Historians of Judaism actually date the strong Jewish emphasis on monotheism somewhat later than expected within Jewish history. The archaeological discovery of idols and artifacts indicating cultic participation from the time of Israel’s presence in Canaan has seemed to indicate a relative laxity in actual practice before the Babylonian captivity, while textual criticism seems agreed that most of the Torah’s foregrounded statements of strong monotheism date from textual recensions during the Babylonian captivity, and thus substantially post-date both the J-writer and the E-writer of the Old Testament (Moberly 217). But the strong emphasis on monotheism which comprises the first commandment given by Yahweh to Moses is a defining feature of Judaism in prevailing polytheistic cultures where the Jews can define their religion in opposition, so to speak. I would like to examine three separate ways in which Jewish monotheism defined itself against a kind of prevailing cultural polytheism. The first significant historical conflict I would like to examine in these terms comes in the Roman period. I would then like to jump forward to the Middle Ages to examine the question of the relation of Jewishness to Christian millenarianism, but I will do this by considering the Roman Catholic church of that era as a syncretic and polytheistic phenomenon, an authentic holdover in certain ways from the Roman Period. Finally, moving to the twentieth century, I finally want to consider the case of Dr. Sigmund Freud — not as a provider of explanations in himself, but examined (in his role as a provider of such explanations) as a rare sublimated case of the conflict between Jewish monotheism and prevailing polytheism. Freud, who would according to his biographer Peter Gay, describe himself as an “atheist Jew,” provides an excellent case study of the anxieties of Jewish monotheism in an age of diminishing religious capacity.
Any discussion of the role played by Judaism in the Roman Empire must necessarily wind up a discussion about Christianity, but I think it is more enlightening to witness the ways in which Judaism in the Roman period was forced to confront Roman polytheism. Of course the central issue in the case of Jewish discomfort with the Roman state religion actually would involve precisely the same theological issues that Christianity later would, in terms of the claims made for an actual human being to divinity. Without needing to rely on the history of early Christianity we need only look to the short terrifying reign of the Roman emperor Gaius, better known by his nickname “Caligula.” Before examining the interactions between Caligula and the Jews in terms of the dynamic of monotheism defending against polytheism, it is worth recalling the larger historical context. Caligula only reigned from 37 to 41 C.E., not quite four years — although his imperial policy towards the Jews was marked by significant upheaval. A quarter-century after Caligula’s death, the Roman-Jewish situation would erupt into outright warfare with the first Jewish-Roman war in 66 C.E. But without any consideration of the open civil strife that would emerge eventually (but continually thereafter, if we consider the numerous later standoffs that would occur, like Bar-Kochba’s revolt several decades later), it is worth noting first the position of the Jewish population within the Roman empire: in Caligula’s reign the Herodian royal family served as a sort of client of the Roman state, but as a Jewish ruling elite represented a relative decadence in religious standards. The Herodians were instead extremely close to the ruling families of Rome, and would ultimately name Jewish princes after Roman political figures, such as Herod Agrippa, named after the military and naval commander of the emperor Augustus, Marcus Agrippa. But the closeness of the Herodians to the Caesars may have ultimately caused Caligula badly to miscalculate the beliefs of the vast majority of Jews in Judaea, by assuming that the relatively secular Hellenistically-derived milieu of the Herod family and their ruling elite represented mainstream Judaism in any way.
