Newsletter Vol
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
A Yorkshire Tragedy by William Shakespeare (Apocrypha)
A Yorkshire Tragedy by William Shakespeare (Apocrypha) This etext was produced by Tony Adam. Shakespeare, William. A Yorkshire Tragedy. Not So New as Lamentable and True. In C.F. Tucker Brooke, ed., The Shakespeare Apocrypha (Oxford, 1918). ALL'S ONE, OR, ONE OF THE FOUR PLAYS IN ONE, CALLED A YORK-SHIRE TRAGEDY AS IT WAS PLAYED BY THE KING'S MAJESTY'S PLAYERS. Dramatis Personae. Husband. Master of a College. Knight, a Justice of Peace. Oliver, Ralph, Samuel, serving-men. Other Servants, and Officers. page 1 / 56 Wife. Maid-servant. A little Boy. SCENE I. A room in Calverly Hall. [Enter Oliver and Ralph, two servingmen.] OLIVER. Sirrah Ralph, my young Mistress is in such a pitiful passionate humor for the long absence of her love-- RALPH. Why, can you blame her? why, apples hanging longer on the tree then when they are ripe makes so many fallings; viz., Mad wenches, because they are not gathered in time, are fain to drop of them selves, and then tis Common you know for every man to take em up. OLIVER. Mass, thou sayest true, Tis common indeed: but, sirrah, is neither our young master returned, nor our fellow Sam come from London? RALPH. page 2 / 56 Neither of either, as the Puritan bawd says. Slidd, I hear Sam: Sam's come, her's! Tarry! come, yfaith, now my nose itches for news. OLIVER. And so does mine elbow. [Sam calls within. Where are you there?] SAM. Boy, look you walk my horse with discretion; I have rid him simply. I warrant his skin sticks to his back with very heat: if a should catch cold and get the Cough of the Lungs I were well served, were I not? [Enter Sam. -
Introductiontoshakespearianstu
I N TR O D U C TI O N SHA KESPEA R IA N STU DY . C O L L I N S ’ SCHOOL AND COLLEGE CLASSICS, I I N A N D TE W TH I NTROD UCT O S N O S. i e 1 clo t/z. Fcap. 8270} pr c s. , ’ A . A E PE T D M o nm s B . H KE SPEA RE S M S b Rev . S T , y , V E I E b R ev D I B A M ERC H A N T O F N C . O RR S . , y M , R IS B A I b R D MO R . CH A RD ev . R I I , y . , W LA W N Rx CH A RD b M . SO . I I I , y K I N G E N Y b WM L AW N R V . SO . H I I I , y I N A b W B KEM H E D G LE R . S A K , y Dr . A CB ETH b A M U E L EI L M , y S N , A s YO U I K E I T b A M UE L EI L L , y S N , U L I US CE S A R b A M UE L EI L J , y S N , ’ M x L'rO N s PA RA m SE O ST B oks I and o mus et b S G . DAV I o C c . L , I I , , , y J . -
Download Thesis
This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ Telltale women the dramaturgy of female characters in Shakespeare's history plays Bachrach, Hailey Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 02. Oct. 2021 Bachrach 1 TELLTALE WOMEN The Dramaturgy of Female Characters in Shakespeare’s History Plays By Hailey Bachrach Submitted to King’s College London English Department in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 30 September 2020 Bachrach 2 Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... -
Summary of the Known Historical Records
Records for WS Section A Distribution Strat Stratford Record (including marriage licence issued in Worcester). Section A below. Lon London Record (including references in records of playing companies). Sections B & C. PR Publication Record (title pages & Stationers’ Register). Section E. LA Literary Allusion (mainly printed, some handwritten). Sections C & D Strat / Lon PR / LA 1564 Strat 65 66 67 68 69 1570 The lost years of Childhood, 71 Education, and Youth 72 73 After his baptism in 1564, there is no record of William Shakspere until the issue of a marriage 74 licence in Worcester in 1582. 75 76 77 78 79 1580 81 82 Strat Marriage licence 83 Strat Named as father of Susanna 84 85 Strat 2 Feb. Named as father of Hamnet & Judeth 86 The lost years of early manhood 87 88 (Lon) William Shakspere is mentioned only once – in a legal document as heir to a disputed portion of 89 land. This record does not say where he was or 1590 what he was doing. 91 1 Strat / Lon PR / LA (LA) The cryptic allusion in Groatsworth might refer to William 1592 Shakespeare, or it might not 93 PR Named in dedication of Venus & Adonis 94 PR Named in dedication of Lucrece 95 Lon LA Strat Lon Named in Stratford as the father of Hamnet, deceased. 96 Bound over in London to keep the peace (Langley writ). 97 Strat 98 Strat Lon PR LA Lon PR LA Eight records only: Cited as author on four title pages; 99 mentioned twice as tax defaulter; twice elsewhere. 1600 PR 01 02 Strat PR 03 Lon PR 04 Lon PR LA 05 Strat Lon PR 06 The lost London years of middle-age. -
