INDEX

Acciaiuoli, additional lives to Plutarch, note 144.

Agrippa (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346.

Alexander (Sir William) [Earl of Stirling],

Julius Caesar, 35;

Julius Caesar compared with Garnier, 39;

Julius Caesar and Shakespeare, 207.

Alexas (Lord), (in Antony and Cleopatra), 348.

Ammonius (the Philosopher), 95.

Amyot (Jacques), 119-141;

birth, etc., 120;

translation of Heliodorus, 121;

of Diodorus Siculus, 123;

and Longus, 124;

tutor to Dukes of Orleans and Anjou, 124;

Grand Almoner of France, 124;

Bishop of Auxerre, 125;

Commander of Order of Holy Ghost, 126;

various disasters, 126;

Projet de l’Eloquence Royal, 128;

modifications of Plutarch, 138.

Antony and Cleopatra, 300-453;

date of composition, 300;

and Appian, 648-652.

Antony and Cleopatra (the two characters), 439-453.

Apius and Virginia, 2-10, 70.

Appian and Antony and Cleopatra, 648-652;

and Julius Caesar, 644-647.

Appian’s Chronicle, translated by Bynniman, note 644;

Sextus Pompeius, 333.

Aufidius (Tullus), [in Coriolanus], 501, 584.

B. (R.), 2, 9.

Baker, Development of Shakespeare as a Dramatist, note 267.

Bernage (S.), on Julius Caesar and Cornélie, 60.

Berners (Lord), part translation, Guevara (Antonio de),

Marco Aurelio con el Relox de Principes, 148.

Bidpai, Fables of, 150.

Blignières (Auguste de), Essai on Amyot, 119.

Blount (Edward), a printer, 300.

Boas (F. S.), Shakespeare and his Predecessors, 426.

Boner (Hieronymus), version of Plutarch’s Lives, note 132.

Boswell (James), quotation from Plutarch, 116.

Bower (Richard), ? author of a New Tragicall Comedie of Apius and Virginia, 2.

Bradley (A. C.), on the Roman Plays, 80;

Julius Caesar, note 267;

Shakesperian atmosphere after Othello and Lear, 305;

Antony and Cleopatra, note 312;

Coriolanus, 462.

Brandes (Dr. George), Julius Caesar, note 217;

on Tieck’s Dramas (in Romantic School in Germany), note 280;

Antony and Cleopatra, 307;

Coriolanus, 464 and 466.

Brandl (Professor Alois), Coriolanus, 464.

Brandon (Samuel), Vertuous Octavia, 71.

Brontë (Charlotte), on Coriolanus, 468, 472.

Brooke (Lord), Antony and Cleopatra—destroyed tragedy on, 70.

Buchanan (George), Baptistes and Jephthes, 21.

Butler (Professor), on Appius and Virginia, note 9.

Büttner, Zu Coriolan und seiner Quelle, 488.

Caesar’s Fall, a play by Drayton, Webster and others, 170.

Calvin (John), prose of, 135.

Camden (William), Remaines, 455.

Caractacus, Elizabethan Plays on, 1.

Carlyle (Thomas), on the Historical Plays, 89.

Casca (in Julius Caesar), 286.

Cassius (in Julius Caesar), 275, 284.

César, by Jacques Grévin, 31.

César, by Grévin and Muretus, compared, 30-33.

Chalmers (Alexander), on Coriolanus, 460.

Chapman (George), French plays, 77;

Bussy d’Ambois, 303;

The Conspiracie and The Tragedie of Charles, Duke of Byron, 464.

Charmian (in Antony and Cleopatra), 347.

Chaucer (Geoffrey), on Brutus and Cassius, 27;

Legend of Good Women, 308.

Chenier (Marie-Joseph), Brutus et Cassius, Les Derniers Romains, 27.

Cicero (in Julius Caesar), 287.

Cinthio (Giovanni Battista Giroldi), play on Cleopatra, note 310.

Cleopatra (in Antony and Cleopatra), 413-438;

relations between Antony and Cleopatra, 439-453;

“One Word,” 653-656.

Cleopatra, by Samuel Daniel, 48.

Coleridge (Samuel Taylor), Brutus (in Julius Caesar), 201, 202, 204, 205;

Julius Caesar, 256;

Antony and Cleopatra, 305, 317, 338;

Coriolanus, 462, 473;

on Aufidius (in Coriolanus), 486;

“Inexplicable” passage in Coriolanus, 657-659.

