hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
1603 AD 11 11 Browse Search
1600 AD 10 10 Browse Search
1608 AD 9 9 Browse Search
1578 AD 7 7 Browse Search
1601 AD 6 6 Browse Search
1599 AD 6 6 Browse Search
1623 AD 6 6 Browse Search
1607 AD 6 6 Browse Search
1561 AD 5 5 Browse Search
1574 AD 5 5 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background. Search the whole document.

Found 33 total hits in 22 results.

1 2 3
1869 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
tle spasmodic. In both instances Shakespeare had to suit his treatment to the material. But that material in the case of Coriolanus offered less difficulty. It lay ready to the dramatist's hand and took the shape that he imposed, almost of itself. The result is a masterpiece that, as an organic work of art, has been placed on the level of Shakespeare's most independent tragedies.E.g. by Viehoff, in his interesting essay, Shakespeare's Coriolan (Jahrbuch der D.-Sh. Gesellschaft, Bd. iv. 1869), which has been used in the following paragraphs. Thus it is easy to see how the personality of the hero dominates the complex story, as the heart transmits the life-blood through the body and its members, and receives it back again; how his character contains in itself the seeds of his offence and its reparation; how the other figures are related to him in parallel and contrast; how the two grand interests, the conflict between Coriolanus and Aufidius, the conflict between Coriolanu
1602 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
t to pair him with the Roman who would not flatter Neptune for his trident, and of whom it was said, his heart's his mouth. Still the analogies in career and character are there, so far as they go; but they are insufficient to prove that the actual suggested the poetical tragedy, still less to override the internal evidence, relative though that be; for they could linger and germinate in the poet's mind to bring forth fruit long afterwards: as for example the treason and execution of Biron in 1602 inspired Chapman to write The Conspiracie and The Tragedie which were acted in 1608. Again, in connection with what seems to be the actual date, an attempt has been made to explain one prominent characteristic of the play from a domestic experience through which Shakespeare had just passed. His mother died in September 1608, and her memory is supposed to be enshrined in the picture of Volumnia. As Dr. Brandes puts it:William Shakespeare, a critical study. The death of a mother
1600 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
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
1623 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
Chapter 1 Position of the Play Before the Romances. Its Political and Artistic Aspects Coriolanus seems to have been first published in the folio of 1623, and is one of the sixteen plays described as not formerly entered to other men. In this dearth of information there has naturally been some debate on the date of its composition, yet the opinions of critics with few exceptions agree as to its general position and tend more and more to limit the period of uncertainty to a very few months. s for the stage, it was generally passed over. Not universally, however. It seems already to have engaged the attention of one important dramatist in France, the prolific and gifted Alexandre Hardy. Hardy began to publish his works only in 1623, and the volume containing his Coriolan appeared only in 1625; so there is hardly any possibility of Shakespeare's having utilised this play. And, on the other hand, it was certainly written before 1608, probably in the last years of the sixteenth
1625 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
athetic to many, and the legend is of so little historic significance that it is often omitted from modern handbooks of Roman history; so, for these reasons, despite its pre-eminent fitness for the stage, it was generally passed over. Not universally, however. It seems already to have engaged the attention of one important dramatist in France, the prolific and gifted Alexandre Hardy. Hardy began to publish his works only in 1623, and the volume containing his Coriolan appeared only in 1625; so there is hardly any possibility of Shakespeare's having utilised this play. And, on the other hand, it was certainly written before 1608, probably in the last years of the sixteenth century, but in any case by 1607, so there is even less possibility of its being influenced by Shakespeare's treatment. All the more interesting is it to observe the coincidences that exist between them, and that are due to their having selected a great many of the same motifs from Plutarch's story. It shows
January, 1609 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
