Notes

Introduction

1. Walter Cohen, Drama of a Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance Englandand Spain (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985), 401–402; AlanSinfield, Faultlines: Cultural Materialism and the Politics of DissidentReading (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), 107; Arthur Riss,“The Belly Politic: Coriolanus and the Revolt of Language,” ELH 59 (1992):53–75; Francis Barker, The Tremulous Private Body (London: Methuen,1984), 36.

2. Christopher Caudwell, “English Poets: The Period of Primitive Accumulation,”in Marxist Literary Theory, ed. Terry Eagleton and Drew Milne (London:Blackwell, 1996), 92.

3. John Danby, Shakespeare’s Doctrine of Nature: A Study of King Lear (London:Faber and Faber, 1961), 46. For an influential collection of essays onShakespeare, culture, and ideology, many of which tend to rely on transitionalschemas, see Shakespeare in a Changing World, ed. Arnold Kettle (New York:International Publishers, 1964). For important recent critiques of transitionalschemas, see David Aers, “A Whisper in the Ear of Early Modernists; orReflections on Literary Critics Writing the ‘History of the Subject,’ ” in Cultureand History, ed. David Aers, ed. 1350–1600: Essays on English Communities,Identities, and Writing (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1992), 177–202;The Culture of Capital: Properties, Cities, and Knowledge in Early ModernEngland, ed. Henry S. Turner (New York: Routledge, 2002), especially the intro-ductory essay, in which Turner remarks that the “‘transition to capitalism’ inEngland is best undertaken not as the history of a latent system perpetually onthe cusp of emergence but as an analysis of the specific forms that capital mighttake and of the specific locations and modes of activity in which these formsappeared” (9–10). For an incisive comparison of Marxist-transitional argumentsand more recent cultural materialist studies, those that take a non-Marxistapproach to assessing material objects and culture, see Douglas Bruster, “TheNew Materialism in Renaissance Studies,” in Material Culture and CulturalMaterialisms in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, ed. Curtis Perry (Belgium:Brepols Publishers, 2001), 225–238.

4. See Lawrence Stone, The Crisis of the Aristocracy, 1588–1641 (Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1965); The Causes of the English Revolution, 1529–1642 (NewYork: Harper and Row, 1972).

5. Robert Brenner, Merchants and Revolution: Commercial Change, PoliticalConflict, and London’s Overseas Traders, 1550–1653 (Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1993), 642.

6. Conrad Russell, Unrevolutionary England, 1602–1649 (London: HambledonPress, 1990), 48.

7. Glenn Burgess, Absolute Monarchy and the Stuart Constitution (New Haven:Yale University Press, 1996), 49.

8. J.C.D. Clark, Revolution and Rebellion: State and Society in England in theSeventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986), 18. For further statements on revisionist methodology, see PaulChristianson, “The Causes of the English Revolution,” Journal of British Studies 15(1976): 40–75; and R.C. Richardson, The Debate on the English RevolutionRevisited, 3rd edition (London: Routledge, 1998). For “post-revisionist” reaffirma-tions of early modern class ideologies, see Conflict in Early Stuart England: Studiesin Religion and Politics, 1603–1642, ed. Richard Cust and Ann Hughes (London:Longman, 1989). For a spirited Marxist critique of revisionism, see James Holstun,Ehud’s Dagger: Class Struggle in the English Revolution (London: Verso, 2000).

9. Richard Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation: English RenaissanceCulture and the Genealogy of Capital (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 64.

10. Ibid., 9.11. Ibid., 242–246.12. See, e.g., Linda Woodbridge, Vagrancy, Homelessness, and English Renaissance

Literature (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2001); and William C. Carroll,Fat King, Lean Beggar: Representations of Poverty in the Age of Shakespeare(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996).

13. Paul Brown, “ ‘This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine’: The Tempest andthe Discourse of Colonialism,” in Political Shakespeare: New Essays in CulturalMaterialism, ed. Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield (Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press, 1985), 48–71.

14. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, The German Ideology, Part One, ed. C.J. Arthur (New York: International Publishers, 1993), 64.