Before examining Caligula’s inadvertent fostering of religious conflict, though, we should recall that Caligula himself was not quite sane, and that a large measure of Caligula’s delusions were religious in character, including declaring war on the Sea-God, Neptune, and declaring himself a god: we should bear in mind that, as Ferrill notes, “the Emperor’s attitude towards the gods clearly shocked Greek and Roman pagans, especially Italians” yet the same attitude “with the Jews led to a crisis that was aborted only by the Emperor’s death” (Ferrill 140). The difficulty here is that we have lost the account from the most reliable historian of the period, Tacitus, whose history of Caligula’s reign is not extant, although Ferrill quotes the summary given by Tacitus elsewhere in an epitome of Jewish history: Tacitus writes that “when the Jews were ordered by Caligula to set up his statue in the temple they preferred the alternative of war. The death of the Emperor put an end to the disturbance.” (140). It is worth noting that the decades leading up to Caligula’s reign — i.e. The reign of Augustus and the reign of Tiberius — had marked a slow Roman encroachment upon the Herodian state: on the death of Herod the Great in 4 C.E., Augustus would limit the title assumed by his heir: Herod the Great had been a king, but his son Archelaus would be named “ethnarch” at Augustus’ command, and other sons Philip and Herod Antipas would rule as “tetrarchs.” By 14 C.E., Augustus would depose Archelaus entirely, and Philip’s portion would ultimately be annexed by Syria while Herod Antipas (the Herod of the New Testament story of Salome, who executed John the Baptist) would be supplanted to a certain degree by his brother-in-law Herod Agrippa. Herod Agrippa — named, as noted, in the ultimate Jewish assimilationist maneuver within the Roman imperial context — would befriend the young Caligula in the court of the Emperor Tiberius at Capri. This led to the future Jewish ruler’s getting caught up in the palace intrigue of the Caesars, as he was placed under house arrest by Tiberius after being accused of plotting sedition with Caligula — Caligula was not punished — and Herod Agrippa was not freed until the death of Tiberius had left Caligula as the new emperor of Rome. Caligula promptly freed Herod Agrippa from the confinement in which Tiberius had placed him, and also made him King of the Syria which had swallowed Philip’s portion of Judaea. Caligula then showed further favor on Herod Agrippa when (in short order) he banished his brother-in-law Herod Antipas, then currently ruler, and made Herod Agrippa ruler of his territories instead — effectively King of all Judaea. How this played out is worth noting before we move to the question of religious misunderstanding in the opposite direction, for it shows the simple clash in ethical systems between Roman and Jew in the time period. It was in all cases the question of title that occupied the Jewish leaders — the final maneuver in which Agrippa managed to have Antipas banished to become sole ruler was accomplished by accusing Antipas of treasonous intent when he appealed to Caligula to be given the title of King (which Augustus had removed from the Herods but Caligula restored). The notion that the Herodians — who had only taken power from the Hasmoneans in 37 B.C.E., and thus represented a dynasty substantially younger than the Caesars (since Julius Caesar had been murdered in 44 B.C.E.) — were in any position to bargain over such titles, which must have been purely honorific and served largely to maintain the peace in Judaea while politically assimilating it better as a province (less so than an independent client state), especially considering the success that the precisely similar Roman annexation of Egypt had, after the death of Cleopatra. Interestingly, though, it was actually Egypt rather than Judaea that began Caligula’s problems with the Jews in earnest — and it is necessary to recall that at this time period (mid-first-century C.E.), the Jewish Diaspora was already to a certain degree largely in effect, with large portions of the Roman Empire’s Jewish citizenry living outside Judaea. (Obviously the rapid spread of Christianity among Jewish populations shortly after this was helped by the fact that those populations were largely scattered throughout the cities of the Roman empire.) In any case, Cleopatra’s defeat at the Battle of Actium left Rome as the de facto ruler of the largest and most cosmopolitan city of the period, Alexandria, the provincial capital of Egypt founded by Alexander the Great. Augustus would take a protective attitude toward the Jewish population of Alexandria, enumerating their rights in a public inscription: but conflict with the Greek inhabitants (and inheritors of Alexander the Great’s earlier conquest) would erupt into pogroms in Alexandria under Caligula’s reign at the time of the appointment of Herod Agrippa as sole king of Judaea.
