The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1766  Wednesday, 10 September 2003

From:           Stanley Wells <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 9 Sep 2003 13:13:16 +0100
Subject: 14.1761 Wood Controversy
Comment:        RE: SHK 14.1761 Wood Controversy

Fancy that:

Hugh Capet also, who usurped the crown upon Charles Duke of Lorraine,
the sole male heir of the line and stock of Charles the Great, to make
his title seem true and appear good, though indeed it was stark naught,
conveyed himself as heir to the lady Lingard, daughter to King
Charlemagne, son to Louis the Emperor, that was son to Charles the
Great. (Holinshed, Chronicles.)

        Hugh Capet also - who usurped the crown
        Of Charles the Duke of Lorraine, sole heir male
        Of the true line and stock of Charles the Great -
        To fine his title with some shows of truth,
        Though in pure truth it was corrupt and naught,
        Conveyed  himself as heir to th'Lady Lingard,
        Daughter to Charlemain, who was the son

                         To Louis the Emperor, and Louis
                           the son of Charles the Great.  (Henry V,

Stanley Wells

>If the distinction between piracy and plagiarism has been forgotten, it
>surely occurred recently.  Black's Law Dictionary confirms my own
>memory, by including in the definition of piracy (beyond the Cap'n Kidd
>variety) "The term is also applied to the illicit reprinting or
>reproduction of a copyrighted book or print or to unlawful plagiarism
>from it."  Plagiarism is defined as "The act of appropriating the
>literary composition of another, or part or passages of his writings, or
>the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product
>of one's own mind."
>It appears from the first definition that the meanings may overlap but,
>my own sense of the matter is that this is an appearance only, and that
>plagiarism is a wrong against the creator or maker of a work, and piracy
>a wrong against the publisher or distributor (who may also be the
>creator).  A rough and ready simplification is that the first protects
>the creatives, the second protects the suits.  Or, as the Marxists among
>us might imagine it, first the producers and then the exploiters.
>My descent into the stormy teapot of scholarly discussion led me also to
>a nearby dictionary entry I hope others will find as fascinating as I
>do.  It is that for "Pimp-tenure," defined as "A very singular and
>odious kind of tenure [i.e.,  the right to hold land under specified
>conditions of duty to the lord granting it, TB] mentioned by the old
>writers.<Wilhelmus Hoppeshort tenet dimidiam virgatam terrae per
>servitium custodiendi sex damisella, scil. meretrices ad usum domini
>Tony Burton

S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email 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.

Subscribe to Our Feeds


Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.