Shakespeare didn't read the classics. He watched his contemporary playwrights and read the same pop-tier poets as all other English people of his time. He has also known some bible passages from the psalms they sung at that time in the church and had evidently consulted the book of prayer for burial and marriage. The claim that he was reading Ovid, Pliny or Aesop relies on ideas and similies that were so common he might have picked up pretty much anywhere. For his history plays he relied on Holinshed who was used in his school. And every time he drops a Latin phrase it's also picked up from his school books.
So, why don't you do it like Shakespeare? Why not just write instead of starting with the Greeks?
Shut up pleb faggot
poor b8
but in case any one isnt aware shakespeare was very well read in english histories and roman texts. the greeks weren't his forte, but shakespeare was very well read.
>>7963707
He read Plutarch you cuck, and that is sufficient.
>>7963707
>That pic
Actually he did read the classics. You can tell because he plagiarized them many, many times.
>Shakespeare didn't read the classics
Right, he just wrote plays about them based on shit he made up
you could have chosen almost any figure from history before the early modern era and this statement would be true.
but you chose a nigger from the height of the fucking renaissance.
do you know why it was called the renaissance? because the classics were revived and brought back into society
re-naissance literally refers to the re-birth of the classics and you're a fucking moron
>>7963877
>Right, he just wrote plays about them based on shit he made up
Ditto. Vis.
>Twelfth Night III,i,62:
>Cressida was a beggar
And THAT is from Robert Henryson writing in Scots and not from Chaucer (and most certainly not Homer), which means Shakes didn't actually study the classics any moar than you would "study" Tarantino cinema. Or would you call someone a Bible Scholar based on him quoting Ezekiel 25:17?
>>7964236
weak b8
>>7963707
>2016
>still believe the illiterate shakespeare of stratford who couldnt even sign his own name could have authored those books
>not realising that to have written those books you would need an understanding of at least latin, french, italian and ancient greek
>not realising the author would have had to been extremely well read and it would have been impossible to have access to have a library of that size as a peasant
>not realising that the real author was using shakespeare as a front for criticising the tudors
>>7964354
>he fell for the authorship debate meme
wew lad. I feel sorry for you, tbqhwyf.
>>7964380
>being this bluepilled
baconism is the true enlightenment
>>7964395
Baconism...please, anon. Please. Stop before you embarrass yourself further.
>>7964399
>desperation from shakespear deniers
>baconism
yeah I just made it up. I'm a creative guy
>>7964411
Trust me, sweetheart, there is no desperation.
>baconism
Implying I'm not aware of any and all candidates for the authorship question and haven't done extensive research into, not only Shakespeare's life, but the lives of all serious candidates who've been proposed in the countless coup de tat's to discredit the king of the English language.
Please, anon. Don't do this to yourself.
>>7964424
Okay anon riddle me this
Some of the books he read was only availablein latin or ancient greek. How did a poor farmer learn to read latin and ancient greek?
There were only a few copies of these books. Where did Shakspeare the peasant from Stratsford get access to a library with all these books?
Shakespeare would sign letters and contracts with a cross yet the manuscripts of his sonnets show a beautiful scripture. How can you explain that difference?
Where did Shakespeare the peasant get his education in classical languages and calligraphy?
>>7964411
I do not like the Bacon theory a lot since the only Bacon we can find in Shakespeare is a fake Aristotle quotation. From which we must conclude that Shakespeare was none other but Michel de Montaigne. From his own oevre he would take entire paragraphs (before they were printed in English translation! The theory he saw the manuscripts, if you ask me, is completely insane). What's more he shows a good command of French (for puns like his you need some native level French) and whatever his opinion of the Tudors, it really pales to his Dauphin being a bloody horse-fucker.
>>7964475
>Some of the books he read was only availablein latin or ancient greek.
le wut? The only ancient greek of his is "anthropophagoi" in Othello IIRC.
>Where did Shakespeare the peasant get his education in classical languages and calligraphy?
He got an education in Stratford upon Avon and his Latin is mostly the lines of poetry used to illustrate the grammar in a school book. The self-same school book he would quote directly (with some terrible puns) in LLL.
>"Ich liebe ich will dich,
>denn ich habe sachliche
>Gründe dafür"
wat
>>7964475
>Okay anon riddle me this
All right, we're really going to do this?
>Some of the books he read was only availablein latin or ancient greek. How did a poor farmer learn to read latin and ancient greek?
In all of Shakespeare's work, he almost always alludes to the English translation of any reference book. Always. And he was not just some poor farmer who didn't know anyone. His father was a farmer when he was younger, but by the time William was 4 years old, John was elected mayor of Stratford. Sometime in the mid 1570's, John lost his family fortune and was stripped of his title because he made some illegal trades, skipped Protestant church, and made some bad investments. He was a businessman who lost all of his money.