Yet the chief mistake of Caligula’s Jewish policy was yet to come, when he demanded — upon announcement (which historians have speculated had more to do with mental instability than actual revelation) that Caligula was to be regarded as a god. Of course the deification of Julius Caesar by the Roman Senate had earlier occurred before the Second Triumvirate had broken down — both Augustus and Mark Antony would join to pay homage at the shrine of the newly deified Caesar before their relations devolved into Civil War. Yet Caligula’s demand that a statue of himself be placed in the temple at Jerusalem represented a fundamental error in the Roman understanding of Jewish monotheism. This is perhaps chiefly derived from the fact that Greek and Roman polytheism maintained a tradition of religious syncretism, in which foreign cults were easily accepted. (The acceptance of Judaism as a cult, through Christianity, is testament to this, but Romans of the period also imported various other eastern cults, including Mithraism, the cult of the Magna Mater, and the Egyptian cult of Isis.) But another irony is lurking here: to the ancient Greeks and Romans, who considered the Hebrew word “Adonai” — used to refer to the Lord God in the Old Testament — to be cognate (as it is linguistically) with the eastern mystery-cult of Adonis, the lover of Venus. Peter Schafer in an excellent survey of anti-Jewish attitudes in the ancient quotes an essay by the Romanized Greek Plutarch entitled “Who the God of the Jews Is” which “hinted at the possibly identityâ€¦with Adonis and connected the Jews dislike of the pig with the fact that ‘Adonis is said to have been slain by the boar’.” (Schafer 53). Schafer additionally quotes numerous other sources from the period which go one step further to assume that the Jews actually worship (on the model of the animal deities of Egypt) a giant pig, not unlike the one that slew Adonis: he quotes a satirical poem by Petronius which begins “The Jew may worship his pig-god” (Schafer 77). In other words, the historic origins of Israel with Moses and Egypt led to a fundamental Roman error in considering Judaism to be, essentially, just one more Egyptian animal-god cult.
The conflict between flesh-and-blood humans and the abstract all-powerful God of the Jews would of course be further played out in Christianity, which emerged from the disastrous Roman policy in Judaea under Caligula. It is worth noting that the central conflict between Christianity and Judaism has hinged upon precisely the same substitution of the human figure for the divine image as was played out in Caligula’s order that a statue representing himself as a godhead should be erected in the Temple at Jerusalem. Deicide — the crime of murdering a deity — has been ascribed to the Jews by the Christians on the basis of Matthew 27: 20-26:
But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.
Of course, the historical Jesus was crucified, which was a uniquely Roman manner of death: when the slave revolt of Spartacus was suppressed in 71 BCE, Appian tells us, six thousand rebel slaves were crucified at once by Roman legions, their crucified corpses lining the road from Rome to Capua (a distance of approximately 125 miles). It is strange that the Gospels go out of their way to offer a reason why it was not the Romans but the Jews who were responsible for the execution of Jesus, claiming that under Roman occupation they had no law to put a man to death. For evidence to contradict this claim that the Jewish high priests lacked the power to, one need read no further than the rest of the New Testament: in Acts 6:12 they command the death by stoning of St. Stephen Protomartyr and at John 8:5 they seem to challenge Jesus with the letter of the law in suggesting the woman taken in adultery be stoned to death as well. The charge of deicide has historically been one of the major sources of conflict between Christianity and Judaism, although a recent Vatican press-release reveals that Pope Benedict XVI’s next book will officially absolve the Jews of the crime of deicide. On March 2, 2011, the Associated Press reported that a new book by the Pope will offer a sweeping exoneration of the Jewish people for the death of Jesus Christ. The Second Vatican Council made a similar declaration in 1965. But Benedict is the first pope to personally do so, and Jewish scholars said Wednesday that his arguments were a milestone attack on the “foundation of anti-Semitic persecution.”
