The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0254  Friday, 31 March 2006

[1] 	From: 	Peter Hadorn <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 11:33:30 -0600
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry

[2] 	From: 	Gregory McNamara <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 12:40:57 -0500
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry

[3] 	From: 	Peter Bridgman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 19:57:03 +0100
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Peter Hadorn <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 11:33:30 -0600
Subject: 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry

Regarding Shakespeare's connection to Prince Henry,  I just finished 
re-reading my article, "'The Two Noble Kinsmen' and the Problem of 
Chivalry," "Studies in Medievalism" Vol. 4 (1992):45-57.  Although I 
think I have since become a better writer, I would stand by my argument 
that in Shakespeare and Fletcher's play, the playwrights are directly 
criticizing Prince Henry's politics.

For what it's worth.

Peter Hadorn
Associate Professor of English
University of Wisconsin-Platteville

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Gregory McNamara <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 12:40:57 -0500
Subject: 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry

In response to Sara Trevisan's question about Shakespeare and Prince 
Henry, I would suggest that Shakespeare did not have occasion to come 
into direct contact with Prince Henry until 1603, when both began 
performing their respective roles in the court of James I.

I do not know what sort of circulation William Fowler's fascinating 
account of Henry's baptism (Edinburgh, 1594) might have had in England 
or if Shakespeare was aware of the book or any aspects of its contents, 
but this is one possible source.  Marlowe, on the other hand, would not 
have known anything about Fowler's book or Henry's life, as he was 
killed before the prince was born.

Regards,
Greg McNamara

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Peter Bridgman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 30 Mar 2006 19:57:03 +0100
Subject: 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.0248 Shakespeare and Prince Henry

Sara Trevisan asks ...

 >I was wondering if someone could clarify any kind of acquaintance
 >whatsoever which might have existed between Shakespeare and
 >Prince Henry in the 1590s, as well as any knowledge of Henry's life
 >which Shakespeare might have had, and the reasons for it.

As Henry was born in 1594, I doubt whether WS had any meaningful 
acquaintance with him in the 1590s.

According to Michael Wood, "In summer 1609 a series of lavish 
entertainments was staged for the investiture of Henry as Prince of 
Wales, and it seems that Shakespeare's Cymbeline was specifically 
written for this occasion".

Peter Bridgman

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.