Collins (John Churton), Studies in Shakespeare, 180;

Shakespeare’s Latinity, 653.

Collischonn (G.A.O.), Introduction to Grévin’s Caesar, note 27;

and Muretus’ Julius Caesar, note 27;

coincidences between Grévin and Shakespeare, 34.

Cominius (in Coriolanus), 498, 556.

Complaint of Rosamond, by Samuel Daniel, 48;

parallelisms with Romeo and Juliet and Rape of Lucrece, 56.

Confrères de la Passion, 30.

Coriolanus, 454-627;

date of composition, 454;

“Inexplicable” passage in, 657-659.

Cornelia, by Thomas Kyd, 54.

Cornélie, compared with Muretus, 37.

Cory, translation of Leo, 333.

Courier (P. L.), on Plutarch, 106, 119.

Cruserius, Latin version of Plutarch, 133.

Cymbeline, 312.

Daniel (Samuel), Cleopatra, 48, 338, 451.

Dante, on Brutus and Cassius, 26.

Decius (in Julius Caesar), 286.

Defence of Ryme, by Samuel Daniel, 50.

de l’Escluse (Charles), additional lives to Plutarch, 144.

Delia, by Samuel Daniel, 48.

Delius (Nicolaus), Shakespeare and Plutarch, 165;

on Coriolanus, 456, 487;

Coriolanus and Plutarch, 493.

Demogeot, on Amyot, 139.

De Quincey (Thomas), on Plutarch, note 114.

Diall of Princes, by Thomas North, 143.

Digges (Leonard), on the Roman Plays, 85;

on Julius Caesar, 255.

Dodsley (Robert), Old English Plays, 4.

Dolabella (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346.

Doni (Antonio Francesco), Morale Filosofia

(same as Bidpai’s Fables), 144, 150.

Dowden (Professor Edward), Shakespeare’s Mind and Art, 214.

Drayton (Michael), Mortimeriados or The Barons’ War, 169.

Dryden (John), on Plutarch, 106;

Life of Plutarch, 110;

All for Love or The World Well Lost, 256, 340.

Eccerinis, by Mussato, 11.

Eedes (Dr.), lost Latin play, 180.

English and Roman plays compared, 74.

Enobarbus (in Antony and Cleopatra), 349-359.

Eros (in Antony and Cleopatra), 366.

Fabula Praetexta, 11.

Faguet (Émile), on Cornélie, 37.

Famous Victories of Henry V., 2.

Farmer (John S.), reproduction of Appius and Virginia, 3.

Favorinus (the Philosopher), 101.

Fénelon (François de Salignac de la Mothe), on Amyot, 136.

Ferrero (Professor Guglielmo), on Antony and Cleopatra, note 335;

on Cleopatra, note 414 and 452.

Filelfo, Latin version of Plutarch, 134.

Florus (Mestrius) [friend of Plutarch], 97.

French Senecans, 19-44.

Fulvia (in Antony and Cleopatra), 396.

Furness (Frances Howard), Antony and Cleopatra, note 59;

on Charmian, note 347.

Garnett (Dr. Richard), Date and Occasion of The Tempest, 466.

Garnier (R.), Cornélie, 35;

Drama about Portia, 35;

Marc Antoine, 41;

Antonius, English translation by Countess of Pembroke, 46;

Antony and Cleopatra, 338;

parallels between Cornélie and Julius Caesar, 628-630.

Gassner (H.), edition of Kyd’s Cornelia, note 55.

Geddes (Dr.), a lost Latin play, 180.

Gellius (Aulus), on Plutarch, 101.

Genée (Rudolph), Shakespeare’s Leben und Werke, 198.

Gervinus (Georg Gottfried), Shakespeare Commentaries,

Julius Caesar, 224;

Antony and Cleopatra, 305, 307, 340;

Plutarch’s Antony, 336;

Coriolanus, 471.

Goethe, on “love,” 446.

Gorboduc, 45, 70.

Goulard (Simon), Octavius Caesar Augustus, 648.

Greene (Robert), James IV., note 62.

Grévin (Jacques), César, note 27, 31.

