The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0634 Friday, 24 September 2007
Date: Thursday, 20 Sep 2007 11:35:07 -0400
Subject: 18.0627 Deadly Shakespeare
Comment: Re: SHK 18.0627 Deadly Shakespeare
>David Evett wrote:
>I'd be interested to see John Briggs's argument for keeping Davy
>Gam--not otherwise a personage of the play, and enjoying the status of
>being named only because he's a gentleman rather than a commoner.
>Actually, a gentleman *is* a commoner - as is an esquire, who is of a
"Commoner" was careless; I know that the dividing line between elite
folk and ordinary folk was not sharply defined, and only meant to mark a
rough and ready distinction between the kind of men with whom the king
might have been expected to pass a few hours while waiting for battle
(see the corresponding scene on the French side)--that is, men "of
note"--and the Williamses and Bateses and nameless boys of the world of
the play. My comment was not intended to wonder why Gam was named; it
implies a reason. In any case, John Briggs's comment does not respond to
my question, which in effect was this: what are the criteria for
inclusion in the list?
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
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.