To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Since the beginning of Israel’s war on Gaza in October 2023, a rich body of legal scholarship has tackled various legal issues arising from Israel’s overall military conduct. One issue that has received very little attention is Israel’s destruction of Palestinian cultural heritage. In this article, I demonstrate how Israel’s systematic destruction of Gaza’s cultural heritage has been facilitated through reliance on sources and language of law. Considering this unprecedented level of destruction, I examine the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in applying protection and accountability measures in response to the ongoing destruction of Palestinian heritage. I suggest that these three organizations provide the State of Palestine with an entry point to demand recognition, protection, and accountability for the destruction of this heritage. Rather than approaching each organization as an end in itself, I propose engaging with the three organizations simultaneously as tools to be utilized.
A thorough understanding of New Place encourages to think about William Shakespeare more as a resident and representative of Stratford-upon-Avon than as a citizen of London. In relation to Shakespeare's life, New Place represents his social status and aspirations more than any other aspect of it. Shakespeare's taste in a home reflects his literary sensibilities as a writer. Archaeological remains will never reveal anything about their effect on Shakespeare's own intellect, imagination and feelings. This is the task of a Sir Thomas Browne, or a sympathetic biographer. The cultural reputation of New Place after Shakespeare, until the demolition of the second house in 1759, is worthy of more consideration, as, too, are the life and legacy of his granddaughter, Elizabeth, Lady Barnard. In later years the relationship between the New Place and Nash's House becomes significant, and the shared ownership and questions about their boundaries are interesting.
Hugh Clopton was a wealthy mercer, benefactor and public official. He was the youngest son of John and Agnes Clopton and was born near Stratford-upon-Avon at Clopton House, his ancestral home, in 1440. The earliest reference to a building on this plot is Clopton's own will of 1496: 'my grete house in Stratford'. Archaeological evidence suggests that it is likely that Hugh Clopton used the frontage range as shops. The upper floor of the front range probably contained bedchambers and additional storage rooms. Wells were the most efficient and practical source of water. Three wells are known to have existed on the site, although only two seem to date from Clopton's New Place. A passageway ran along the northern side, between New Place and the neighbouring buildings, from Chapel Street in an easterly direction. Hugh Clopton's New Place is known to have been built of brick and timber.
Corroborative evidence supports the likelihood that the frontage as sketched by Vertue represents Shakespeare's own home-improvement. The appearance of the external architectural features is thought to be similar to those of New Place. Vertue's sketch portrays a three-storey, half-timbered, square-panel-framed building. Shakespeare's gentlemanly status would have been conspicuously displayed on the remodelled frontage. Shakespeare's treatment of the hall remains uncertain. It remained, however, firmly at the heart of the house complex. The archaeological evidence suggests that part-way down the southern range on the courtyard side, there was a change in room width. After comprehensive archival research and archaeological interpretation, new artistic representations of New Place during Shakespeare's ownership have been created by Phillip Watson. The reconstructions encompass the complete refurbishment of the frontage range, including the long-gallery storey with gabled dormers, and present the Chapel Lane service and rear entrances, projecting and Elizabethan-style windows, and decorative timberwork.
In March 2010, the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust started to lift the turf on the site of William Shakespeare's family home. This introduction presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in the subsequent chapters of this book. The book provides the first 6,000 years of the site, from its prehistoric beginnings through its development into a plot within the economic context of early medieval Stratford-upon-Avon, and the construction of the first timber-framed building. It describes the construction and distinctive features of Hugh Clopton's brick-and-timber house, the first New Place, and provides a detailed account of it. The book also provides a cultural, religious and economic context for Shakespeare's upbringing; education; work; marriage; and early investments up to his son, Hamnet's death, and his father, John Shakespeare, being made a gentleman. It discusses the importance of New Place to Shakespeare and his family during the nineteen years he spent time there.