15. Ibid., 65–66.16. Terry Eagleton, Ideology: An Introduction (London: Verso, 1991), 135.17. Jorge Larrain, Marxism and Ideology (Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press,

1983), 47.18. Louis Althusser, Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays (New York: Monthly

Review Press, 1971), 127–186.19. Pierre Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice (Stanford: Stanford University Press,

1990), 52–65.20. Louis Montrose, The Purpose of Playing: Shakespeare and the Cultural Politics of

the Elizabethan Theatre (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996), 13.21. Jonathan Dollimore, “Shakespeare, Cultural Materialism and the New

Historicism,” in Political Shakespeare, 10.

Notes174

175Notes

22. See Conrad Russell, The Causes of the English Civil War (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1990), chap. 2; Mark Kishlansky, Parliamentary Selection:Social and Political Choice in Early Modern England (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1986); and G.R. Elton, The Parliament of England,1559–1581 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).

23. Cust and Hughes, eds., Conflict in Early Stuart England, 16.24. Kevin Sharp, Remapping Early Modern England: The Culture of Seventeenth-

Century Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 15.25. Foundational studies on the “transition debates” include Maurice Dobb, Studies in

the Development of Capitalism (New York: International Publishers, 1947); and aseries of essays published in Science and Society in the 1950s, which are collected inthe volume entitled Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism, ed. and intro. RodneyHilton (London: Verso, 1976). Important recent contributions to the transitiondebates include Rodney Hilton, Class Conflict and the Crisis of Feudalism: Essays inMedieval Social History (London: The Hambledon Press, 1985); The BrennerDebate, ed. T.H. Aston and C.H.E. Philpin (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1985); Ellen Meiksins Wood, The Pristine Culture of Capitalism: An HistoricalEssay on Old Regimes and Modern States (London: Verso, 1991) and The Origin ofCapitalism (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1999). For an informative critique ofBrenner’s theory of the transition, see Alan H. Carling, Social Division (London:Verso, 1991), chap. 2. For the most recent, magisterial assessment of the role of sta-tus and class during the transitional period in Europe generally, see RichardLachman, Capitalists in Spite of Themselves: Elite Conflict and Economic Transitions inEarly Modern Europe (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000). For a detailed,non-Marxist account of the transition, see Robert S. Duplessis, Transitions toCapitalism in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

26. Louis Althusser, For Marx, trans. Ben Brewster (London: Verso, 1969), 99.27. Ibid., 100.28. Ibid., 10129. Ibid., 120.30. Ibid., 120–121.31. Ibid., 121.32. This summary of Brenner’s argument is based on his account of the transition

in “The Origins of Capitalist Development: A Critique of Neo-SmithianMarxism,” New Left Review 104 (1977), 25–92, reprinted in The BrennerDebate. For Brenner’s more recent contribution to the debate, see his “BourgeoisRevolution and Transition to Capitalism,” in The First Modern Society, ed. A.L.Beier et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 271–304.

33. Brenner, “The Origins of Capitalist Development,” 78.34. See Pierre Macherey, A Theory of Literary Production, trans. Geoffrey Wall

(London: Routledge, 1978), especially chap. 21.35. Karl Marx, Capital III (New York: International Publishers, 1967), 377–378,

cited in Jon Elster, Making Sense of Marx (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1985), 489.

36. Much of my thinking on “immanent critique” has been influenced by SeylaBenhabib’s assessment of the strategy as it is employed by Marx and the

Frankfurt School. See Seyla Benhabib, Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study ofthe Foundations of Critical Theory (New York: Columbia University Press,1986), chap. 1.

37. This is a very loose application of the term “constellation” as used in a series ofwritings by both Theodor Adorno and Walter Benjamin. See, e.g., TheodorAdorno, Negative Dialectics (New York: The Seabury Press, 1973): “By them-selves, constellations represent from without what the concept has cut awaywithin: the ‘more’ which the concept is equally desirous and capable of being . . .”(162). For informative discussions of the range of meanings that the term“constellation” carries in Frankfurt School writings, see Terry Eagleton, TheIdeology of the Aesthetic (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990), chaps. 12–13; andSusan Buck-Morrs, The Origin of Negative Dialectics (Hassocks: HarvesterPress, 1977), chap. 1.