Michael West
Theater of Enigma in Shakespeare’s England Michael West Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2018 © 2017 Michael West All rights reserved ABSTRACT Theater of Enigma in Shakespeare’s England Michael West Theater of Enigma in Shakespeare’s England demonstrates the cognitive, affective, and social import of enigmatic theatrical moments. While the presence of other playgoers obviously shapes the experience of attending a play, I argue that deliberately induced moments of audience ignorance are occasions for audience members to be especially aware of their relations to others who may or may not share their bafflement. I explore the character of states of knowing and not-knowing among audience members and the relations that obtain among playgoers who inhabit these states. Further, I trace the range of performance techniques whereby playgoers are positioned in a cognitive no-man's land, lying somewhere between full understanding and utter ignorance—techniques that I collectively term “enigmatic theater.” I argue that moments of enigmatic theater were a dynamic agent in the formation of collectives in early modern playhouses. I use here the term “collective” to denote the temporary, occasional, and fleeting quality of these groupings, which occur during performance but are dissipated afterwards. Sometimes, this collective resembles what Victor Turner terms communitas, in which the normal societal divisions are suspended and the playgoers become a unified collectivity. At other times, however, plays solicit the formation of multiple collectives defined by their differing degrees of knowledge about a seeming enigma. -
Purgatoire Saint Patrice, Short Metrical Chronicle, Fouke Le Fitz Waryn, and King Horn
ROMANCES COPIED BY THE LUDLOW SCRIBE: PURGATOIRE SAINT PATRICE, SHORT METRICAL CHRONICLE, FOUKE LE FITZ WARYN, AND KING HORN A dissertation submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Catherine A. Rock May 2008 Dissertation written by Catherine A. Rock B. A., University of Akron, 1981 B. A., University of Akron, 1982 B. M., University of Akron, 1982 M. I. B. S., University of South Carolina, 1988 M. A. Kent State University, 1991 M. A. Kent State University, 1998 Ph. D., Kent State University, 2008 Approved by ___________________________________, Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Susanna Fein ___________________________________, Members, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Don-John Dugas ___________________________________ Kristen Figg ___________________________________ David Raybin ___________________________________ Isolde Thyret Accepted by ___________________________________, Chair, Department of English Ronald J. Corthell ___________________________________, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Jerry Feezel ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………………………………………………………viii Chapter I. Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 Significance of the Topic…………………………………………………..2 Survey of the State of the Field……………………………………………5 Manuscript Studies: 13th-14th C. England………………………...5 Scribal Studies: 13th-14th C. England……………………………13 The Ludlow Scribe of Harley 2253……………………………...19 British Library -
CYMBELINE" in the Fllii^Slhi TI CENTURY
