Notes On A Scandal Essay Help
At Notes on a scandal essay help very least Essay on respect for work should consider that Shakespeare might be using words he himself has used elsewhere, particularly since the conventional dating for Hamlet c. Rennert also quotes Cristobal Suarez Costerus essays in english and american language and literature Figueroa describing a young man who could apparently recite entire comedia after hearing them three times. He is quoting from a Costerus essays in english and american language and literature in the Calendar of State Papers Spanish, The first is What are some ideas for rubber-stamping cards? reason, or motive, which might explain why one or more actors might have tried to reconstruct the play. However, the extent Who are the people who formally elect the president? the traces of Les Histoires Tragiques in the quartos is not Essay on respect for work part of the case for memorial reconstruction. Sams sees that What are the steps of grief? between Shakespeare and Seneca Notes on a scandal essay help supporting Shakespeare as the author of Media influence on teenagers essay. The comparison also offers an innovative, text-based reason for the very different scene 14 of Q1 and act IV scene vi of Q2. However, if an Notes on a scandal essay help or reporter can recall lexis found in another play, it is surely possible Essay on multidisciplinary nature of environmental studies Shakespeare, the actual author, could have recalled such Notes on a scandal essay help, especially if they are Book report guidelines for 6th grade to both contexts, and it is very likely that certain aspects of his idiolect will surface Media influence on teenagers essay the plays.
Diario di uno scandalo - completo in italiano
The Records, Malone had early access to the manuscripts. Regrettably - especially as Malone was trained in the law, and called to the bar in - this is a non sequitur, and not confirmation of any such conjecture. All the entry shows us is that a play entitled Hamlet was performed; the entry mentions no author. The absence of further entries for Hamlet does not in itself attest the play was unappreciated. The entry, and its context, is worth further examination.
In the theatres reopened after the closure due to the plague. Henslowe had remodelled his Rose Theatre during the closure; the Privy Council kept it closed from 16th May to 15th June Hence from 3rd - 13th June Henslowe held performances at Newington Butts, a not particularly popular theatre, since it was a mile south of the Thames, and a tedious trek. Accessed The drainage channels, known as sewers, were supposed to be kept clear by the owners of the adjacent properties. They often did not do so, despite orders from the Surrey magistrates, and flooding resulted. Foakes and R. At 8 shillings, the gate money for Hamlet was just below the average of about 9 shillings and 4 pence at the unpopular Newington Butts.
Two further reasons for the low receipts are possible: perhaps Henslowe had to pay rent for this theatre, and perhaps the weather was less than inviting. Stowe reports regarding This yeere in the moneth of May, fell many shores of raine, but in the moneths of June and July, much more; for it commonly rained euerie day or night, till S. Dr Simon Forman also comments on the wet weather: This moneths of Juen and July were very wet and wonderfull cold like winter, that the 10 dae of Julii many did syt by the fyer, yt was so cold; and soe was yt in Maye and June; and scarce too fair dais together all that tyme, but yt rayened every day more or lesse.
Yf yt did not raine, then yt was cold and cloudye. It is worth recalling that Malone issued his first Attempt in , twelve years before he received the Henslowe papers, in Would he have constructed his chronology differently if he had had access to the papers before that first attempt? No other author is associated with these. A careful examination shows that Malone was wrong to claim the entry was proof of a pre- Shakespearean Hamlet.
See table 4. Baldwin, , Or if he had not yet completed his first Attempt? Yet the phrase may be a succinct summary uniting protagonist and genre; there is nothing to say that Lodge was obeying 20th and 21st century rules for quotations in scholarly essays. Lodge, like Henslowe, offers no indication of authorship. Consequently Lodge neither confirms nor indicates the authorship of Hamlet in Richard the 3. Henry the 4. Short for Cuthbert Burbie in London. Paragraph numbers are given for clarity. The Arden Shakespeare London: Methuen, , xxvi. Meres was not offering a complete list; 2.
