Discovering the Subject in Renaissance England

Author(s):  
Elizabeth Hanson
1975 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Broude

When we speak of ‘revenge tragedy,’ we are often unaware of the extent to which our approach to these important Renaissance plays has been conditioned by the name we have given them. Elizabethans themselves recognized no distinct dramatic type called revenge play. The term is a modern one, made current at the turn of the century by A. H. Thorndike, and first defined at length by Fredson Bowers more than thirty years ago. As a critical term, it depends upon the modern meaning of revenge, and it simultaneously reflects and shapes both modern assumptions about the subject matter of the plays and modern prejudices about the ethical principles upon which they are assumed to be predicated.


2000 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 798
Author(s):  
Constance Jordan ◽  
Elizabeth Hanson

1999 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 342-343
Author(s):  
Emily Carroll Bartels

PMLA ◽  
1935 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 1320-1327
Author(s):  
Colbert Searles

THE germ of that which follows came into being many years ago in the days of my youth as a university instructor and assistant professor. It was generated by the then quite outspoken attitude of colleagues in the “exact sciences”; the sciences of which the subject-matter can be exactly weighed and measured and the force of its movements mathematically demonstrated. They assured us that the study of languages and literature had little or nothing scientific about it because: “It had no domain of concrete fact in which to work.” Ergo, the scientific spirit was theirs by a stroke of “efficacious grace” as it were. Ours was at best only a kind of “sufficient grace,” pleasant and even necessary to have, but which could, by no means ensure a reception among the elected.


1966 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 363-371
Author(s):  
P. Sconzo

In this paper an orbit computation program for artificial satellites is presented. This program is operational and it has already been used to compute the orbits of several satellites.After an introductory discussion on the subject of artificial satellite orbit computations, the features of this program are thoroughly explained. In order to achieve the representation of the orbital elements over short intervals of time a drag-free perturbation theory coupled with a differential correction procedure is used, while the long range behavior is obtained empirically. The empirical treatment of the non-gravitational effects upon the satellite motion seems to be very satisfactory. Numerical analysis procedures supporting this treatment and experience gained in using our program are also objects of discussion.


1966 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 159-161

Rule: I'd like at this point to bring up the subject of cables and wireways around the telescope. We've touched upon this twice during previous sessions: the cable wrap up problem, the communications problem, and data multiplexing problem. I think we'll ask Bill Baustian if he will give us a brief run down on what the electrical run problems are, besides doubling the system every year.


Paleobiology ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 6 (02) ◽  
pp. 146-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Oliver

The Mesozoic-Cenozoic coral Order Scleractinia has been suggested to have originated or evolved (1) by direct descent from the Paleozoic Order Rugosa or (2) by the development of a skeleton in members of one of the anemone groups that probably have existed throughout Phanerozoic time. In spite of much work on the subject, advocates of the direct descent hypothesis have failed to find convincing evidence of this relationship. Critical points are:(1) Rugosan septal insertion is serial; Scleractinian insertion is cyclic; no intermediate stages have been demonstrated. Apparent intermediates are Scleractinia having bilateral cyclic insertion or teratological Rugosa.(2) There is convincing evidence that the skeletons of many Rugosa were calcitic and none are known to be or to have been aragonitic. In contrast, the skeletons of all living Scleractinia are aragonitic and there is evidence that fossil Scleractinia were aragonitic also. The mineralogic difference is almost certainly due to intrinsic biologic factors.(3) No early Triassic corals of either group are known. This fact is not compelling (by itself) but is important in connection with points 1 and 2, because, given direct descent, both changes took place during this only stage in the history of the two groups in which there are no known corals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document