Grosart (Dr. Alexander), edition of Daniel’s Cleopatra quoted from, 51.

Guevara (Antoniode), The Favored Courtier, 148;

El Libro Aureo de Marco Aurelio, otherwise

Emperador y eloquentissimo Orator,

called Marco Aurelio con el Relox de Principes

or The Diall of Princes, 147 and 148.

Halliwell-Phillips (J. O.), Weever’s Mirror of Martyrs, 170.

Hamlet, 78, 173.

Hardy (Alexandre), Coriolan, 475.

Hazlitt (W. Carew), notes 4 and 5.

Heine (Heinrich), on Cleopatra, 441;

on Rome, 547.

Henry V., 172.

Heywood (Thomas), Rape of Lucrece, 68.

Holden (Rev. Dr. H. A.), on Plutarch, note 114;

on Amyot, note 133.

Holland (Philemon), translation of Pliny, 333, note 456;

Livy on Coriolanus, 626.

Hudson (Dr. Henry Norman),

Shakespeare, his Life, Art and Characters, 224.

Hughes (Thomas), Misfortunes of Arthur, 45.

Hugo (Victor), Historical Plays, 87.

Ingram (Professor), on “endings” (of verses), 304.

Iras (in Antony and Cleopatra), 347, 438.

Jacobs (Joseph), Fables of Bidpai, note 150.

Jaggard (the Younger), a printer, 301.

Jodelle (Étienne), Cleopatra Captive, 28, note 322;

Antony and Cleopatra, 338;

Cleopatra, note 435.

Johnson (Dr. Samuel), Julius Caesar, 256;

Coriolanus, 480, 482;

Menenius Agrippa, 564.

Jonson (Ben), Catiline, 54;

Sejanus and Catiline, 85;

Discoveries and Staple of News,

on Julius Caesar, 174 and 175;

Epicoene, note 303, 460.

Jowett (Benjamin), Plato, Vol. I., note 237;

Plato, Vol. II., 446.

Julius Caesar, date of composition, 168;

Plutarch, 180;

the lives of Brutus, Caesar and Antony, 188;

should it be named Marcus Brutus, 212;

Julius Caesar is himself analogous to the

King in the English Historical Plays, 213.

Julius Caesar, character in other plays, 177.

Julius Caesar and Appian, 644-647.

Julius Caesar and Garnier’s Cornélie, 60;

parallels between, 628-630.

Julius Caesar, by Muretus, 11.

Junius Brutus (in Coriolanus), 499.

Kahnt (Paul), Gedankenkreis ...

in Jodelle’s und Garnier’s Tragödien, note 19.

Karsteg (Prof. von), in Harry Richmond, 393.

King John, 82.

King Lear, 78.

Klein, on Cinthio’s Cleopatra and Antony and Cleopatra, note 310.

Kreyssig (Friedrich Alexo Theodor), on Octavius, 378;

on Volumnia, 553;

on Virgilia, 570.

Kyd (Thomas), translation of Cornélie

(under name Cornelia), 54;

Boas’ edition, note 55.

Lamprias, brother of Plutarch, 98.

Landman (Dr. Friedrich), on Euphues, 149.

Lanson, on Amyot, 141.

La Rochefoucauld (François, VI. Duc de), notes 420, 424 and 451.

Lartius (in Coriolanus), 513.

Le Duc (Viollet), Ancien Théatre François, note 28.

Lee (Sidney), Shakespeare and Camden, 457.

Lepidus (in Julius Caesar), 297.

Lepidus (in Antony and Cleopatra), 368.

Lessing (Gotthold Ephraim), Hamburg Dramaturgy on the Roman Plays, 86.

Ligarius (in Julius Caesar), 286.

“light” endings, 304.

Lily (John), Euphues and The Diall of Princes, 149.

Lloyd (Watkiss), on Coriolanus, 519.

Lodge (Thomas), The Wounds of Civill War, 62;

A Looking Glass for London and England, 62;

translator of Josephus and Lucius Annaeus Seneca, 68.

Lord Alexas, see Alexas.

Lotze, on Historical Plays, 89.

“Love,” in three plays, 342.

Luce (Alice), edition of Countess of Pembroke’s

translation of R. Garnier’s Antonius, note 46.

Lucilius (in Julius Caesar), 285.

Lucina, Elizabethan plays on, 1.