After William Shakespeare's death in 1616, New Place survived, in the same form, for a further eighty-five years before being destroyed to make way for a new, more fashionable, eighteenth-century house. This chapter discusses his motivations for building the property, the architecture and layout of the building, and the archaeological evidence that was left behind. Sir John Clopton was a direct descendant of Hugh Clopton, so, in 1677, the ownership of New Place reverted into the hands of a descendant of the original builder. Because of a change in economic fortunes, Stratford-upon-Avon was undergoing a period of significant redevelopment. The house was constructed on a three-bay plan, a feature typical of the period and one of a number of defining features of high-status houses. A considerable number of houses survive that have comparable architectural qualities to Sir John Clopton's New Place.
This chapter argues that Shakespearian biography in relation to New Place needs thorough revision and a greater level of nuance in order to increase understanding of Shakespeare's relationship to Stratford-upon-Avon. Nicholas Rowe was the first to present Stratford-upon-Avon and New Place as Shakespeare's retirement home. The major Shakespeare biographies into the twenty-first century bear witness to the still-popular trope of Shakespeare's retirement. Anne Shakespeare, and her lucrative, working-day world as manager of New Place, are an important part of Shakespearian biography. Shakespeare's brother Gilbert provided crucial assistance with Shakespeare's business affairs, and represented his older brother in his purchase of 107 acres of arable land from the Combes in May 1602. William's brother Edmund, sixteen years his junior, most certainly had ties with London. Shakespeare wrote at different speeds throughout his career, and some plays seem more polished than others.
Radiocarbon dates have become a cornerstone in archaeological reconstructions of past population dynamics. The increasing reliance on large-scale radiocarbon databases, usually aggregated from diverse sources, however, raises persistent concerns about sampling bias, especially heterogeneous sampling intensity across sites. In this paper, we introduce a rescaling method that adjusts the frequency of dates in radiocarbon datasets in proportion to dwelling counts at the settlement level, using weighting and bootstrap resampling. Through a series of simulations, we show that this approach consistently yields probability distributions that more closely reflect hypothetical population trends, particularly in contexts with high inter-settlement variability in sampling intensity. We apply our method to archaeological data from two areas in Korea, the Yeongsan and Geum River Basins, during the Proto–Three Kingdoms (1C BC–AD 3C) and Three Kingdoms Periods (AD 4–7C). Results demonstrate that rescaled datasets offer significantly different interpretations of population organization and reconfiguration than those derived from original data. This study highlights the importance of addressing sampling heterogeneity in local-scale demographic research and suggests that rescaling is a valuable complement to existing bias-correction strategies in archaeological studies of demography.
Stratford-upon-Avon helped to form William Shakespeare. From 1564 to 1596, Shakespeare was identified primarily with one house: his parents' home, a substantial family dwelling on Henley Street. The house on Henley Street was Shakespeare's portal on to the town and into the wider world of the imagination. Commerce and traffic to the town increased significantly from 1492 once Hugh Clopton had built the bridge across the Avon. For Shakespeare, the place of education was thus closely related to the costumed activities of civic authority and theatrical productions. John Shakespeare removed his eldest son from the school to learn the family trade of glove-making. He married Anne Hathaway of Shottery in November 1582. In the same year that Shakespeare married, Alexander Aspinall was appointed as the schoolmaster and continued teaching until his death. From Shakespeare's childhood until into his thirties, Stratford-upon-Avon continued to host theatrical performances.
This chapter presents an overview of the site since the removal of the 1702 house. It focuses upon the archaeological projects that have taken place during the last 150 years namely that of Halliwell-Phillipps and Dig for Shakespeare. Francis Gastrell removed Sir John Clopton's New Place in its entirety down to its foundations, with much of the rubble being used to fill the cellar and level the site. In 1836 New Place and John Nash's House were purchased by David Rice, who retained ownership for twenty-six years before he sold New Place to James Halliwell-Phillipps. Halliwell-Phillipps was an antiquary, a literary scholar and a principal friend of the William Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. His aims for the excavations were similar to those of Dig for Shakespeare: to identify the remains of New Place and recover artefacts that may have belonged to Shakespeare himself.