"CYMBELINE" IN THE fllii^SLHi TI CENTURY Bennett Jackson Submitted in partial fulfilment for the de ree of uaster of Arts in the University of Birmingham. October 1971. University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. SYNOPSIS This thesis consists of an Introduction, followed by Part I (chapters 1-2) in which nineteenth- century criticism of the play is discussed, particular attention being paid to Helen Faucit's essay on Imogen, and its relationship to her playing of the role. In Part II the stags-history of Oymbcline in London is traced from 1785 to Irving's Lyceum production of 1896. Directions from promptbooks used by G-.P. Cooke, W.C. Macready, Helen Eaucit, and Samuel ±helps are transcribed and discussed, and in the last chapter the influence of Bernard Shaw on Ellen Terry's Imogen is considered in the light of their correspondence and the actress's rehearsal copies of the play. There are three appendices: a list of performances; transcriptions of two newspaper reviews (from 1843 and 1864) and one private diary (Gordon Crosse's notes on the Lyceum Gymbeline); and discussion of one of the promptbooks prepared for Charles Kean's projected production. -
Hamlet and the Invention of Tragedy1
Hamlet and the invention of Tragedy1 Helen Cooper UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, OXFORD The first thing that should be said about Hamlet is that he is a serial killer. He kills off a higher proportion of the speaking cast list, either directly with his own hand or indirectly, than any other Shakespearean character, including Richard III and Macbeth. To begin with, his victims include the entire Polonius family. He kills Polonius deliberately, though it is true that he believes him to be someone else at the time; but such an instance of mistaken identity, of killing B when one had set out with the intention of killing A, is not acceptable as an excuse for murder in a court of law. Laertes he kills with his own hand, though inadvertently; the text leaves open the opportunity, taken up in many productions, to have Hamlet engineer the change of swords deliberately as result of realizing that Laertes’ is unbated, but he cannot know that it is poisoned. Ophelia’s death he causes indirectly, but there can be no question but that he carries total moral responsibility for it, first tendering her affection, then proceeding through public humiliation to private violent abuse, and finally murdering her father. The First Quarto has Laertes make the double accusation of responsibility for the catastrophes to both Polonius and Ophelia explicit: Griefe upon griefe, my father murdered, My sister thus distracted: Cursed be his soule that wrought this wicked act.2 At no point, however, does Hamlet acknowledge his own role in bringing about her death, nor does he show any compunction over it. -
Introducing John Hall, Master of Physicke
1 Introducing John Hall, Master of Physicke The earliest reference to John Hall is his admission to Queens’ College, Cambridge, aged 14, in 1589. The last is his will dated 25 November 1635. His Little Book of Cures, Described in Case Histories and Empirically Proven, Tried and Tested in Certain Places and on Noted People forms the most substantial account of his life and work among his patients in the locale made famous by Hall’s father-in-law, William Shakespeare. Most of the records relating to Hall concern his life in Stratford-upon-Avon, starting with his marriage to Susanna, the Shakespeares’ eldest child, in June 1607. Hall was born in Carlton, Bedfordshire, the son of William Hall. John Taplin has written importantly and extensively on Hall’s family background in Shakespeare’s Country Families (Taplin 2018: 85–112). Taplin’s book is not widely known but is available for consultation in the Shakespeare Centre Library. Hall received his BA in 1593/4 and his MA in 1597. A doctorate in medicine was required for licensing by the College of Physicians of London or to teach at a university, but not otherwise. An academic doctorate was no more necessary as a medical qualification then than it is now. Although Hall never obtained, or claimed to have, the degree of Doctor of Medicine, his MA made him better qualified than most physicians in England at this time. Hall never used the title of Dr, nor was he addressed so by his contemporaries, though he has frequently and confusingly been granted it post mortem. -
The Sonnets and Shorter Poems