Lucretia, Elizabethan plays on, 1.

Macbeth, 78, and Antony and Cleopatra, 302.

Malone (Edmund), date of Antony and Cleopatra, 303;

date of Coriolanus, 454, 459, 460.

“Mansions” (another name for “scenes”), 476.

Marcius (in Coriolanus), 497, 549.

Marcus Aurelius, 104.

Mark Antony

(in Julius Caesar), 289-298.

(in Antony and Cleopatra), 390-412.

Marlowe (Christopher), Edward II., 2;

Tamburlaine, note 62,

and Shakespeare, Henry VI., 93.

Massinissa, Elizabethan plays on, 1.

Mecaenas (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346, 361.

Menas (in Antony and Cleopatra), 348, 376.

Menecrates (in Antony and Cleopatra), 376.

Menenius Agrippa (in Julius Caesar), 558.

Meres (Francis), list of plays, 171;

Palladis Tamia, 172.

Messala (in Julius Caesar), 285.

Méziriac (Bachet de), on Amyot, 128.

Misfortunes of Arthur, by Thomas Hughes, 45.

“Mixed” plays, 18.

Moeller, Kleopatra in der Tragödien-Literatur, note, 310.

Montaigne (Michael, Lord of), on Muretus, 20;

on Amyot, 129.

Montreuil, Cleopatre, note 310.

Muretus, Julius Caesar, 11, 20.

Mussato, Eccerinis, 11.

Nashe (Thomas), use of word “lurched,” 460.

Nicholson (S.), Acolastus his Afterwit, 171.

North (Sir Thomas), 141-167;

birth and education, 142;

Diall of Princes, 143;

Lord Lieutenant of Cambridgeshire and Isle of Ely, 143;

Doni’s Morale Filosofia, 144;

command at Ely, 146;

dignities and pensions, 146;

his style in translating Plutarch, 154;

? as to the Greek text, note 155.

Nuce (Thomas), English version of Octavia, 12.

Octavia, ? by Seneca, 10-19.

Octavia (in Antony and Cleopatra), 362-366.

Octavius (in Julius Caesar), 298.

Octavius (in Antony and Cleopatra), 373, 378.

Othello, 78.

Ovid, Epistle of Dido, 653.

Pais (Ettore), on story of Coriolanus, 474.

Pembroke (Countess of),

translation of Garnier’s Antonius, 2;

Mornay’s Discourse on Life and Death, note 46.

Philotas, by Samuel Daniel, 49.

Pindarus (in Julius Caesar), 284, 285.

Plays named after two persons, 341.

Plutarch and Shakespeare, 92 etc., 95-119;

ancestry and education, 95;

Isis and Osiris, 96;

Moralia, 97;

marriage, 98;

priest of Apollo, 102;

Archon of Chaeronea, 104;

? a consul, 104;

? governor of Greece, 104;

and Plato, 108;

Neo-Platonism, 108;

his philosophy, 108;

Praecepta gerendae Reipublicae, 113;

Latin version of his Lives, published at Rome by Campani, 132;

other translations, 132;

editions of North’s version, 151;

various versions and Volumnia’s speech, 631-643.

Portia (in Julius Caesar), 271-274.

Preston (Thomas), King Cambyses, 8.

Proculeius (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346.

Puschkin, parallel with Cleopatra’s “One Word,” 655.

Quarterly Review (1861), on Plutarch, 162.

Rabelais (François), prose of, 135.

Racine (Jean), on Amyot, 136.

Richard III., 177.

Rigal (Eugène), on Alexandre Hardy, 476.

Roman and English plays compared, 74.

Romeo and Juliet, 177.

Ronsard (Pierre de) Roman plays by the School of, 11;

on Grévin’s César, 33.

Rousseau (Jean Jacques), on Plutarch, 117.

Ruhnken, edition of Muretus, note 27.

Ruskin (John), on Virgilia, 497.

Rusticus (Arulenus), friend of Plutarch, 97.

Sachs (Hans), play on Cleopatra, note 310.

St. Évremond, on Plutarch, 112.

Scarus (in Antony and Cleopatra), 359.

Schiller, historical plays of, 87.

Schweighäuser (Johann), version of Appian quoted, 645.

Scott (Sir Walter), on Dryden’s All for Love, 256.

Seneca, ? author of Octavia, 10.