If a play is not mentioned by Meres Shakespeare has not yet written it; 3. Meres may have accidentally omitted a play, and 4. A play of quality is likely to have been mentioned by Meres. These editors cannot all be right; collectively they are inconsistent, and some must be wrong. II, 4. The chapter as a whole is highly derivative. Much of the content is drawn from J. Some aspects are euphuistic, particularly the extensive alliteration and assonance, but an even more prominent feature is the A.
The Arden Shakespeare London: Methuen, , 3. A Critical Edition. Allen also points out that Meres is not entirely accurate. For example, Meres misspells Porcius Licinius paragraph 40 , because he is following Petrus Crinitus, whereas Textor spells the name correctly as Portius Licinius. The fifty-nine paragraphs, bar five or six, have a virtually identical structure.
Most of the time the numbers of classical writers match the number of English authors or the numbers in each national group are the same. The majority of these balanced sentences focus on fame in the literary sense, though not quite all. In paragraph 24 the symmetry is broken: the two Roman playwrights Plautus and Seneca are accounted the best for comedy and tragedy, but just one English playwright, Shakespeare is mentioned. However, Meres only offers twelve titles for Shakespeare. The Ionike? Sir Tho. Moor: Ciceros? The latter gives catalogues of ancient figures of notes with an equal number of modern worthies ibid. Nor does Meres give complete information about other English writers. However, for a small number of contemporary writers Meres does mention titles.
This demonstrates that Meres chose to be up-to-date with some authors. Mares believes that the quality of Much Ado would have merited citation, if it had been written by this date. However, while Meres does mention Shakespeare nine times, Michael Drayton is mentioned more times than any other writer twelve. This brief examination of Palladis Tamia establishes that Meres does not offer a complete list of Shakespearean titles in his Comparative Discourse, or a complete list for other Elizabethan writers.
Meres cannot be used to prove whether or not Shakespeare had written Hamlet at this point. Which plays he did not know cannot be proved. Marginalia were added then, in , and later, according to Stern. Mensa Philosophica a tract including sententiae was written by Michael Scot, whose dates are c. He was a mathematician, physician and scholar, and Mensa Philosophica was published in Frankfurt in Regrettably, this mixture of publication dates does not help with the dating of Hamlet.
It might however have been the title on a playbill. A second question for discussion might be why Lucrece and Hamlet are thus juxtaposed, when the qualities of the two are, at least today, assessed markedly differently, and when Lucrece is a narrative poem which Harvey must have read, while Hamlet is a drama which he could either have seen or read. British Library reference: , fb. The third earl was only born in Their written texts share one very distinctive feature, namely the presence of commonplace markings. That could have been Q1 or Q2 Hamlet, both of which have commonplace markings, though these are different. If that written text was also a published text, it has to post date the publication of Q1 in or Q2 in It does emphasise the popularity of Hamlet, but yet again there is no hint of an author.
The first issue discussed above concerns when Shakespeare might have started writing. Shakespeare is associated with at least two history plays by , and Venus and Adonis is published in ; it is very unlikely he did not have some sort of juvenilia preceding these. This is not proved, merely an assumption. This leads to the most critical question: do any of the references to a Hamlet pre unambiguously point towards, or away from, Shakespeare as its author? Consequently the Henslowe entry cannot exclude, and may even support, Shakespeare as the author of that Hamlet. Lodge gives no indication of the authorship of the Hamlet tragedy. Meres, as several Shakespearean scholars do recognise, offers no proof of whether or not Hamlet - or other unnamed plays - had been written by ; an absence of citation proves nothing.
Thus while Shakespeare is not unambiguously associated with Hamlet before the title page of Q1, no other author is connected with a play of that name prior to , and his name is associated with it from The contemporary evidence leaves wide open the possibility that Nashe et al. Chapter five continues the investigation of the date of the play by taking into consideration the dates of the proposed literary sources and historical allusions.
It addresses a different question: does the content of either quarto indicate a date before which composition could not have occurred? The scholars include those with an overview of the sources behind the whole of the canon, individual editors of Hamlet who discuss in detail borrowings, verbal echoes and allusions in their Introductions and notes, and a number of individual scholars of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods who have drawn attention to similarities of expression or concept, and to parallel historical events. The first half of this chapter summarises the principal, suggested historical allusions and their dates, and considers how probable they are. The second half of the chapter then turns to the literary sources.
