Skip to main content

Yes, Shakespeare WAS Right!

For years Shakespeare scholars have pointed to such passages as the following from The Tempest and Two Gentleman of Verona:

1) Prospero (formerly Duke of Milan) explaining things to Miranda:

"In few, they hurried us aboard a bark,
Bore us some leagues to the sea"
The Tempest, Act I, scene 2

2) In Verona, Speed (the servant of Valentine) talking to Proteus:

SPEED: Sir Proteus, save you! Saw you my master?

PROTEUS: But now he parted hence, to embark for Milan

SPEED: Twenty to one he is shipp'd already...

These two passages clearly imply that Milan is a port where one can take a ship to "the sea"
or can arrive by ship from Verona.

But, say the scholars, Milan and Verona are inland towns! How can there be ships there?

Oh well, they say, Shakespeare just made a mistake. We can excuse him for that. After all, he lived in England and never went to Italy. He just didn't know such details. And who cares anyway, he wrote good plays!

Of course, readers of this blog probably already know where I'm heading with this. As can be seen in this recent article (link courtesy of John Rollet via Elizaforum): www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5497075.ece "Shakespeare" was INDEED right. There were plenty of canals and waterways linking such inland towns as Milan and Verona. In fact, they were a principal way of getting around.

Now who might know about this? Someone who apparently never left England or someone who was known to have traveled to Milan, Verona, Venice and generally all over northern Italy where these inland waterways were located? Yes, I guess the "local yokel" COULD have talked with some "sailors" at the Mermaid Tavern (if he really ever went there), but my money is on the first-hand knowledge of someone who was "on the spot".

Once again, things become more explainable when you have the right "Shakespeare", or should that be the "Shakespeare" who was right?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Was King Richard III a Control Freak? Science News ... from universities, journals, and other research organizations   Mar. 4, 2013 — University of Leicester psychologists believe Richard III was not a psychopath -- but he may have had control freak tendencies. University of Leicester psychologists have made an analysis of Richard III's character -- aiming to get to the man behind the bones. Professor Mark Lansdale, Head of the University's School of Psychology, and forensic psychologist Dr Julian Boon have put together a psychological analysis of Richard III based on the consensus among historians relating to Richard's experiences and actions. They found that, while there was no evidence for Shakespeare's depiction of Richard III as a psychopath, he may have had "intolerance to uncertainty syndrome" -- which may have manifested in control freak tendencies. The academics presented their findings on Saturday, March 2 at the University

What's a popp'rin' pear?

James Wheaton reported yesterday in the Jackson Citizen Patriot that the Michigan Shakespeare Festival high school tour of Romeo and Juliet was criticized for inappropriate content -- " So me take issue with sexual innuendoes in Michigan Shakespeare Festival’s High School Tour performances of ‘Romeo & Juliet’" : Western [High School] parent Rosie Crowley said she was upset when she heard students laughing about sexual content in the play afterwards. Her son didn’t attend the performance Tuesday because of another commitment, she said.  “I think the theater company should have left out any references that were rated R,” Crowley said. “I would say that I’ve read Shakespeare, and what I was told from the students, I’ve never read anything that bad.”  She said she objected to scenes that involved pelvic thrusting and breast touching and to a line in which Mercutio makes suggestive comments to Romeo after looking up the skirt of a female. The problem with cutting out the naug

Winkler lights the match

by Linda Theil When asked by an interviewer why all the experts disagree with her on the legitimacy of the Shakespeare authorship question, journalist and author Elizabeth Winkler  calmly replied, "You've asked the wrong experts." * With that simple declaration Winkler exploded the topic of Shakespearean authorship forever. Anti-Stratfordians need no smoking gun, no convincing narrative, no reason who, how, when, or why because within the works lies the unassailable argument: Shakespeare's knowledge. Ask the lawyers. Ask the psychologists. Ask the librarians. Ask the historians. Ask the dramaturges. Ask the mathematicians. Ask the Greek scholars. Ask the physicists. Ask the astronomers. Ask the courtiers. Ask the bibliophiles. Ask the Italians. Ask the French. Ask the Russians. Ask the English. Ask everyone. Current academic agreement on a bevy of Shakespearean collaborators springs from an unspoken awareness of how much assistance the Stratfordian presumptive would h