But to a certain degree, the millenarian role played by the Jews within Christian eschatology may have been the chief means whereby the Christian religion could maintain a form of anti-Semitism, but it is seldom noted the degree to which Christianity represented a continuity with earlier forms of polytheism. The Christian mythology around Jesus resulted in a strange paradox, when the claims of his divine paternity were taken seriously alongside the New Testament account of the crucifixion: this rendered Christianity a rather uncomfortably straightforward human sacrifice cult. Christianity still has a God who requires propitiation; as Regina M. Schwartz notes of the Book of Genesis that “the sacrifices of Cain and Abel suggest propitiation, that is, an offering to ward off divine wrath, to encourage the deity’s favor, to invoke his blessings of prosperity. With the blessings or curses of the cosmos attached to divine pleasure or displeasure, God’s rejection of Cain’s sacrifice is no mere embarrassment.” (Schwartz 2-3). Schwartz sees this combination of a personal god and a primitive concept of sacrifice as the reason for the large amount of violence that is associated with western religions. The emergence of the Christian doctrine of the “Holy Trinity” — which claimed the mystical identity of the Yahweh of the Torah and Jesus, together with a Holy Spirit that pervades all things, in which each of these three elements is equivalently God but is not equivalent to any of the others individually — was put forward in opposition to bishop Arius at the Council of Nicaea, although the “Arian heresy” would emerge periodically in the later history of Christianity. But the dependence of the Roman Catholic church upon not only the doctrine of the Trinity but of the acceptance of native cults into the Roman Catholic “cult of the saints” leaves a remarkably pagan impression for an ostensibly Christian religion. However it is worth noting that after the Reformation shattered the monolith of medieval Christianity into numerous different sects, that the Jews then begin to play a more interesting role in the redefinition of Christianity: the traditional millenarian role allotted to the Jews on the basis of the New Testament book of Revelation leads both to active courting of the Jews by millenarian sects (as occurred in England under Cromwell) or angry denunciation of the Jews for failing to follow the script offered to them by Revelation (which largely characterized Martin Luther’s diatribes about the Jews in Germany). This shift in Christianity would use the Jews as a pivot to attain further distance from Roman Catholicism — to a certain degree, the Jews were held up by post-Reformation Christian denominations as models of monotheistic piety in contradistinction to the virtual polytheism of the corrupt Roman church.
To look at one final iteration of the interaction between Jewish monotheism and polytheism, I would like to turn to one final figure, often supposed to have been beyond any such silly questions of mere religious belief — this is Dr. Sigmund Freud, the Viennese physician who would found the discipline of “psychoanalysis” and is in many ways considered a precursor, and an important developmental figure, for the modern science of psychiatry. Sander Gilman has done an excellent job unpacking the strange evasions entailed in assessing Freud’s Jewishness, starting with his legendary characterization of himself as a “Godless Jew” or “Jewish atheist.” Freud of course is a legendary debunker of religion tout court: the first chapter of Civilization and its Discontents has Freud confessing that he himself has never felt the feeling of “oceanic” connectedness with some larger reality which characterizes religious experience — then explains that this religious urge is in fact due to the “derivation of religious needs from the infant’s helplessness and the longing for the father aroused by it” which, says Freud, “seems to me incontrovertible.” Freud then notes “I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father’s protection” (Freud 19). At this point, one is tempted to gently inquire of “Viennese wizard” (as Vladimir Nabokov liked to call Dr. Freud) if he really thinks that any infant is capable of longing for a father rather than a mother at such an early developmental stage, or if the need for a father’s protection is really so much stronger than the need for a mother’s nutrition. But then the whole of Freud’s late work is subsumed in a fictive attempt to write the so-called “Oedipus complex” as a kind of foundational myth for humanity, bound and determined to prove that the incestuous motivations which he think course through everyone’s most basic psychological make-up are, in fact, writ large as the building blocks of society. This is the substance of Freud’s own strange work on Jewish monotheism, the 1939 Moses and Monotheism, in which Freud offers a revisionist psychohistory of the Jewish religion, in which Moses fails to make it to the Promised Land because he is killed and eaten by the primal horde, and the succeeding guilt over this murder is the origin of the famous Jewish guilt. This theme, which Freud had explored earlier in Totem and Taboo, has no actual evidence to support it. Yet Freud will define the progress toward monotheism in precisely the same terms that the Romans would use to denigrate the Jews as simply another Egyptian cult:
The god, in human form, still carried at first the head of an animal; later on he was won’t to assume the guise of the same animal. Still later the animal became sacred to him and his favourite companion or else he was reputed to have slain the animal, when he added its name to his own. Between the totem animal and the god the hero made his appearance; this was often an early stage of deification. The idea of a Highest Being seems to have appeared early; at first it was shadowy and devoid of any connection with the daily interests of mankind. As the tribes and people were knit together into larger unities and the gods also become organized into families and hierarchies. Often one of them was elevated to be the overlord of gods and men. The next step, to worship only one God, was taken hesitatingly, and at long last the decision was made to concede all power to one God only and not to suffer any other gods beside him. (Freud 105).