Senecio (Sosius), friend of Plutarch, 97.

Serapion, a poet, 101.

Sextus of Chaeronea, 104.

Sextus Pompeius (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346, 373.

Shakespeare (William),

Roman plays influenced by Senecan pieces, 56,

and Thomas Kyd, 56;

Midsummer-Night’s Dream and

Merchant of Venice show traces of North’s Plutarch, 151;

various editions of North’s Plutarch, note 152, and North, 163.

Sicinius Vellutus (in Coriolanus), 499.

Sidgwick (Henry), on Julius Caesar, 176.

Silius (in Antony and Cleopatra), 345.

Skelton (John), Garland of Laurel, 309.

Sonnets—Daniel’s Delia, 56;

sorrows in the, 313.

Stahr (A.), on Cleopatra, 427.

Stengel, Théatre d’Alexandre Hardy, 476.

Stirling (Earl of), see Alexander (Sir William).

Stokes (Henry Paine),

Chronological Order of Shakespeare’s Plays, note 168.

Stone (Boswell), Shakespeare’s Holinshed, note 180.

Strato (in Julius Caesar), 285.

Swinburne (Algernon Charles), Trilogy on Mary Stuart, 89.

Taylor (Sir Henry), Philip van Artevelde, 89.

Ten Brink (Bernhard), on Cleopatra, 443.

Tennyson, Harold, 89.

Thyreus (in Antony and Cleopatra), 346.

Timaeus, treatise on the, by Plutarch, 101.

Timon, 82, 307.

Timon, brother of Plutarch, 98.

Titinius (in Julius Caesar), 284, 285.

Titus Andronicus, 177.

Titus Lartius (in Coriolanus), 498, 556.

Trench (Richard Chenevix), Archbishop of Dublin, on Plutarch, 114;

on Shakespeare and Plutarch, 164;

on Coriolanus, 600.

Troilus and Cressida, 84.

Tullus Aufidius, see Aufidius (Tullus).

Turberville (George), translation of Ovid, 654.

Vaugelas (Claude Favre de), on Amyot, 136.

Ventidius (in Antony and Cleopatra), 345.

Verity (A. W.), edition of Julius Caesar, 175;

edition of Coriolanus, note 497.

Viehoff, on Shakespeare’s Coriolan, 479.

Virgilia (in Coriolanus), 497, 566.

Voltaire (François Marie Arouet de), on Brutus, 239.

Volumnia (in Coriolanus), 494, 549;

her speech and various versions of Plutarch, 631-643.

Warburton (William), a reading in Antony and Cleopatra, 411.

Ward (Prof. A. W.),

on Countess of Pembroke’s version of Garnier’s Antonius, note 46;

on Lodge’s The Wounds of Civill War, note 62.

Warning to Fair Women, 171.

“weak” endings, 304.

Weever (John), Mirror of Martyrs, 170, 172.

Whitelaw, date of Coriolanus, 466.

Wordsworth (William), on Plutarch, note 114.

Wright (W. Aldis), edition of Julius Caesar, 172.

Wyndham (the Right Honble. George), on Plutarch, 112;

on Amyot’s Plutarch’s Morals, note 144;

on Julius Caesar, 239.

Xylander, Latin version of Plutarch, 133.

Zielinski (Professor Thaddäus),

Marginalia Philologus

on Antony and Cleopatra, note 347;

on Cleopatra’s “One Word,” 653.

GLASGOW: PRINTED AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS BY ROBERT MACLEHOSE AND CO. LTD.

BY

A. C. BRADLEY, LL.D., Litt.D.

Formerly Professor of Poetry in the University of Oxford

Shakespearean Tragedy

LECTURES ON HAMLET, OTHELLO, KING LEAR, MACBETH

8vo. 10s. net.

“Mr. Bradley’s book, as the Americans would say, is a ‘real live book,’ and ought to find a place side by side with the volumes of Coleridge, Lamb, Hazlitt, and Swinburne, among the best and most illuminative specimens of English dramatic criticism.”—Mr. W. L. Courtney in the Daily Telegraph.

“An admirable piece of work. To call it the most luminous piece of Shakespearean criticism that has ever been written would be to pretend to an impossible familiarity with the whole gigantic literature of the subject. Let me only say, then, that no such minutely searching and patiently convincing studies of Shakespeare are known to me.”—Mr. William Archer in the Daily Chronicle.