38. Eric Mallin undertakes a similar project in Inscribing the Time: “I proceed onthe assumption that historical contexts must demonstrably play into plot,theme, genre, image, or staging; the drama’s central literary features must beapposite to or cognate with some significant cultural fact or presence and socreate a representational resonance with history.” Eric S. Mallin, Inscribing theTime: Shakespeare and the End of Elizabethan England (Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1995), 6.

39. Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-CenturyEurope (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 29; NorthropFrye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press,1957), 151–239.

40. Bryan Reynolds, Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and theCritical Future (New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press, 2003), 6–7.

41. Ibid., 7.42. Ibid., 6.43. G.K. Hunter, “A.C. Bradley’s Shakespearean Tragedy,” Essays and Studies 21

(1968): 112, cited in Terence Hawkes, That Shakespeherian Rag: Essays on aCritical Process (London: Methuen, 1986), 35.

44. Elmer Edgar Stoll, Art and Artifice in Shakespeare: A Study in Dramatic Contrastand Illusion (New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1933).

45. Ibid., 48.46. Ibid., 51.47. Hugh Grady, The Modernist Shakespeare: Critical Texts in a Material World

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), 71.48. Levin L. Schucking, Character Problems in Shakespeare’s Plays (Gloucester: Peter

Smith, 1959), 134–143.49. Ibid., 190.50. Leo Kirschbaum, Character and Characterization in Shakespeare (Detroit:

Wayne State University Press, 1962), 61.51. Ibid., 62.52. Ibid., 62.53. Madeline Doran, Endeavors of Art: A Study of Form in Elizabethan Drama

(Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1954), 234–235.

Notes176

177Notes

54. In addition to Grady, The Modernist Shakespeare, see Richard Halpern,Shakespeare Among the Moderns (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997).

55. In a sophisticated version of this argument, Paul Delany remarks that Lear,while omitting the “essential elements of the transition from feudalism to themercantile economy as the great increase in the use of money,” “represents theneoclassical economy of the Renaissance, not directly, but rather through anexploration of the philosophical concepts and moral values that are typicallyassociated with that economy” (24–25). Delany then suggests that transitionalvalues are divided between rival camps in the play: “Edmund, Regan, andGoneril extend their political ruthlessness to the personal realm by espousing astrict and often brutal functionalism in social life; their opponents, on theother hand, are addicted to precedent and ceremony, whatever the cost in effi-ciency” (26). See Paul Delany, “King Lear and the Decline of Feudalism,” inMaterialist Shakespeare: A History, ed. Ivo Kamps (London: Verso, 1995),20–38.

56. See Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially SymbolicAct (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), 125–129.

57. Franco Moretti, “The Great Eclipse: Tragic Form as the Deconsecration ofSovereignty,” in Shakespearean Tragedy, ed. John Drakakis (London: Longman,1992), 45–83.

58. See Nicholas Abercrombie, Stephen Hill, and Bryan S. Turner, The DominantIdeology Thesis (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980).

59. See, e.g., Anthony Giddens, A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), chaps. 7–8. For a comprehensivediscussion of the revisionist accounts of early modern ideology, see AlexCallinicos, Making History: Agency, Structure and Change in Social Theory(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988), chap. 4. For a good introduction tohistorical sociology, see Dennis Smith, The Rise of Historical Sociology(Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991).

60. Michael Mann, The Sources of Social Power: A History of Power from theBeginnings to A.D. 1760 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).

61. My view of the text–context interaction is slightly different in this respect fromEric Mallin’s notion of “inscription”: “The act of inscribing history in texts maybegin authorially as an attempt to contain or reify chaotic meanings. . . . But itmore often becomes, in spite of itself, the practice of protracting and replicat-ing a chaos of histories through the artistic medium.” Eric Mallin, Inscribingthe Time, 15. While I thoroughly agree with Mallin’s chaos or “contagionmodel” of history as against a deterministic model, I would argue that genericconventions tend to influence whether a particular play imposes structure andlogic onto its historical referents or replicates historical contingency.