Although Gilman is mostly concerned with analyzing Freud’s Jewishness in terms of prevailing racial stereotypes, it is worth noting that in religious terms, Freud here manages to distance himself from any sympathetic mainstream Jewish account of monotheism. Indeed, Freud may best be understood as a bizarre form of atavistic hankering for polytheism: one may note the Hellenizing imperative of his terminology (such as “Oedipus complex” or the Acheron quotation which serves as epigraph to the Traumdeutung) which occurred at a time when “Hellenized” or “Apikoros” were still legitimate terms of opprobrium within the Jewish community. And we may finally consider if, ultimately, perhaps Freud might be considered as a polytheist: as a medical doctor, he did (after all) take the Hippocratic Oath, one of the few available expressions of polytheism around. It might seem frivolous, but there is something in Freud which so resists the normative Jewish conception of God that it seems possible he might have secretly believed in the old Gods of Rome.
Ferrill, Arther. Caligula, Emperor of Rome. London: Thames and Hudson, 1991. Print.
Freud, Sigmund. Civilization and its Discontents. Translated with an introduction by James Strachey. New York: W.W. Norton and Co, 1962. Print.
Freud, Sigmund. Moses and Monotheism. Translated by Katherine Jones. London: Hogarth Press, 1939. Print.
Gay, Peter. Freud: A Life for Our Time. New York: Norton, 1998. Print.
Gilman, Sander. Freud, Race and Gender. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995. Print.
Gilman, Sander. The Case of Sigmund Freud: Medicine and Identity at the Fin-de-Siecle. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994. Print.
Moberly, R.W.L. “How Appropriate Is ‘Monotheism’ As A Category for Biblical Interpretation?” In Stuckenbruck, Loren T. And Stroston-North, Wendy E. (Editors) Early Jewish and Christian Monotheism. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Print.
“Pope Exonerates Jews.” Associated Press, 2 March 2011. Accessed 1 April 2011 at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/world/europe/03pope.html?_r=1&ref=benedictxvi . Web.
Schaefer, Peter. Judeophobia: Attitudes Towards The Jews In The Ancient World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997. Print.
Schwartz, Regina M. The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.
Get Professional Assignment Help Cheaply
Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?
Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.
Why Choose Our Academic Writing Service?
- Plagiarism free papers
- Timely delivery
- Any deadline
- Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
- Subject-relevant academic writer
- Adherence to paper instructions
- Ability to tackle bulk assignments
- Reasonable prices
- 24/7 Customer Support
- Get superb grades consistently
Online Academic Help With Different Subjects
Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.
Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.
While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.
Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.
In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.
Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.
We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!
We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.
Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.
What discipline/subjects do you deal in?
We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.
Are your writers competent enough to handle my paper?
Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.
What if I don’t like the paper?
There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.
- When assigning your order, we match the paper’s discipline with the writer’s field/specialization. Since all our writers are graduates, we match the paper’s subject with the field the writer studied. For instance, if it’s a nursing paper, only a nursing graduate and writer will handle it. Furthermore, all our writers have academic writing experience and top-notch research skills.
- We have a quality assurance that reviews the paper before it gets to you. As such, we ensure that you get a paper that meets the required standard and will most definitely make the grade.
In the event that you don’t like your paper:
- The writer will revise the paper up to your pleasing. You have unlimited revisions. You simply need to highlight what specifically you don’t like about the paper, and the writer will make the amendments. The paper will be revised until you are satisfied. Revisions are free of charge
- We will have a different writer write the paper from scratch.
- Last resort, if the above does not work, we will refund your money.
Will the professor find out I didn’t write the paper myself?
Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.
What if the paper is plagiarized?
We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.
When will I get my paper?
You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.
Will anyone find out that I used your services?
We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.
How our Assignment Help Service Works
1. Place an order
You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.
2. Pay for the order
Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.
3. Track the progress
You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.
4. Download the paper
The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!