AN ANALYSIS OF A NOTEBOOK OF JAMES ORCHARD HALLIWELL-PHILLIPPS THE SONNETS AND SHORTER POEMS by ELIZABETH PATRICIA PRACY A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Arts of The University of Birmingham for the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY The Shakespeare Institute Faculty of Arts The University of Birmingham March 1999 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. O t:O SYNOPSIS The thesis starts with an Introduction which explains that the subject of the work is an analysis of the Notebook of J. O. Halliwell-Phillipps dealing with the Sonnets and shorter poems of Shakespeare owned by the Shakespeare Centre Library, Stratford-upon- Avon. This is followed by an explanation of the material and methods used to examine the pages of the Notebook and a brief account of Halliwell-Phillipps and his collections as well as a description of his work on the life and background of Shakespeare. Each page of the Notebook is then dealt with in order and outlined, together with a photocopy of Halliwell-Phillipps1 entry. Entries are identified where possible, with an explanation and description of the work referred to. -
Review of Literary Records
Shakespearean Biografiction: How modern biographers rely on context, conjecture and inference to construct a life of the Bard A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Arts and Humanities Brunel University By Kevin Gilvary November 2014 ii Candidate Kevin Gilvary (1955- ) B.A. (Hons), Classics, Southampton, 1976 M.A., Classics, Southampton, 1978 M.A. (Ed), Language in Education, Southampton 1996 P.G.C.E., Institute of Education, London, 1980 Doctoral Study 2007-2014 (part-time), Brunel University Supervisor 1 Professor William Leahy, School of Arts, Brunel University Supervisor 2 Dr. Sean Gaston, School of Arts, Brunel University Examiner 1 Professor Tom Betteridge, School of Arts, Brunel University Examiner 2 Professor Tom Healey, University of Sussex iii Abstract Modern biographies of William Shakespeare abound: new studies appear almost every year, each claiming new research and new insights, while affirming that there are enough records for a documentary life. In this thesis, I argue that no biography of Shakespeare is possible due to insufficient material, that most of what is written about Shakespeare cannot be verified from primary sources, and that Shakespearean biography did not attain scholarly or academic respectability until Samuel Schoenbaum’s Documentary Life (1975). The thesis therefore is concerned with demythologising Shakespeare by exposing numerous “biogra-fictions.” I begin by reviewing the history and practice of biography as a narrative account of a person’s life based on primary sources. Next I assess the very limited biographical material for Shakespeare identifying the gaps, e.g. there is no record that he spent any of his childhood in Stratford or ever attended school. -
Shakespeare Apocrypha” Peter Kirwan
The First Collected “Shakespeare Apocrypha” Peter Kirwan he disparate group of early modern plays still referred to by many Tcritics as the “Shakespeare Apocrypha” take their dubious attributions to Shakespeare from a variety of sources. Many of these attributions are external, such as the explicit references on the title pages of The London Prodigal (1605), A Yorkshire Tragedy (1608), 1 Sir John Oldcastle (1619), The Troublesome Raigne of King John (1622), The Birth of Merlin (1662), and (more ambiguously) the initials on the title pages of Locrine (1595), Thomas Lord Cromwell (1602), and The Puritan (1607). Others, including Edward III, Arden of Faversham, Sir Thomas More, and many more, have been attributed much later on the basis of internal evidence. The first collection of disputed plays under Shakespeare’s name is usually understood to be the second impression of the Third Folio in 1664, which “added seven Playes, never before Printed in Folio.”1 Yet there is some evidence of an interest in dubitanda before the Restoration. The case of the Pavier quar- tos, which included Oldcastle and Yorkshire Tragedy among authentic plays and variant quartos in 1619, has been amply discussed elsewhere as an early attempt to create a canon of texts that readers would have understood as “Shakespeare’s,” despite later critical division of these plays into categories of “authentic” and “spu- rious,” which was then supplanted by the canon presented in the 1623 Folio.2 I would like to attend, however, to a much more rarely examined early collection of plays—Mucedorus, Fair Em, and The Merry Devil of Edmonton, all included in C.