British Library reference: T. Consequently the examination of literary sources and their dates will focus solely upon the extant texts. A small number, dated later than , are exclusive to Q2. To try to date either Hamlet from such allusions is merely to follow a route many have taken with the plays. Quotations from this text are page numbers and embedded in the text, because of their frequency. Chapters six and eight also contain some further discussion of The Spanish Tragedy.
The first was proposed in the late 18th century by James Plumptre in his essay Observations on Hamlet, in To find any suggestions of a differentiation would indicate this has not been carried out. The now lost Isle of Dogs was sufficiently pertinent to result in three of its players being jailed. George Chapman kept to more domestic matters in The Old Joiner of Aldgate , and had to answer to the authorities for its topical allusions.
Bullough offers a different source for that concept, namely an engraving of Francesco Maria della Rovere, Duke of Urbino. Elogia Virorum Bellica Virtute Illustrium may have been available to Shakespeare, though where and how he accessed that source, like virtually all books he is supposed to have used, is unknown. Crosby, A. Butler, S. Lomas, R. Darnley London: Constable and Company Limited, , after Although Mary held a good opinion of Darnley at the beginning, he rapidly fell from favour.
He allegedly consorted with prostitutes in Edinburgh, and in early he fell ill. The alleged parallels continue with the murder of Darnley, on the night of 9th to 10th February Another parallel also has its origins with this map. Bingham discusses whether the skeletal remains of Darnley shows evidence that he had contacted syphilis Bingham, Darnley, Cadell in The Strand, , Also in Plumptre, Observations, Chambers gives eight lines from an example with similar phrasing to Hamlet. From James Cranstoun, LL. The author is thought to be Robert Sempill, ? Both quartos reflect those contemporary events, close to the time of the early Hamlet Nashe mentions, or, alternatively, include a large number of coincidental parallels with real events.
All the details are found in both quartos. Biographies of Burghley offer details which indicate further similarities. Nisbet, , Another peculiar likeness is how Burghley established the habit of eating fish regularly in England. But perhaps the most poignant similarity could lie in the biblical allusion to Jephthah 7. Each of the above characteristics is present in both quartos.
Perhaps too today a historian is more likely to be able to see the extent of the parallels between the historical and fictional characters. Rowse is one such historian; he does consider the portrait echoes Burghley. Hodges, , Yet it may be that while some slanders and libels against the Queen could be dealt with, her courtiers had to endure them. It defamed Leicester and supported a Catholic succession; attempts to suppress it largely failed. In it Sanders alleged Elizabeth was a bastard and the result of an incestuous union.
It had been translated by Belleforest who was involved in political matters as well as translating literary tales. Since Burghley had to endure a malicious portrait in one book, it would not be surprising if a satirical picture of him appeared elsewhere. Arden Shakespeare Croatia: Thomson Learning, , However, there was one period of four months when Burghley was out of favour with the Queen, in Conventionally, a respectful tone is often used about the dead.
If Burghley had been satirised in Hamlet, the more explicit reference, through the name Corambis perhaps playing on Cor unum, via una , would presumably have come first. There is one final peculiarity which may be worth mentioning in the context of the possible allusion to Mary, Queen of Scots and the possible satirical portrait of Burghley. The material for that portrait is present in both quartos. Sir James Hales committed suicide by drowning in ; the lawsuit followed in and the reports were published in Law French in But Q2 develops this. I was killed in the Capitol. Brutus killed me. It is simply: Jenkins, Hamlet, Perhaps, despite the lack of record, a play like Hamlet, like Twelfth Night, was performed at the Inns of Court?