62. For an early approach to integrating genre theory and new historicism, seeLeonard Tennenhouse, Power on Display: The Politics of Shakespeare’s Genres(New York: Methuen, 1988). More recently, there has been a salutary return toformalist concerns by recent cultural materialist critics working within andbeyond the early modern period. See, e.g., Heather Dubrow, Echoes of Desire:English Petrarchism and its Counterdiscourses (Ithaca: Cornell University Press,

1995); Jean Howard, “Competing Ideologies of Commerce in ThomasHeywood’s If You Know Not Me You Know Nobody, Part II,” in The Culture ofCapital ed. Henry S. Turner, 163–182; and Susan J. Wolfson, Formal Charges:The Shaping of Poetry in British Romanticism (Stanford: Stanford UniversityPress, 1997). Stephen Greenblatt, it should be noted, has emphasized that newhistoricist methodology should refocus, rather than dispense with, generic dis-tinctions among texts: “As soon as you collapse everything into something calledtextuality, you discover that it makes all the difference what kind of text you aretalking about. The collapse licenses a certain kind of attention and invites thequestions that literary critics characteristically ask, but at the same time it callsfor a sharp attention to genre and rhetorical mode …” Stephen Greenblatt andCatherine Gallagher, Practicing New Historicism (Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 2000), 23. For an excellent discussion of Greenblatt’s earliercomments on the relationship between genre and new historicism, see StephenCohen, “Between Form and Culture: New Historicism and the Promise of aHistorical Formalism,” in Renaissance Literature and Its Formal Engagements, ed.Mark David Rasmussen (New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press, 2002), 18–41.

Chapter 1

1. See Myra Jehlen’s “History Before the Fact; or, Captain John Smith’sUnfinished Symphony,” Critical Inquiry 19 (1993): 677–692.

2. See, e.g., Peter Hulme, Colonial Encounters: Europe and the Native Caribbean,1492–1797 (London: Routledge, 1986); Peter Hulme and Francis Barker,“ ‘Nymphs and reapers heavenly vanish’: the discursive con-text of TheTempest,” in Alternative Shakespeares, ed. John Drakakis (London: Routledge,1985), 191–205.

3. Some of the recent influential arguments that either make cursory reference to oromit entirely questions of economic relations in their discussion of The Tempestinclude, Hulme, Colonial Encounters; Hulme and Barker, “ ‘Nymphs and reapersheavenly vanish’: the discursive con-text of The Tempest”; Thomas Cartelli,“Prospero in Africa: The Tempest as Colonialist Text and Pretext,” in ShakespeareReproduced: The Text in History and Ideology, ed. Jean E. Howard and Marion F.O’Connor (Methuen: New York, 1987), 99–115; Alden T. Vaughan,“Shakespeare’s Indian: The Americanization of Caliban, “Shakespeare Quarterly39 (1988); 137–153; Ronald Takaki, “The Tempest in the Wilderness: TheRacialization of Savagery,” The Journal of American History (1992): 892–911.

4. The one notable example, which I discuss at length below, is Paul Browne’s essayentitled “ ‘This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine’: The Tempest and theDiscourse of Colonialism,” in Political Shakespeare: New Essays in CulturalMaterialism, ed. Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield (Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press, 1985) 59. See also the brief discussion of vagabondage inStephen Greenblatt’s Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of SocialEnergy in Renaissance England (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988),47–56.

Notes178

179Notes

5. The rise of masterlessness also complicates an already counterintuitivepoststructural understanding of historical process without a subject. Outsidethe parameters of any discursive understanding of what would constitute aRenaissance subject, but yet also deeply connected with the vicissitudes of his-tory, the masterless man is in one sense the perfect metaphor for antihumanisthistory; yet on the other hand he is also a very real, very oppressed historicalpresence during the early modern period. He is, paradoxically, the embodimentof history without a subject.

6. I borrow these terms from Mary Louis Pratt’s Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing andTransculturation (Routledge, London 1992).

7. See Richard Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation (New York: CornellUniversity Press, 1991), chap. 2.

8. William Harrison, A Description of England, ed. George Eden (New York:Dover Publications, 1994), 185.

9. The classic account of enclosures and the decline in villeinage is R.H. Tawney’sThe Agrarian Problem in the Sixteenth Century (New York: Harper andRow, 1967).

