Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ktprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T19:32:30.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Divided Command in Shakespeare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Paul A. Jorgensen
Paul A. Jorgensen*
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles 24
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is well known that Shakespeare's depiction of battles was limited by space, personnel, and equipment. It is not well known why, despite Ben Jonson's instructive ridicule and his own professed awareness of these limitations, he persisted in staging battle after battle almost to the end of his career. In endorsing his statement of what was wrong with his dramatization of war, we have failed to inquire what was right about it. Principally, I believe, we have neglected to look for the aspect of warfare that steadily interested him and his audience.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 70 , Issue 4-Part1 , September 1955 , pp. 750 - 761
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1955

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Note 1 in page 750 Several excellent studies of soldiers and army life in Shakespeare have demonstrated that the dramatist had a well-informed interest in the backgrounds of warfare. See especially J. W. Draper, “Sir John Falstaff,” RES, viii (1932), 414–424; H. J. Webb, “Falstaff's Tardy Tricks,” MLN, lviii (1943), 377–379, and “The Military Background in Othello,” PQ, xxx (1951), 40–52; and L. B. Campbell, Shakespeare's “Histories”: Mirrors of Elizabethan Policy (San Marino, Cal., 1947), Ch. xv Miss Campbell's study is notable in showing, though mainly for one play, Shakespeare's knowledge of Renaissance theories and procedures of war.

Note 2 in page 751 The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans, tr. Thomas North (Stratford-upon-Avon, 1928), ii, 256 (henceforth cited as Lives).

Note 3 in page 751 “The Life of Fabius Maximus,” Lives, ii, 88. The relationship of Fabius to his junior colleagues (Marcellus and Minucius) was that of a dictator to a magister equitum who had independent powers. Besides the tactical advantages supposedly gained from this balancing of temperaments, the Roman Republic also found a political safeguard in employing two consuls with equal authority in war as in peace.

Note 4 in page 751 Of the Knowledge and Conducte of Warres (1578), fol. 12v.

Note 5 in page 751 The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, tr. Richard Knolles (1606), p. 420.

Note 6 in page 752 The Works of Sir Walter Ralegh, ed. Oldys and Birch (Oxford, 1829), vi, 267–268. In The Cabinet-Council (Works, viii, 136) Ralegh draws upon another segment of Roman history, that of the creation of the four tribuni militares, to enforce his opinion that “the plurality of commanders in equal authority is for the most part occasion of slow proceeding in the war.”

Note 7 in page 752 Politicke, Moral, and Martial Discourses, tr. Arthur Golding (159S), p. 379.

Note 8 in page 752 Clement Edmondes, Observations upon Caesars Commentaries (1604), p. 121; Henri, Duc de Rohan, The Complete Captain, or an Abridgement of Caesars Warrs, with observations upon them … Englished by J. C. (1640), p. 164. For the importance of the Commentaries in England, see H. J. Webb, “English Translations of Caesar's Commentaries in the Sixteenth Century,” PQ, xxviii (1949), 490–495.

Note 9 in page 752 The Practice, Proceedings, and Lawes of Armes (1593), p. 51.

Note 10 in page 752 Antonio de Guevara, The Dial of Princes, tr. Thomas North (1582), fol. 54; Barnaby Rich, A Souldiers Wishe to Britons Welfare (1604), p. 12.

Note 11 in page 753 Machiavéls Discourses, tr. Edward Dacres (1636), pp. 525–527.

Note 12 in page 753 William Camden, The Historié of… Princesse Elizabeth (1630), Book iv, p. 91.

Note 13 in page 753 See, e.g., the following accounts: Sir William Slyngisbie, “Relation of the Voyage to Cadiz, 1596,” ed. J. S. Corbett, The Naval Miscellany, Vol. I (Navy Records Soc, 1902); The Naval Tracts of Sir William Monson, ed. M. Oppenheim (Navy Records Society, 1902), Vol. i; Sir Francis Vere, “The Callis Journey,” in The Commentaries of Sir Francis Vere (1657), reprinted in An English Garner, ed. E. Arber (Birmingham, 1883), Vol. vii; “A Briefe and True Report of the Honorable Voyage unto Cadiz, 1596,” Purchas His Pilgrimes (Glasgow, 1907), Vol. xx, and the longer version of the “Report” in Richard Hakluyt, The Principal Navigations (Glasgow, 1904), Vol. iv.

Note 14 in page 754 A Second and Third Blast of Retrait from Plaies and Theaters (1580), p. 105.

Note 15 in page 754 iv.iii and iv.iv. (All Shakespeare references are to Tlie Complete Works, ed. G. L. Kittredge, Boston, 1936.) These scenes, according to W. G. Boswell-Stone, are “imaginary” (Shakespeare's Holinshed, New York, 1896, p. 231).

Note 16 in page 757 Shakespeare's Plutarch, ed. C. F. Tucker Brooke (London, 1909), i, 168.

Note 17 in page 757 This important change has been noticed by Virgil K. Whitaker, Shakespeare's Use of Learning (San Marino, Cal., 1953), p. 236.

Note 18 in page 760 “The Life of Alexander the Great,” Lives, v, 165.

Note 19 in page 760 I have discussed Shakespeare's use of these sections in “Military Rank in Shake speare,” HLQ, xiv (1950), 17–41.

Note 20 in page 761 Othello and Antony are of course fully portrayed, but they owe their interest primarily to nonmilitary situations.