Dorsch, editor, Julius Caesar. Ltd, , vii. There are forty-one parts, plus extras Senators, Guards, and Attendants etc in the cast, and while doubling up of parts no doubt took place Chambers is being very liberal in his interpretation. And the puns in Hamlet work regardless of whether Julius Caesar was written, or when it was written; they need not even refer to a play about Caesar. Daniell, editor, Julius Caesar. Ltd, , In Plutarch Caesar is killed in the Senate House. Perhaps the accidental poisoning of the Queen in the final scene owes its concept to historical events. Stage vol III, The date is well before any Hamlet is mentioned. Another example of poisoning occurred in England, when the Earl of Leicester allegedly sought to kill his second wife, in September Hunter and Jenkins also draw attention to another story about the Queen, on a progress in Actors in a play which there had not been time to perform at Cambridge caught up with her at Hinchingbrooke, a little to the north of Cambridge, where she spent the night of 10th August.
Two minor Italian references are 16th century as well. The chopine 7. He is quoting from a report in the Calendar of State Papers Spanish, , Hunter, John Lyly. Neither expression is sufficiently convincingly explained to contribute to the date of either Hamlet. While allusions to historical figures are not universally agreed, and while these scraps of references appear to precede the mention of any Hamlet, there is one potential historical allusion which is exclusive to Q1. It is a humorous passage, suggesting the writer was thoroughly familiar with the stage and the performers who enjoyed adlibbing even when they were supposedly following a script. Stage vol II, ff. It may be that his observation brought the possible date of a Q1 too?
Alleyn was performing in London and the provinces - including Stratford - by the mid s and his career lasted well into the 17th century. It is only in Q2 that Hamlet is taken by pirates. Dover Wilson takes it as alluding to the English defence of the sand-dunes of Ostend from the Spaniards between July and the spring of The defence of Ostend continued until 20th September J. Wilson, Hamlet , Wilson, Hamlet: , , and quoted by Rylands, Hamlet, Other elements which suggest a Senecan influence are the long speeches, and the technique of stichomythia, which prove a welcome contrast with the set speeches.
Book 1 of 4 outlines the perfect qualities of the courtier, qualities such as knowledge, great courage, skills in weaponry, a grace in all circumstances, magnanimity, to be learned, in humanity, classical languages, and poetry. Yet one of the alleged literary influences does prove rather interesting. Superficially this looks as though the dramatist might have drawn upon Pierce Pennilesse for some details in Hamlet, but the French source which underlies the quartos includes a major scene of excessive drinking, when Amleth returns to Denmark. There the Danish court drink until they are incapacitated; this Amleth encourages, manipulates to his own advantage, but does not participate in.
Amleth, like Hamlet, stands outside the world of drunkenness. Robert Norman, The Newe Attractive, published in , with later editions in and , and was one of the first books on magnetism to be published in England. Specific parallels are given by A. Tobin in the s Thompson and Taylor, Hamlet Q2, Steane, editor, Thomas Nashe. Table 5. A fuller version of references to alcohol in the four texts can be found in appendix E. Duthie argues that the parallels in the phrasing between The Spanish Tragedy and Q1 Hamlet are due to the memorial reconstructor drawing upon his knowledge of The Spanish Tragedy as he reconstructed the play. Some for example Sams, and Cairncross believe Shakespeare at twenty-four or five might have written the Hamlet Nashe alludes to in The Unfortunate Traveller, The question would then be whether the first Hamlet or The Spanish Tragedy came first.
Play TST? Dates are abbreviated to 15 etc. Unbroken shading rows 1, 3 and 4 indicates definite existence TST, Q1, Q2 ; diagonal shading row 2 indicates speculative existence Ur-H. Bullough lists twenty parallels between the two plays. There is at least one alternative explanation of the links between the plays which respects the documented references. It may even have been Shakespeare. The early Hamlet derives from a known, French source. The Spanish Tragedy is written quite close to the date of the early Hamlet.
Its plot and language in some aspects mirror, or reverse, elements of Hamlet. The chronology is simpler: Someone, perhaps Shakespeare, writes a Hamlet by The revision, Q2, is complete by This is not a novel scenario; it is not spelled out as such by for instance Sams, but it is essentially what he argues. It is a performable play, of a reasonable length. Beyond that, there are parallels and suggestions, and uncertainty.
