up, kept alive and vivid within the flesh of womanhood. They were intolerable and enticing all at once. No matter how the mosques were painted anew and rebranded as places of Christian worship, they were like these women, merely veiled, hiding and ready to burst forth in rebellion at any moment.

Clearly, the Christian Castilians felt the same.5



1. Laura R. Bass and Amanda Wunder discuss theories on tapada fashion citing the influence seemed to have occurred when Moriscas were required to adopt the Castilian mantle, disposing their previous Moorish head coverings. The fashionable manner in which Moriscas covered their faces with these mantles led to Castilian adoption and stylistic preference for covering one eye. (The Veiled Ladies of Early Modern Spanish World: Seduction and Scandal in Seville, Madrid, and Lima, 104-105)
2. Prince Mohammed Ben Abad. “Verses to My Daughters,” Fordham University Sourcebook, Accessed 30 APR 2017, https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/Halsall/source/moorishpoetry.asp.
3. Mary Elizabeth Perry, The Handless Maiden (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), 89.
4. Ibid., 88.
5. Both sides contributed to the tragedy in the form of significant cruelty and violence during the uprising. Moriscos were eventually defeated by the Castilian forces. The Castilians would in turn, undertake a campaign to expel those of Moorish descent and entice Christian settlers to the region, effectively rendering the Morisco threat nil.