hide Matching Documents

The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.

Document Max. Freq Min. Freq
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 22 22 Browse Search
Knight's Mechanical Encyclopedia (ed. Knight) 20 20 Browse Search
Strabo, Geography (ed. H.C. Hamilton, Esq., W. Falconer, M.A.) 12 12 Browse Search
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background 10 10 Browse Search
J. B. Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary 7 7 Browse Search
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4. 6 6 Browse Search
Appian, The Civil Wars (ed. Horace White) 5 5 Browse Search
Edward Porter Alexander, Military memoirs of a Confederate: a critical narrative 4 4 Browse Search
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith) 3 3 Browse Search
Appian, The Foreign Wars (ed. Horace White) 2 2 Browse Search
View all matching documents...

Browsing named entities in M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background. You can also browse the collection for 1600 AD or search for 1600 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 10 results in 5 document sections:

M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, Chapter 1 (search)
d after Elizabeth, and few have survived that were composed before the beginning of the seventeenth century. For long the Historical Drama treated by preference the traditions and annals of the island realm, and only by degrees did the matter of Britain yield its pride of place to the matter of Rome the Grand. Moreover, the earlier Roman Histories are of very inferior importance, and none of them reaches even a moderate standard of merit till the production of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar in 1600 or 1601. In this department Shakespeare had not the light to guide him that he found for his English Histories in Marlowe's Edward II., or even in such plays as The Famous Victories of Henry V. The extant pieces that precede his first experiment, seem only to be groping their way, and it is fair to suppose that the others which have been lost did no better. Their interest, in so far as they have any interest at all, lies in the light they throw on the gradual progress of dramatic art in thi
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, Chapter 2 (search)
Chapter 2 Shakespeare's Treatment of History The turn of the centuries roughly bisects the dramatic career of Shakespeare. In the first half he had written many comedies and a few tragedies; in the second he was to write many tragedies with a few plays which, on account of the happy ending and other traits, may be assigned to the opposite class. But beyond these recognised and legitimate subdivisions of the Romantic Drama, he had also before 1600 busied himself with that characteristic product of the Elizabethan Age, the Historical Play dealing with the national annals. In this kind, indeed, he had been hardly less abundant than in comedy, the proportions being nine of the one to eleven of the other. Then suddenly he leaves it aside, and returns to it only at the close in Henry VIII., which moreover is but partially his handiwork. Thus, while the tragic note is not inaudible in the earlier period of his activity nor the comic note in the later, the third, that sounded so loud
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, chapter 3 (search)
modern money.That is, if we multiply them by eight. They give the impression that North was notvery well off, that in his circumstances some assistance was desirable, and a little assistance would go a long way. At the same time they show that his conduct deserved and obtained appreciation. Indeed, the pension from the Queen is granted expressly in consideration of the good and faithful service done unto us. He also benefited by a substantial bequest from Lord North, who had died in 1600, but he was now an old man of at least sixty-six, and probably he did not live long to enjoy his new resources. Of the brother Lloyd records: There was none better to represent our State than my Lord North, who had been two years in Walsingham's house, four in Leicester's service, had seen six courts, twenty battles, nine treaties, and four solemn jousts, whereof he was no mean part. In regard to the younger son, even the year of whose death we do not know, the parallel summary would run: H
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Julius Caesar, chapter 4 (search)
reditor: and other coincidences like the Et tu, Brute, in Acolastus his Afterwit By S. Nicholson.(1600) may be due to the use of common or current authorities. One little detail has been used as an argument that the play was later than 1600. Cassius says: There was a Brutus once that would have brook'd The eternal devil to keep his state in Rome As easily as a king. (I. ii. o the increasing disapproval of profane language on the stage; and since three plays published in 1600 use infernal, the inference is that Julius Caesar is subsequent to them. One fails to see, how very well have been made in any of the intervening years, even though it were written before 1600. The most then that can be established by this set of inferences, is that it was produced after Mloser relations with Hamlet than with Henry V. It is not rash to place it between the two, in 1600 or 1601. This does not however mean that we necessarily have it quite in its original form. O
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Coriolanus, chapter 17 (search)
ve that natural competency Whereby they live. (I. i. 135 seq.) This certainly is liker Livy than Plutarch; and besides the chances of Shakespeare having read Livy in the original, we have to bear in mind that in 1600 Philemon Holland published the Romane Historie written by Titus Livius of Padua. His version, as it is difficult to procure, may be quoted in full: Whilome (quoth he) when as in mans bodie, all the parts thereof agreed not, as now they do in oike Shakespeare, and has made the most of the parallels between his story and the story of Coriolanus. Rather more than the most. It is special pleading to interpret Raleigh's arguments against the Act for sewing Hemp and the Statute of Tillage in 1600, as directed against cheap corn. His point was rather that coercive legislation in regard to agriculture hindered production and was oppressive to poor men. Nor am I aware that his speeches on these occasions increased his unpopularity,--which, no