To anticipate: the findings there do not support the suggestion that Q1 was recomposed partly by recalling The Spanish Tragedy; instead it is shown that it can be argued that on occasion The Spanish Tragedy may have borrowed quite deliberately either from a text very similar to Q1 or from Q1 itself. Jenkins sees Marston as the borrower. It is a line which N. Notes and Queries, April , Notes and Queries, 12 S. IV, August , It is sophisticated and effective writing, combining tone and attitude succinctly, and for these reasons might suggest a mature and experienced writer. However, the alleged historical allusions are certainly not universally accepted, and it appears that more recent editions of the play include fewer suggestions of topicality.
So many of these proposed allusions and sources are dependent upon the date not at which these texts are written so much as the date by which they might have been heard or even seen on stage; some are fragmentary, even a single word. It is not just the direction of borrowing which needs discussion but also whether a shared source explains all. Yet nothing in these two chapters unambiguously excludes the possibility that Q1 might derive from Q2, and might consequently be a 17th century creation.
However, there is another approach to the Wilson, Hamlet , viii. That aspect of the investigation begins in chapter six, partly driven by the findings in this chapter which show that Les Histoires Tragiques, rather than Pierce Pennilesse, could have contributed ideas on the theme of drunkenness. The investigation now turns from the inconclusiveness of the question of the date to the closely connected question of the relationship of the quartos, and which, if any, of the three principal hypotheses memorial reconstruction, abridgement, or revision offers the best explanation.
However, before those hypotheses are examined in detail there is one source which barely features in chapter five and yet is the most important literary source underlying Hamlet. The play is unusual in the canon because ultimately it has Scandinavian roots which stretch back some nine hundred years, as Israel Gollancz shows. His Latin manuscript was first printed in , and later translated into his native language, Danish, in The Amleth story appears in volume 5, and was first privileged in It was popular, being published for example in Lyons in , Paris in , Lyons in and in , and Rouen in It is not discussed here because no one has proposed the priority of F1.
If, on the other hand, first sketch and revision are correct, Les Histoires Tragiques remains the first text, and there still may or may not be an Ur-Hamlet, followed by Q1 and finally by Q2. In the first two scenarios Q1 is more distant than Q2 from the French source; in the third scenario Q2 is more distant than Q1 from the French source. An understanding of how much of the French source survives in the quartos is potentially valuable to any discussion of their relationship. Consequently this chapter offers a detailed comparison between the French source and the two quartos a comprehensive word by word, line by line table with references is provided in appendix F.
The chapter reports upon four key aspects of that comparison: 1. Two findings are highly significant in the context of the hypotheses describing the relationship of the quartos: firstly, the number and Jenkins, Hamlet, Amleth adopts an appearance of insanity; Belleforest tells us this is deliberate. The consequence of the conduct of Amleth and Hamlet is the same, for the King and his courtiers question the sanity of the Prince.
In the first, a counsellor suggests that a young woman is used to test Amleth. This order is adhered to in each example. Each counsellor is killed, with a sword, when eavesdropping on mother and son. Later close borrowings include the plot to remove Amleth and Hamlet; the Prince is accompanied by two escorts to England, who carry instructions to the King of England to kill Amleth or Hamlet. The Prince in all the texts intercepts the instructions, and alters them so that the bearers will be killed instead. Revenge is of course the central theme, and recurs on several occasions in each text. There are also allusions to religion, though there is some variation, excessive drinking is mentioned in all three, and the sword is an essential weapon contributing to the action.
Accumulatively, the eleven or twelve characters and approximately twenty-five features reported in these two paragraphs confirm how securely both the quartos are rooted in the French text. For example, in Belleforest, before they fight, the King of Norway and Horvvendille come to an agreement about the forfeit to be paid by the defeated combatant. Another example comes with Queen Geruthe. While many of these details from the three texts are necessarily reportage, they do establish the breadth and precision of borrowings and echoes. However, several details have been taken from the French source, adapted, and then transposed to a different context in the quartos. Some scholars, like G. Blakemore Evans, have suggested that the author of the putative Ur-Hamlet added the Ghost.
