hide Matching Documents

Browsing named entities in M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background. You can also browse the collection for 1612 AD or search for 1612 AD in all documents.

Your search returned 3 results in 2 document sections:

M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Introduction, chapter 3 (search)
e third for the earlier one. Still, such things do occur, and I think there is a tendency in those who discuss this point to confine Shakespeare over rigidly to one edition. In the twentieth century it is possible to find men reading or re-reading a book in the first copy that comes to hand without first looking up the date on the title page. Was this practice unknown in Shakespeare's day? And again a fourth edition, with a separate supplement bearing the date of 1610, was published in 1612; and of this the famous copy in the Greenock Library has been claimed as the dramatist's own book. If by any chance this should be the case, then Shakespeare must have got it for his private delectation, for by this time he had finished his plays on ancient history and almost ceased to write for the stage. But apart from that improbable and crowning honour, there is no doubt about the value of North's version to Shakespeare as dramatist, and the four editions in Shakespeare's lif
M. W. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays and their Background, Coriolanus, chapter 17 (search)
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