“Professor Bradley realises to the full the depth and the delicacy and the darkness of his subject; and realising this, he contrives to say some very admirable things about it.”—Mr. G. K. Chesterton in the Daily News.

Oxford Lectures on Poetry

8vo. 10s. net.

“A remarkable achievement.... It is probable that this volume will attain a permanence for which critical literature generally cannot hope. Very many of the things that are said here are finally said; they exhaust their subject. Of one thing we are certain—that there is no work in English devoted to the interpretation of poetic experience which can claim the delicacy and sureness of Mr. Bradley’s.”—Athenæum.

“This is not a book to be written about in a hasty review of a thousand words. It is one to be perused and appreciated at leisure—to be returned to again and again, partly because of its supreme interest, partly because it provokes, as all good books should do, a certain antagonism, partly because it is itself the product of a careful, scholarly mind, basing conclusions on a scrupulous perusal of documents and authorities.... The whole book is so full of good things that it is impossible to make any adequate selection. In an age which is not supposed to be very much interested in literary criticism, a book like Mr. Bradley’s is of no little significance and importance.”—Daily Telegraph.

LONDON: MACMILLAN AND CO. LTD.

A History of English Poetry.

By W. J. Courthope, C.B., M.A., D.Litt., LL.D.,

formerly Professor of Poetry in the University of Oxford; Fellow of the British Academy; Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature; Hon. Fellow of New College, Oxford. 6 vols. 8vo. 10s. net each.

Vol. I. The Middle Ages; Influence of the Roman Empire; The Encyclopædic Education of the Church; The Feudal System.

Vol. II. The Renaissance and the Reformation; Influence of the Court and the Universities.

Vol. III. The Intellectual Conflict of the Seventeenth Century; Decadent Influence of the Feudal Monarchy; Growth of the National Genius.

Vol. IV. Development and Decline of the Poetical Drama; Influence of the Court and the People.

Vol. V. The Constitutional Compromise of the Eighteenth Century; Effects of the Classical Renaissance; its Zenith and Decline; The Early Romantic Renaissance.

Vol. VI. The Romantic Movement in English Poetry; Effects of the French Revolution.

A History of English Prosody

from the Twelfth Century to the Present Day. By George Saintsbury, M.A. Oxon., Hon. LL.D. Aberd., Hon. D.Litt. Dresd., Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature in the University of Edinburgh. 3 vols. 8vo.

Vol. I. From the Origins to Spenser. 10s. net.

Vol. II. From Shakespeare to Crabbe. 15s. net.

Vol. III. Conclusion. [Spring, 1910.

LONDON: MACMILLAN AND CO. LTD.

Footnotes:

Ἐπεὶ δὲ πολλοὺς τῶν Ἀμβρώνων οἰ Ῥωμαῖοι διαφθείραντες ἀνεχώρησαν ὀπίσω καὶ σκότος ἐπέσχεν, οὐχ ὥσπερ εὐτυχήματι τοσούτῳ τὸν στρατὸν ἐδέξαντο παιᾶνες ἐπινίκιοι καὶ πότοι κατὰ σκηνὰς καὶ φιλοφροσύναι περὶ δεῖπνα, καὶ, τὸ πάντων ἥδιστον ἀνδράσιν εὐτυχῶς μεμαχημένοις, ὕπνος ἤπιος, ἀλλ’ ἐκείνην μάλιστα τὴν νύκτα φοβερὰν καὶ ταραχώδη διήγαγον. Ἦν μὲν γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἀχαράκωτον τὸ στρατόπεδον καὶ ἀτείχιστον, ἀπελείποντο δὲ τῶν βαρβάρων ἔτι πολλαὶ μυριάδες ἀήττητοι καὶ σνμμεμιγμένων τούτοις, ὅσοι διαπεφεύγεσαν, τῶν Ἀμβρώνων ὀδυρμὸς ἦν διὰ νυκτὸς, οὐ κλαυθμοῖς ούδὲ στεναγμοῖς ἀνθρώπων ἐοικῶς, ἀλλὰ θηρομιγής τις ὠρυγὴ καὶ βρύχημα μεμιγμένον ἀπειλαῖς καὶ θρήνοις ἀναπεμπόμενον ἐκ πλήθους τοσούτου τά τε πέριξ ὄρη καὶ τὰ κοῖλα τοῦ ποταμοῦ περιεφώνει. Καὶ κατεῖχε φρικώδης ἦχος τὸ πεδίον.