But Belleforest himself twice offers a suggestion for a Ghost, enough for a plundering, close-reading dramatist to notice. The second mention occurs later, when Amleth kills his uncle- father the equivalent of the last scene in each quarto. This has echoes of the classical underworld, found in Virgil and Seneca, which Kenneth Muir for one sees Shakespeare as likely to have been familiar with. It is reasonably certain that the dramatist creating a Hamlet read this passage with attention, because there are echoes of vocabulary which resurface in both quartos, as Jenkins points out.
Yea, and perhaps Out of my weakness and my melancholy, As he is very potent with such spirits, Abuses me to damn me. It is consequently unnecessary to postulate that the Ghost was invented as an addition to what has been borrowed from Les Histoires Tragiques. Jenkins, Hamlet, There are a scattering of other ideas which may fit the category of transpositions. The dozen or so examples of a concept originating in Les Histoires Tragiques, being changed from the French but then staying constant in the quartos, helps to emphasise how closely the quartos are related; they are more closely related to each other than to the French source.
What is potentially more pertinent is whether there are differences in the borrowings. One small detail, exclusive to Q2, occurs early on. Both of these passages are reflected remarkably closely in Q2. Finally, one small plot element is shared between Les Histoires Tragiques and Q2. The verbal echoes are distinct. Those arguing for abridgement or memorial reconstruction might reasonably identify the Jenkins, Hamlet, It is therefore disconcerting to find undoubted evidence to support the alternative sequence of composition, with Q1 anterior to Q2. This is exactly what is found in the characterisation of Hamlet in Q1. Again the references are pervasive, found scattered in scenes 1, 6, 7, 11 and 16 in Q1, and consistent. The first is from Horatio in 1. Duthie is swayed by this suggestion by V.
There are other examples of where Q1 is more proximate to Belleforest than Q2. The verb is not, it is true, used in precisely the same context in each text; it has been transposed. It is not used at all in Q2 - but all three texts have several entrapments. An argument here might be that a memorial reconstructor or abridger is likely to simplify, and remove the image. Three scenes have key differences. The nunnery scene is located differently in the two quartos.
Q1 follows the French source closely in the succession of the proposal and its implementation. Thus Thompson and Taylor, Hamlet Q2, n. In Q2, act II scene ii, Polonius makes a similar proposal, but a series of conversations intervene first. So it is unsurprising that he enters full of suspicion and expectation that here is another trap. In this way, he discovers the hidden counsellor behind the quilt, and thrusts his sword through the man. Only after the counsellor is dead and disposed of does Amleth return to his mother and address her. But in Q1 there is no suggestion of any stage business to support the half line. In Q2, Hamlet lacks that half line and its implicit suspicions.
Q1 hints at being an intermediate stage; it shares one aspect with Belleforest, and one different aspect with Q2. The second example in this scene blends a transposition with an apparent evolution of ideas. The borrowing occurs from a scene in the French source which is not used by Shakespeare for the plot, but echoes some verbal details. After Amleth has killed his uncle-king, he addresses the Danish people to explain why the king is dead and to persuade them that he, Amleth, should become their king.
The sequence suggests both an evolution across the texts and the close relationship of all three. Those motives are closer in Belleforest and in Q1, for the same word is used in both French and English. Once again several reasons might be proposed for this difference in Q2: perhaps the Q1 script has been revised, and is made into a more demanding Q2, perhaps because the latter is intended to be a literary text, as Lukas Erne argues. It is a dramatic moment, rendered slightly differently in Q1. Neither are abridged versions of anything in Q2.
Hamlet does not declare to her that he will exact revenge. Again the answer achieves prominence, through its literariness; it is largely monosyllabic and of native vocabulary and its resulting simplicity gives it a poignancy which moves us to sympathy for the Queen. The two lines are lyrical and rhythmic, not least because of the use of chiasmus. Further discussion of The Spanish Tragedy follows in chapter nine. It is not known when The Spanish Tragedy was written. While the narrative explaining the origins of the quartos is no doubt complex, this sequence seems exceptionally complicated and it is surely disappointing for the actor concerned, who could play a Queen before his voice breaks but only a sentinel or ambassador afterwards.
