‘Our Fellow Shakespeare’: A Contemporary Classic in the Early Modern University

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (301) ◽  
pp. 652-669
Author(s):  
Daniel Blank

Abstract This essay discusses the reception of Shakespeare’s works among the students and fellows of early modern Oxford and Cambridge. Taken at face value, the documentary record would seem to suggest that Shakespeare had no place there, as authorities at the two English universities aimed to prevent the presence of his work in the academic sphere. However, this essay uses a variety of literary and archival evidence to show that Shakespeare’s works not only entered into scholarly discourse, but also achieved a status that had previously been reserved for ancient authors. I argue that the best window into Shakespeare’s reception among early modern scholars can be found in academic drama, and I examine two university theatrical productions that engage closely with his works: the Parnassus plays, performed at Cambridge between 1598 and 1601, and Narcissus, performed at Oxford in 1602. These plays not only provide early examples of Shakespeare’s reception among intellectuals, but also illustrate how the scholars of Oxford and Cambridge figured Shakespeare as a ‘classical’ author—an author as worthy of imitation as Homer or Ovid. The process of establishing Shakespeare as a ‘classic’ in the academic setting, this essay ultimately argues, began much earlier than scholars have realized.

Numen ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.S. Versnel

AbstractThe well-known substantialist-'Frazerian'-definitions of magic as distinct from religion by its immediate and individual goals, the concomitant manipulative and coercive attitude, the instrumental and mechanical type of action etc., have been under attack for more than half a century. Anthropologists in particular have argued that no meaningful contrast between religion and magic can be gained from this approach and that our notion 'magic' is a modern-western biased construct which does not fit representations of other cultures. Consequently, in the view of some of them, the term 'magic' should be altogether avoided. Furthermore, with respect to the ancient and early modern world, in which the opposition religion-magic is supposed to have originated, it is argued that magic and religion function exclusively as value-judgments, terms indicating 'magic' being exploited to stigmatize illegitimate or undesired (religious) behaviour of socially or culturally deviant groups. In the present article it is argued that-although admittedly this functionalist approach has yielded remarkable and lasting results-rejection of the term 'magic' will soon turn out to be unworkable and, in fact, is putting the cart before the horse. From an etic point of view-which in the view of the author is the only possible way to conduct scholarly discourse-it will be impossible to do cultural research without the aid of heuristic instruments such as-at least broad, polythetic or prototypical-definitions. And, if possible at all, it would be utterly unpractical to completely eliminate religion as one of the obvious models of contrast. This position is substantiated with some practical instances from the Graeco-Roman world. It is shown that, at least in the context of (magical) curse-tablets and-related but clearly distinct-(religious) prayers for justice or vengeance, the ancient authors were clearly aware of the very same distinctions modern people normally associate with the notions of magic and religion.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-343
Author(s):  
Dominik Berrens

The sloth (Folivora) is a mammal from Central and South America that struck the early modern ( c.1500–1800) European naturalists as especially odd. Hence, descriptions and depictions of this animal featured in many texts from this period. Apart from its physiognomy and its behaviour, the naming of the sloth was discussed in detail, and scholars came up with various names and etymologies for the animal. Several European and Amerindian languages were involved in this complex naming process, while Latin played a decisive role as the lingua franca in establishing a scholarly discourse. The paper focuses on written sources from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; it tries to reconstruct how the given names and their etymologies were connected to the perceived behaviour and the physiognomy, and what this might tell us about the conceptions behind these. The results are compared to similar findings from anthropology and ethnobiology.


Author(s):  
Matthew H. Edney

This article considers the configuration of the Atlantic by Europeans through the production, circulation, and consumption of spatial information, specifically in the form of maps. It examines each of the several cartographies associated with the early modern Atlantic within their respective knowledge domains. Europeans slowly developed the idea of the Atlantic in order to organise and understand the waters, shores, peoples, and places that they encountered as they sailed westward and southward away from Europe. Understanding the contributions of cartography to the formation of the Atlantic requires an appreciation of the historical limits to the various practices and institutions of making and using maps. It should be considered, for example, the way in which Christopher Columbus, when he headed out into the Ocean Sea in 1492, set aside one way of conceptualising and representing the world and began working in another. He had conceived of his direct voyage to the Indies through participation in the general scholarly discourse of geography (then generally known as ‘cosmography’), which understood the earth to be a sphere and already mapped it using latitude and longitude.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document