(XX. Döhner’s Edition.)

Or take this from the Life of Sulla:—

Τὴν δὲ κραυγὴν καὶ ἀλαλαγμὸν οὐκ ἔστεγεν ὁ ἀὴρ ἐθνῶν τοσούτων ἅμα καθισταμένων εἰς τάξιν. Ἤν δὲ ἅμα καὶ τὸ κομπῶδες καὶ σοβαρὸν αὐτῶν τῆς πολυτελείας οὐκ ἀργὸν οὐδὲ ἄχρηστον εἰς ἔκπληξιν, ἀλλ’ αἵ τε μαρμαρυγαὶ τῶν ὅπλων ἠσκημένων χρνσῷ τε καὶ ἀργύρῳ διαπρεπῶς αἵ τε βαφαὶ τῶν Μηδικῶν καὶ Σκυθικῶν χιτώνων ἀναμεμιγμέναι χαλκῷ καὶ σιδήρῳ λάμποντι πυροειδῆ καὶ φοβερὰν ἐν τῷ σαλεύεσθαι καὶ διαφέρεσθαι προσέβαλλον ὄψιν, ὤστε τοὺς Ῥωμαίους ὑπὸ τὸν χάρακα συστέλλειν ἑαυτοὺς καὶ τὸν Σύλλαν μηδενὶ λόγῳ τὸ θάμβος αὐτῶν ἀφελεῖν δυνάμενον βιάζεσθαί τε ἀποδιδράσκοντας οὐ βονλόμενον ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν καὶ φέρειν βαρέως ἐφυβρίζοντας ὁρῶντα κομπασμῷ καὶ γέλωτι τοὺς βαρβάρους.

(XVI. Döhner’s Edition.)

This is very different from the unstudied charm of Herodotus. Even in North’s translation, though something of the cunning has been lost in the selection and manipulation of the words, it is easy to see that the pictures are elaborate both in their general effect and their details.

Now the Romaines, after they had overcome the most parte of the Ambrons, retyring backe by reason the night had overtaken them, did not (as they were wont after they had geven such an overthrow) sing songes of victory and triumphe, nor make good chere in their tentes one with an other, and least of all sleepe: (which is the best and sweetest refreshing for men that have fought happely), but contrarily they watched all that night with great feare and trouble, bicause their campe was not trenched and fortified, and bicause they knewe also that there remained almost innumerable thowsandes of barbarous people, that had not yet fought: besides also that the Ambrons that had fled and scaped from the overthrow, did howle out all night with lowd cries, which were nothing like men’s lamentacions and sighes, but rather like wild beastes bellowing and roaringe. So that the bellowinge of such a great multitude of beastly people, mingled together with threates and waylinges, made the mountains thereabouts and the running river to rebounde againe of the sounde and ecco of their cries marvellously: by reason whereof, all the valley that lay between both, thundered to heare the horrible and fearfull trembling.

The ayer was even cut a sunder as it were with the violence of the noyse and cries of so many sundry nations, which altogether did put them selves in battell ray. The sumptuousness of their furniture moreover, was not altogether superfluous and unprofitable, but served greatly to feare the beholders. For the glistering of their harnesse, so richly trimmed and set forth with gold and silver, the cullers of their arming coates upon their curaces, after the facion of the Medes and Scythians, mingled with the bright glistering steele and shining copper, gave such a showe as they went and removed to and fro, that made a light as clere as if all had bene on a very fire, a fearfull thing to looke upon. In so much as the Romaines durst not so much as once goe out of the trenches of their campe, nor Sylla with all his perswasion coulde take away this great conceived feare from them: wherefore, (and bicause also he would not compell them to goe forth in this feare) he was driven not to stirre, but close to abide, (though it grieved him greatly) to see the barbarous people so proudly and villanously laugh him and his men to scorne.

“Shall I cut the gables of the ankers, and make thee Lord not only of Sicile and Sardinia, but of the whole Empire of Rome besides?”