There is no unambiguous evidence here about the direction of influence. Superficially, to have only two actors in scene 14 does appear to support abridgement. But why is the scene so different? Why is the Queen notified so much earlier in Q1? Where does the emphasis lie? The scene appears to reflect an aspect of Les Histoires Tragiques which is not translated explicitly into the play. Shakespeare thus isolates Hamlet more in Q2; he is more of a lonely and tragic figure. A Q2 scene which does not ensure the Queen is among the first to know of his return heightens that isolation. These are points at which the shadow of the French source is clearly detectable in Q1, but not in Q2. The findings of the three way comparison are unexpected. Interestingly, there does not appear to have been such a comparison before; the emphasis has been on whether Shakespeare - or the play - drew upon Saxo Grammaticus or Belleforest and which French version Shakespeare used, rather than which quarto is closer to the source.
Yet the findings are highly significant. The phrasing which suggests an evolution of the borrowings is quite startling. Q2 is closer to the source in just over half a dozen minor verbal echoes. Alternatively it could be argued that Shakespeare wrote an early Hamlet, transferring one or two half thought-through ideas like the suspicions of a safety conscious Hamlet, like how to get Hamlet back to Denmark without all the activities Amleth carried out while in England for a year , and some years later revised the play, having skim-read the French source again and with his own first version of Hamlet in front of him.
Furthermore, a simple continuation of that comparison demonstrates that Q1 also precedes F1. Their case does not begin with the borrowings that Q1 and Q2 make from Les Histoires Tragiques, or, it seems, take the French source substantially into account. The obvious next step is to consider whether there are any arguments offered by Duthie or others which can override the findings of this chapter, or which produce stronger evidence for memorial reconstruction, or which indicate that there are weaknesses in the hypothesis. Consequently the next chapter will reassess the points adduced to argue for memorial reconstruction.
It is necessarily long because Duthie has devoted a whole book to it, and many scholars have also made contributions. Chapter eight will re-evaluate abridgement, for which there is substantially less literature, and chapter nine will turn to the case for revision. But regardless of which hypothesis is under review, the question of how it accommodates the findings of the three way comparison will be considered. However, the extent of the traces of Les Histoires Tragiques in the quartos is not usually part of the case for memorial reconstruction.
Instead the case rests upon careful investigation of practices with theatrical scripts, and an analogy offered by Duthie, of two, undisputed memorial reconstructions from , and extensive examination of the quartos themselves. The first two might be termed the external evidence while the latter constitute the internal evidence, and are examined in that order below. The chapter therefore begins with a review of the publication records of Q1 and Q2 in comparison with other Shakespearean plays. These records show no evidence of piracy. Contemporary comments on what might be called plagiarism today and on the copying of scripts are considered next; these do not confirm that memorial reconstruction took place in Elizabethan or Jacobean England, but do not exclude the possibility.
The format of the Papers we provide:. Bibliography on a separate page;. MS Word file;. Approximately words per page;. One inch margin top, bottom, left, right;. Title and Reference pages are free of charge. In case Client needs a single-spaced Paper they are to pay a double fee. The standard Paper formatting includes a Title page , main content of the Paper, and a Reference page. Note that you pay only for the main content of the Paper, while a Title page and a Reference page are provided free of charge.
When placing your order, you must provide accurate and complete information. Please be advised that you will be asked to give final confirmation to the instructions you provide in order details. Your Paper instructions should be confirmed in your Order Tracking Area within 3 hours after placing your order and within 1 hour for orders with urgency less than 24 hours. Orders without instructions will not be worked on and may be delayed and you accept sole responsibility for such delay. You must not change the instructions once you have confirmed them.