10. Cited in Margaret James, Social Problems and Policy During the PuritanRevolution, 1640–1660 (New York, Barnes and Noble, 1966), 281.

11. Marx was inclined toward this view, although his opinions on vagabondageseemed to have changed throughout his writings. In The German Ideology Marxwrites, “These vagabonds, who were so numerous that, for instance, Henry VIIof England had 72,000 of them hanged, were only prevailed upon to work withthe greatest difficulty and through the most extreme necessity. The rapid rise ofmanufacture, particularly in England, absorbed them gradually.” Karl Marx,The German Ideology, ed. C.J. Arthur (New York: International Publishers,1993), 74. It is difficult to tell in this passage whether Marx believes vagabondswere reluctant to work, or whether Tudor culture was reluctant (or able) toemploy them. In Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations, Marx writes of the newlydispossessed peasants: “Such a mass would be reduced either to the sale of itslabour power or to beggary, vagabondage or robbery as its only source ofincome. History records the fact that it first tried beggary, vagabondage andcrime, but was herded off this road on to the narrow path which led to thelabour market by means of gallows, pillory and whip.” Karl Marx, Pre-CapitalistEconomic Formations, trans. Jack Cohen, intro. and. ed. E.J. Hobsbawm (NewYork: International Publishers, 1989), 111. Marx seems to be invoking historyor an immanent, materialist dialectic as an agent here, rather than idleness of thevagabonds themselves. In Capital Marx writes of the new proletariat: “thesemen, suddenly dragged from their wonted mode of life, could not as suddenlyadapt themselves to the discipline of their new condition. They were turned enmasse into beggars, robbers, vagabonds, partly from inclination, in most casesfrom stress of circumstances” Karl Marx, Capital I, ed. Frederick Engels (NewYork: International Publishers, 1967), 686. Marx offers here a compromise posi-tion: on the one hand, the feudal peasantry was not immediately convertibleinto a wage-laboring proletariat; on the other hand, “stress of circumstances”(unemployment?) created the conditions of vagabondage.

12. C. Lis and H. Soly, Poverty and Capitalism in Pre-Industrial Europe (New Jersey:Humanities Press, 1979), 48.

13. A.L. Beier, Masterless Men: The Vagrancy Problem in England, 1560–1640(London: Methuen, 1985), 16.

14. Steve Rappaport, Worlds Within Worlds: Structures of Life in Sixteenth-CenturyLondon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 120.

15. Ian Archer, The Pursuit of Stability (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1991), 13–14.

16. Ibid., 210.17. The revisionist economic history suggests that W.K. Jordan’s classic description

of vagrancy was dogmatic, to say the least. Jordan writes, “There is no doubtwhatever that vagabondage was widespread, that it was organized, and that itimposed on rural village communities burdens and dangers with which theycould not cope. The evidence is abundantly clear that this class was feared byall elements in the society and that the incredibly harsh penalties against it wereto a large degree justified.” See W.K. Jordan, Philanthropy in England:1480–1660: A Study in the Changing Pattern of English Social Aspirations(London: Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1959), 78.

18. Robert Brenner, “The Origins of Capitalist Development: a Critique of Neo-Smithian Marxism,” New Left Review 104 (1977): 77.

19. See D.M. Palliser, “Tawney’s Century: Brave New World or Malthusian Trap?”Economic History Review 35 (1982): 339–353. Palliser is referenced inA.L. Beier’s article, “Poverty and Progress in Early Modern England,” in TheFirst Modern Society: Essays in English History in Honour of Lawrence Stone, ed.A.L. Beier et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 201.

20. Michel Foucault, Madness and Civilization (New York: Vintage Books,1965), 49.

21. Beier, Masterless Men, 26.22. Derek Hirst, Authority and Conflict: England, 1603–1658 (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1986), 51.23. David Underdown, Revel, Riot and Rebellion: Popular Politics and Culture in

England, 1603–1660 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 37.24. C.B. Macpherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1962), 147.25. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. C.B. Macpherson (Penguin Books, 1968), 285.26. Ibid., 26c.27. Thomas Carew, Coelum Britannicum, in The Poems of Thomas Carew, ed.