In the third edition this is altered to cables, and this is the form that occurs in Shakespeare:

But this change is a very slight one that Shakespeare might easily make for himself on the same motives that induced the editor of the Lives to make it. And though attempts have been made to prove that the fourth edition was used for Coriolanus, there are great difficulties in accepting so late a date for that play, and one phrase rather points to one of the first two editions (see Introduction to Coriolanus). If this is really so, it affects the case of Antony and Cleopatra too, for it would be odd to find Shakespeare using the first or second edition for the latter play, and the third for the earlier one. Still, such things do occur, and I think there is a tendency in those who discuss this point to confine Shakespeare over rigidly to one edition. In the twentieth century it is possible to find men reading or re-reading a book in the first copy that comes to hand without first looking up the date on the title page. Was this practice unknown in Shakespeare’s day?

“(a) Caesar’s friends that governed under him, were cause why they hated Caesar’s government ... by reason of the great insolencies and outragious parts that were committed: amongst whom Antonius, that was of greatest power, and that also committed greatest faultes, deserved most blame. But Caesar, notwithstanding, when he returned from the warres of Spayne, made no reckoning of the complaints that were put up against him: but contrarily, bicause he found him a hardy man, and a valliant Captaine, he employed him in his chiefest affayres.

“(b) Now it greved men much, to see that Caesar should be out of Italy following of his enemies, to end this great warre, with such great perill and daunger: and that others in the meane time abusing his name and authoritie, should commit such insolent and outragious parts unto their citizens. This me thinkes was the cause that made the conspiracie against Caesar increase more and more, and layed the reynes of the brydle uppon the souldiers neckes, whereby they durst boldlier commit many extorsions, cruelties, and robberies.”

Plutarch is speaking of Antony in particular, but surely this is the sort of thing that was in Shakespeare’s mind.

The second criticism is that in the economy of the piece it leads to nothing, “unless,” as Mr. Bradley says, “we may hold that but for the quarrel and reconciliation, Cassius would not have allowed Brutus to overcome his objection to the fatal policy of offering battle at Philippi.” This is quite true, though the proviso is a most important one. But it does very manifestly connect with what has gone before, and gives the essence and net result of the story. We could sooner dispense with the Fifth Act than the Fourth, for the Fifth may with less injustice be described as an appendix than the Fourth as an episode. Not only is it less unique in kind, but for the most part it works out issues that can easily be foreseen and that to some extent are clearly indicated here. Of course this is not to say that it could be rejected without mutilating the play, for it works them out far more impressively than we could do in our own imaginations, even with Plutarch to help us.

And she says in her defence:

(II. 32.) Cf.

This certainly is liker Livy than Plutarch; and besides the chances of Shakespeare having read Livy in the original, we have to bear in mind that in 1600 Philemon Holland published the Romane Historie written by Titus Livius of Padua. His version, as it is difficult to procure, may be quoted in full:

Whilome (quoth he) when as in mans bodie, all the parts thereof agreed not, as now they do in one, but each member had a several interest and meaning, yea, and a speech by it selfe; so it befel, that all other parts besides the belly, thought much and repined that by their carefulness, labor, and ministerie, all was gotten, and yet all little enough to serve it: and the bellie it selfe lying still in the mids of them, did nothing else but enjoy the delightsome pleasures brought unto her. Wherupon they mutinied and conspired altogether in this wise, That neither the hands should reach and convey food to the mouth, nor the mouth receive it as it came, ne yet the teeth grind and chew the same. In this mood and fit, whiles they were minded to famish the poore bellie, behold the other lims, yea and the whole bodie besides, pined, wasted, and fel into an extreme consumption. Then was it wel seen, that even the very belly also did no smal service, but fed the other parts, as it received food it selfe: seeing that by working and concocting the meat throughlie, it digesteth and distributeth by the veines into all parts, that fresh and perfect blood whereby we live, we like, and have our full strength. Comparing herewith, and making his application, to wit, how like this intestine, and inward sedition of the bodie, was to the full stomacke of the Commons, which they had taken and borne against the Senatours, he turned quite the peoples hearts.

In the first place it is closer to North, and agrees with Shakespeare’s usual practice of keeping to North’s words so far as possible. In the second place, it is closer to the Folio text, involving only the displacement of a comma. In the third place, it is simpler to suppose that a whole single line has been missed out than that parts of two have been amputated, and the remainders run together.