As for the case of latin, since Shakespeare was Catholic, a genius of his stature would certainly have an understanding of latin from the bible. Shakespeare makes more references to the bible than any other writer of his time. As for any other work, he could have asked someone to help him translate. Like I said, he wasn't just some lost poor little farmer boy.
>There were only a few copies of these books. Where did Shakspeare the peasant from Stratsford get access to a library with all these books?
His best friend, Richard Field, who grew up on the same street as he did, became an apprentice printer at 18 in London (Shakespeare was 16). The two families were such good friends that William's father, John, personally did the inventory of Richard's father's property when he died. This particular printer that Richard apprenticed for was noted as "one of the best in London," and Richard would go on to take over the business. Richard's shop was in the Blackfriars area of London, where we know Shakespeare had a place when he lived in London.
And guess who printed Shakespeare's first two poems, Venus and Adonis and the Rape of Lucrece? You guessed it. Richard Field's himself. Field's (remember, he's Shakespeare's best friend from Stratford), was noted for his own works being "of high quality" and he had an excellent reputation as an honest and scrupulous businessman in London.
We also know that Field's shop had copies of many of these books you question him having access to.
>Shakespeare would sign letters and contracts with a cross yet the manuscripts of his sonnets show a beautiful scripture. How can you explain that difference?
The sonnets were first printed in 1609 without Shakespeare's permission. Why would you believe that any beautiful scripture is his handwriting?
>Where did Shakespeare the peasant get his education in classical languages and calligraphy?
Again, he was not a peasant. No, he was not of noble birth, but he wasn't just some pauper. His family fell on hard times, somewhere during his teenage years.
>>7964590
>In all of Shakespeare's work, he almost always alludes to the English translation of any reference book. Always.
>Di faciant, laudis summa sit ista tuae!
found the pleb.
>>7963810
Sufficient for someone to learn just how fucking little he knows about the ancient world.
>>7963707
OP didn't read Shakespeare or the classics.
>>7964602
Please stop going on the internet and telling lies, anon. I fear eternity will not be a pleasant rest for you.
Magni dominator poli, Tam lentus audis scelera, tam lentus vides.
>>7964590
>Shakespeare was Catholic
Or it's just his characters. Of course we are exposed to the apocrypha in plays he set in places or in times where everybody has been catholic just you've got some Cicero, some Ovid and some Seneca in Titus Andronicus. The KJB which cut these parts and made it extra effort for the pious catholics to find them wouldn't be completely finished until 1611. And Shakes would quote the metric psalms as well, which was considered hardcore protestant back in his day and age.
>>7964475
>Where did Shakespeare the peasant get his education
From the Stratford Grammar school paid for by his father, John Shakespeare, the chief magistrate of the Stratford town council.
Why not try some basic research before you post on such topics?
>>7964640
I believe his being Catholic was an essential part of his history that would help explain much of his life and his work that, for whatever reason, goes overlooked or is ignored in most Shakespeare scholarship (though there are some famous people who have mentioned it).
>>7964588
>"Ich liebe ich will dich,
>ich will dich
Nein. Trei Agän. But otherwise A+. Have you been studying the language of Almaine?
>>7964665
According to Leo the Fat (for this is what Tolstoi translates to in English) he has been dreadfully secular anyways. What is it that it would explain? I know there is play he had corroborated on about Henry VIIIth but sadly haven't seen it and do now know anything about it.
>>7964588
Ich liebe ihr [adjective I can't read], denn ich habe sachlich gründe dafür.
I love her [in some kind of way], if I have objective reasons for it.
>>7964712
ich liebe *ihn *wirklich
and
>sachliche Gründe
may refer to a plenty of different things (just double-checked. Yes, you can click around in google till you like it.).
You've been studying German?
>>7964723
I now read it a few times and came to the conclusion it's
>ich liebe ihn wirklich
I truely love him
>>7964354
Shakespeare could sign his own name, it was just difficult for him
>>7964380
>>7964395
>>7964399
>>7964411
>>7964424
>>7964540
the fuck? Shakespeare's plays, at least the first folio, were written by a black Jewess (I'm really not memeing-- we discussed this at my university and when I did the research I was floored) named Amelia Bassano from Morocco. She died in poverty while William "Barely Literate" Shakespeare thrived off of the success of her plays. He couldn't even graduate the 1600s equivalent of highschool and I've read sources that he drooled on himself occasionally in public.
>>7964612
That nigger is from the ancient world you space age monkey
![cleopatra_claudette[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/sNm9W9v.jpg "cleopatra_claudette[1].jpg")
>>7964612
>>7964781
Speaking of which, does the description of old Cleo in her burnished throne barge really justify us saying that Shakes knew his Plutarch? There was another Cleopatra play which is now lost and if you make anything with Cleopatra in it then what do you include? It's a part of the myth.