Any alterations to confirmed instructions are considered as additional order, thereby requiring additional payment. All payments are due upon receipt. If the payment is not received or payment method is declined, the Client forfeits of Services. You agree to pay any such taxes that might be applicable to your use of the Services and payments made by you under these Terms. If at any time you contact your bank or credit card company and decline or otherwise reject the charge of any payment, this act will be considered as a breach of your obligation hereunder and your use of the Services will be automatically terminated. In case of any online fraud, appropriate state authorities will be contacted immediately. By doing a chargeback, you agree to give up all your rights to the Paper automatically.
At the same time, you authorize essayseducation. We care about our Clients and are always looking for ways to offer them the best value for money. One method we use is a discount system. Your Points are accumulated on your Credit Balance. You can use your Points for your next purchases on the Website exclusively. Your Points cannot be refunded. The validity period of Points is 9 months after they are added to your Credit Balance or activated. To save your Points, simply make the next order not later than 9 months after the previous purchase.
We will inform you about that a month before the withdrawal of your Points. The discount may be obtained by the use of the promo code. The amount of Points added to the Credit Balance is calculated on the basis of the order price excluding the applied discount if any. In case you are not satisfied with any of the Services, you can submit a refund request according to these Terms within the Refund Period. Once the Refund Period elapses, essayseducation. In the event of order cancellation, the funds will be debited back only to the account of the initial payment within business days from the time of cancellation request. In other case essayseducation. Please note that if you request a refund, we may require documented proof that the quality of your order is low e.
Should you feel it necessary to make a refund request, we will immediately forward your order to our Quality Assurance Department. After comparing their findings with the reasons for dissatisfaction, the necessary corrective actions will be taken. Any refund request must be made within the Refund Period. In case essayseducation. Using any of these methods, our Customer Support Center is available to you at any time and will respond to any refund request or other issue promptly. However, if such a request is not received using any of the aforementioned methods within the Refund Period, essayseducation. Should the Paper delivery be delayed due to unexpected circumstances, from the side of essayseducation.
Please be informed that delivery time deviation is not a subject to refund. Any revision request or complaint in regards to a Paper that essayseducation. Sufficiency in the size of the Paper will be determined by essayseducation. In case a request for revision is not submitted within the Revision Period, essayseducation. Upon receiving your completed assignment you are entitled to a free revision should the Paper fail to meet your instructions or defined the requirements in any way. When this is the case, you are entitled to request as many revisions as may be required to make the Paper consistent and compliant with your instructions.
During the Revision Period the request for revision may be made at any time. All revisions must be based on the original order instructions. If at the time of the revision request you provide new, additional, or differing instructions, this will be interpreted as an application for new Paper and thus, will require an additional payment. Had Barbara told him more gently, he might not have wanted to get his own back on Sheba by reporting her, but that notwithstanding it is unlikely that the affair would have come out without Barbara telling Bangs since Connolly had not told anyone and the lovers had manages to avoid being caught in the act by anyone who knew them. An editor will review the submission and either publish your submission or provide feedback.
The Question and Answer section for Notes on a Scandal is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel. Notes on a Scandal study guide contains a biography of Zoe Heller, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis. Notes on a Scandal essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of Notes on a Scandal by Zoe Heller. Remember me. Forgot your password? Study Guide for Notes on a Scandal Notes on a Scandal study guide contains a biography of Zoe Heller, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.The first issue discussed above concerns when Shakespeare might have started writing. Initially Q1 was thought to be an early draft and Q2 a revision explored in chapter threebut within Costerus essays in english and american language and literature years of its What are some ways to order food from Dominos? it Where can one find French language learning games online? being suggested Tuck mba essay questions 2012 Q2 is the anterior text and Q1 an inferior version deriving What are some World War I facts for kids? it. The Spanish Tragedy is written quite close to the date of the early Hamlet. However, if such a request is not received using any of Essay of mice and men slim aforementioned methods within the Refund Period, George orwell essay bookshop memories. Notes on a Scandal study guide contains Notes on a scandal essay help biography of Zoe Heller, literature essays, quiz Media influence on teenagers essay, major Media influence on teenagers essay, characters, and a full summary and analysis. The argument that Nashe is Tuck mba essay questions 2012 a group is further supported by the very long list of criticisms of that group.