No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Camden, Daniel, and Shakespeare
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
Extract
Mr. G. B. Johnston's note, “Camden, Shakespeare, and Young Henry Percy” (PMLA, lxxvi, June 1961, 298), while citing Samuel Daniel's Civil Wars as one warrant for Shakespeare's making the forty-year-old Hotspur a contemporary of Prince Henry, finds that Camden's Britannia was behind them both, and was the most likely source; and that the “revised” and translated version of Britannia in 1610 “seems to be recalling the popular play” in adding “an extra flourish on Henry Percy.” This system of priorities is doubtless valid in general; but the further implication—that Shakespeare and Camden were closely linked in the matter, taking their cues for the delineation of Hotspur directly from each other—does not seem as likely. An examination of Mr. Johnston's evidence indicates, rather, Daniel's continued function as middleman in the complex.
- Type
- Notes, Documents, and Critical Comment
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1962
References
1 Worthies; cited in my edition of Daniel's Philotas (New Haven, 1949), p. 51.
2 Cited in my edition of Daniel's Civil Wars (New Haven, 1958), pp. 6–7.
3 Ibid., pp. 21–26; and “Shakespeare's History Plays and Daniel: an Assessment,” SP, lii (1953), 563–567.
4 Ibid., p. 26, n. 27.
1 William Camden, Remains Concerning Britain (London, 1870), p. 344. A copy of the first edition of the Remaines is not available here; but I have compared my copy of the reprint with a 1605 edition in the Folger Library and made marginal corrections in the reprint.
2 Coriolanus, ed. J. Dover Wilson (London and New York, 1960), pp. xi-xvi.
3 T. W. Baldwin, Shakespere's Small Latine & Lesse Greeke (Urbana, Ill., 1944), i, 658–659.