>>7964737
>written by a black Jewess
speaking of which, did anyone here read mrs.Aphra Behn? I was about to take a dive into the restoration era. So: Can anyone opine?
>>7964704
(long post, broken up)
To start, Shakespeare's mother was Mary Arden. Her family was Catholic. Super Catholic. So Catholic that they kept a priest to live with them disguised as a gardener. So Catholic that Edward Arden, who was head of the Arden estate, was executed for being Catholic. He hated Robert Dudley (basically Queen Elizabeth's best guy friend) for imposing basically a Protestant police state, refused to honor him, publicly called him an adulterer, etc., etc. It's known that he went to his execution believing the only reason he was executed was, in his words, for "being a Catholic in a Protestant age."
There were a few reasons, but one of the reasons for John Shakespeare losing his title, was he didn't attend the Protestant church. They took attendance. If you didn't go, you were fined. John Shakespeare missed many times after he was caught making illegal trades. This can be interpreted as a show of disrespect for the law, which was, essentially, Protestant law.
When Shakespeare and Anne get married, they do so in Temple Grafton church. A town about 4 miles from Stratford. At first, this doesn't seem suspect because there was a law to marry into another parish. It does become suspect when the person who marries you, John Frith, is an old Catholic priest and was known by spies to have given his Catholic community secret masses and, particularly, Catholic weddings.
>>7964704
>>7964857
His father declared himself Catholic in his last will before he died. His daughter, Susanna, listed her religion as Catholic. Of the ten people listed in Shakespeare's own will, three we don't know the religion of, two were Anglican, and 5 were known Catholics.
That's some of the stuff we know for sure. There's further evidence that William's last teacher at his Stratford school was Catholic. Catholic pamphlets have been found on his property. There's even evidence to suggest that Shakespeare made some sort of pilgrimage to Rome during his "lost years."
Shakespeare being Catholic would help reconcile certain "missing" aspects of his life that are often called into question.
The previously mentioned interest or background in latin, why so many of his plays are set in Italy, his treatment of Catholic friars in his plays as positive people who help and play important parts (reportedly in traditional costume when performed which would have angered the censor), his criticisms of the Protestant rule of law and, particularly, the way the Protestant nobles hypocritically behaved, the inclusion of purgatory in Hamlet (arguably his most personal and introspective work on life and the philosophy of death), why the theme and discussion of divine right is so present in his histories, why he purchased (well over what it was reportedly worth) a property in Blackfriars section of London that was known to hold secret Catholic gatherings and masses, among other things. It also helps explain why he kept so damn secretive about his work and why, for example, his handwriting is rarely the same. He didn't want to be able to be identified by what he was writing. Which would be why there are no records of him writing letters.
He was terrified of being discovered as a Catholic in a time when it was the equivalent of high treason against the Queen/Country.
(more continued)
>>7964737
She wasn't black, if you mean that in the sub-Saharan Africa sense. She was of Jewish/Moroccan/Italian ancestry. She was darker skinned than the beady eyed Anglos, who, predictably, called her black.
>>7964704
>>7964857
>>7964893
Importantly, like you pointed out, why would it matter that he was Catholic? It doesn't. And you're right, Tolstoy is right, Bloom is right, everyone is right. His work doesn't necessarily have a religion and he discusses so many different philosophies and ideas and never explicitly states Catholicism that it'd be ludicrous to say he was definitely Catholic. That's not the point of it. I, for example, was raised in a church, but I'm entirely fascinated by the history and the mystery of all of them. I'm able to question and wonder about God and science and the nature of life and love and the universe, etc., while still acknowledging the good of my own religion and the hypocrisy of another.
G.K. Chesterton notes that him being a Catholic makes the most sense because of how well he wrote poetry and why he was so head and shoulders above the rest of his time. Another anon here was right, that the renaissance was, essentially, society rediscovering their interest in the classics. Basically, they were Protestant. They approached the classics with their flowery prose and simile and metaphor of epic fictional stories as something to be learned. No doubt, many got very good.
A Catholic, in this time, however, would believe it to be second nature. Shakespeare was far more flowery and dramatic and likely had the natural ability for metaphor and simile and raised in this from birth, the way a Catholic would have to be in his time to be that good at it in relation to his peers. Look to Walter Raleigh, as an example. His work is good, in its own way, but it's much more simple, strict, and direct. Whether this is good or bad doesn't really matter. It's just a way to reconcile just how the epic poetry came so naturally to Shakespeare. Not that he was a Catholic in the sense that he most certainly, definitely, and no question believed, just more that was his upbringing and it helped develop his natural talents for flowery prose during a strict Protestant age. In a similar way it helped Joyce.
>>7964588
goddamn nigger now i need to learn deutsche(and i will)
>>7963707
He graduated Grammar School, which essentially guarantees familiarity with at least Latin texts in their original tongue.
Nice try though.
