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
Richard Hakluyt, The Principal Navigations, Voyages, Traffiques, and Discoveries of the English Nation 21 21 Browse Search
Knight's Mechanical Encyclopedia (ed. Knight) 9 9 Browse Search
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background 7 7 Browse Search
Harper's Encyclopedia of United States History (ed. Benson Lossing) 5 5 Browse Search
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition. 5 5 Browse Search
Robert Underwood Johnson, Clarence Clough Buell, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. Volume 4. 1 1 Browse Search
James Russell Lowell, Among my books 1 1 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 1578 AD or search for 1578 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 7 results in 5 document sections:

M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, Chapter 1 (search)
imensions of the original whole, it is unquestionable that they owe their main suggestion and much of their matter to the Cornélie. Since then Garnier, when his powers were still immature, could so effectively adapt these incidental passages, it is not surprising that he should by and by be able to stand alone, and produce plays in which the central interest was more dramatic. Of these we are concerned only with Marc Antoine, which was acted with success at the Hôtel de Bourgogne in 1578, and was printed in the same year. In it Garnier has not altogether freed himself from his former faults. There are otiose personages who are introduced merely to supply general reflections: Diomedes, the secretary, on the pathos of Cleopatra's fall; Philostratus, the philosopher, on the overthrow of the Egyptian monarchy. There is no inter-action of character on character, all the protagonists being so carefully excluded from each other that Octavianus does not meet Antony, Antony does not m
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, chapter 3 (search)
ay of dedicating books to kings who deceased soon after), and was lamented by Amyot in a simple and heartfelt Latin elegy. But his regrets were quite disinterested, for when Henry III. succeeded in 1574, he showed himself as kind a master, and in 1578 decreed that the Grand Almoner should also be Commander of the Order of the Holy Ghost without being required to give proofs of nobility. Invested with ample revenues and manifold dignities, Amyot for the next eleven years lived a busy and sidition. is a task of years rather than of months. The embassage, despite many difficulties to be overcome, had been a success, and Lord North returned to receive the thanks and favours he deserved. He stood high in the Queen's regard, and in 1578 she honoured him with a visit for a night. He was lavish in his welcome, building, we are told, new kitchens for the occasion; filling them with provisions of all kinds, the oysters alone amounting to one cart load and two horse loads; rifling the
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Antony and Cleopatra, chapter 11 (search)
uth and nothing but the truth, when tested by the investigations of modern scholars. His position and circumstances were not theirs. He took Plutarch's Marcus Antonius as his chief and almost sole authority, resorting possibly for suggestions of situation and phrase to the Senecan tragedies on the same theme, probably for the descriptions of Egypt to Holland's translation of Pliny or Cory's translation of Leo, and almost certainly for many details about Sextus PompeiusSee Appendix D. to the 1578 version of Appian; but always treating the Life not only as his inexhaustible storehouse, but as sufficient guarantee for any statement that it contained. In short he could give the history of the time, not as it was but as Plutarch represented it, and as Plutarch's representation explained itself to an Elizabethan. It is hardly to his discredit if he underestimates Cleopatra's political astuteness, and has no guess of the political projects that recent criticism has ascribed to Antony, for
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, part app. c, chapter 1 (search)
is oration, he unfolded before the whole assembly the bloudy garments of the dead, thrust through in many places with their swords, and called the malefactors, cruell and cursed murtherers. With these words he put the people into a fury. （Marcus Antonius.) Shakespeare certainly did not get much of the stuff for Antony's speech from these notices. Appian, on the other hand, gives a much fuller report, which was quite accessible to ordinary readers, for Appian had been published in 1578 by Henrie Bynniman.Under the title: An auncient Historie and exquisite Chronicle of the Romanes warres, both Ciuile and Foren. Written in Greeke by the noble Orator and Historiographer Appian of Alexandria. The English version of the most important passages runs thus: Antony marking how they were affected, did not let it slippe, but toke upon him to make Caesars funeral sermon, as Consul, of a Consul, friend of a friend, and kinsman, of a kinsman (for Antony was partly his kinsman) and
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, part app. d, chapter 1 (search)
I do not think there can be any serious doubt about Shakespeare's having consulted the 1578 translation of the Bella Civilia for this play, at any rate for the parts dealing with Sextus Pompeius. The most important passage is the one (A. and C. III. v. 19) which records Antony's indignation at Pompey's death. Now of that death there is no mention at all in the Marcus Antonius of Plutarch; and even in the Octavius Caesar Augustus by Simon Goulard, which was included in the 1583 edition of tarch's Life, and can be considered a debtor to Appian only in the points that are illustrated in my previous extracts. But there are two qualifications I should like to make to this statement. In the first place, I have not seen the 1578 version of Appian, the passages I have quoted being merely transcripts made by my direction. I have had only the original text to work upon, and it is possible that the Tudor Translation might offer verbal coincidences that of course would not sug