s pamphlets, and concluded that it was proverbial; but it has been pointed out in answer to this Introduction to the Clarendon Press Edition. that Nashe has only the lurch and not the supplementary words, of the garland, while it is to the phrase as a whole, not to the component parts, that the individual character belongs. This, if not absolutely beyond challenge, is at least very cogent, and probably few will deny that Coriolanus must have been in existence before Epicoene was acted in January 1609, old style. How long before? And did it succeed or precede Antony and Cleopatra? Attempts have been made to find in that play immediate anticipations of the mental attitude and of particular thoughts that appear in Coriolanus. Thus Octavia's dilemma in her petition has been quoted: A more unhappy lady, If this division chance, ne'er stood between, Praying for both parts: The good gods will mock me presently, When I shall pray, O, bless my lord and husband! Undo that pra
January, 1608 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
ous case, may be reserved for future discussion. Meanwhile the dating of Coriolanus, subsequently to 1612, is not only opposed to internal evidences of versification and style, but would separate it from Shakespeare's tragedies and introduce it among the romantic plays of his final period. If, however, we turn to the supposed allusions that make for the intermediate date of 1608 or 1609, we do not find them much more satisfactory. Thus it has been argued that the severe cold in January, 1608, when even the Thames was frozen over, furnished the simile: You are no surer, no, Than is the coal of fire upon the ice. (I. i. 176.) But surely there must have been many opportunities for such things to present themselves to Shakespeare's observation or imagination, by the time that he was forty-four years old. Again Malone found a reference to James's proclamation in favour of breeding silk-worms and the importation of young mulberry trees during 1609, in the expression: No
1889 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
ver brood on her. Then, especially by those who advocate a later date for the play, a political motive for it has been discovered. Mr. Whitelaw, who would assign it to 1610, when James's first parliament was dissolved, conjectures that in Coriolanus Shakespeare intended a two-fold warning, to the pride of James, and to the gathering resistance of the Commons.Coriolanus. Rugby Edition. Mr. Garnett,In the conclusion of his essay on the Date and Occasion of the Tempest. Universal Review, 1889. on the other hand, maintains that Coriolanus, to our apprehension, manifestly reflects the feelings of a conservative observer of the contests between James and his refractory parliaments, and placing it after the Tempest, would connect it with the dissolution of the Addled Parliament in 1614. But since the friction between King and Commons, though it intensified with the years, was seldom entirely absent, this theory adapts itself pretty well to any date, and Dr. Brandes, while refusing
November, 1603 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
, the farm of wine-licenses granted him by the Queen had made him objectionable to the pothouse politicians, and his opposition in parliament to a bill for cheapening corn had recently drawn on him new unpopularity. He, therefore, shortly after the accession of James succumbed to the charge, that he, the scarred veteran of the Spanish wars, the zealous advocate of new expeditions against Spain, had involved himself in treasonous transactions with this, the hereditary foe of England. In November 1603 the man who had won treasure-fleets and vast regions for his country, almost fell a victim to popular rage as he was being transferred from one prison to another.Strictly speaking, from the Tower to Winchester for trial. A month later he was condemned to death on wretched evidence: he was not yet executed however but locked up in the Tower, so that men were in suspense as to his fate for many years. To depict his character his biographer Edwards involuntarily hit on some lines of Shakesp
1612 AD (search for this): part 5, chapter 17
against it. On the other hand, an excessively late date has been proposed for Coriolanus on the ground of its alleged indebtedness to the fourth edition of North, of which it is sometimes maintained that Shakespeare possessed a copy. Till 1612, Volumnia says in her great appeal: Think now with thy selfe, how much more unfortunatly, then all the women livinge we are come hether; but in the fourth edition this becomes unfortunate, and so Shakespeare has it: Think with thyself How moort, except one of those alluring and hazardous guesses that would account for the play in the conditions of the time. This, too, as in the previous case, may be reserved for future discussion. Meanwhile the dating of Coriolanus, subsequently to 1612, is not only opposed to internal evidences of versification and style, but would separate it from Shakespeare's tragedies and introduce it among the romantic plays of his final period. If, however, we turn to the supposed allusions that make f
1 2 3