Rhodes Dunlap (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949), 163.28. See Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins

of Our Time (Boston: Beacon Press, 1944).29. See Sir Henry Nicholls, A History of The English Poor Law, 3 vols. (New York:

G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), 1: 183.30. Stuart Royal Proclamations, ed. James F. Larkin and Paul L. Hughes, 2 vols.

(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), 1: 361.31. Cited in James, Social Problems, 287.32. Nicholls, History of the English Poor Law, 159.

Notes180

181Notes

33. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus, trans. Brian Massumi(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987), 385.

34. Adam Smith, An Inquiry into The Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations,ed. Edwin Cannan (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), 157.

35. Thomas Malthus, An Essay on The Principle of Population, ed. Anthony Flew(Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1970), 101.

36. Paul Mantoux, The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century (New York:Harper and Row, 1962), 433.

37. Polanyi, The Great Transformation, 88.38. Karl de Schweinitz, England’s Road to Social Security (Philadelphia: University

of Pennsylvania Press, 1943), 42.39. Henry Robinson, The Office of Addresses and Encounters (London, 1650), 2.40. See Brenner, “The Origins of Capitalist Development,” 25–92.41. Ibid., 78.42. Ellen Meiksins Wood, The Pristine Culture of Capitalism: An Historical Essay on

Old Regimes and Modern States (London: Verso, 1992), 10.43. Stuart Proclamations, 53.44. Cited in Edmund S. Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal

of Colonial Virginia (New York: Norton, 1975), 17.45. “Nova Britannia”, in Tracts and other papers relating principally to the origin, set-

tlement, and progress of the colonies in North America, from the discovery of thecountry to the year 1776, 4 vols., ed. Peter Force (Gloucester, Massachusetts:Peter Smith, 1963), Part VI, 1:19.

46. Force, Tracts, Part XIII, 3:4.47. Captain John Smith, “Description of New England”, in The Complete Works of

Captain John Smith, 3 vols., ed. Philip Barbour (Chapel Hill: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1986), 1:338; hereinafter cited in the text as DP.

48. Ibid., 138.49. William Strachey, A True Repertory of the Wreck and Redemption of Sir Thomas

Gates, Knight, in A Voyage to Virginia in 1609, ed. Louis B. Wright(Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1964), 68–69.

50. Colonel Norwood, A Voyage to Virginia, in Force, Tracts, Part X, 3:15.51. Captain John Smith, The Proceedings of the English Colonies in Virginia (1612),

in Complete Works, Vol. I; hereinafter cited in text as P.52. Captain John Smith, The Generall Historie of Virginia (1623), in Complete

Works, Vol. II; hereinafter cited in text as GH.53. James Lang, Conquest and Commerce: Spain and England in The Americas

(New York: Academic Press, 1975), 115.54. David Bertelson, The Lazy South (New York, 1967), 29, cited in Lang,

Conquest and Commerce, 15.55. See Jack Greene, Pursuits of Happiness (Chapel Hill: University of North

Carolina Press, 1988).56. Wesley Craven, The Dissolution of the Virginia Company: The Failure of a

Colonial Experiment (Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1964), 35.57. Ibid., 38.58. Captain John Smith, A Map of Virginia, in Complete Works, 1:148.

59. Captain John Smith, New England’s Trials (1622), in Captain John Smith: ASelect Edition, ed. Karen Ordahl Kupperman (Chapel Hill: University of NorthCarolina Press, 1988), 197.

60. See Craven, The Dissolution of the Virginia Company, chap. 2.61. All citations from The Tempest taken from the Signet edition, ed. Robert

Langbaum (New York: Signet), 1964.62. See Michael Postan, The Medieval Economy and Society (London: Pelican

Books, 1975), 82. Feudal exploitation traditionally aimed to restrict peasantmovement across the land, particularly during the high Middle Ages, whenrents in kind were commuted to money rents. Faced with increasingly coercivefeudal tenures, discontented serfs frequently made attempts to flee manoriallife in search of more independence in the expanding towns. The earliest “mas-terless” movement was thus the well-known flight of the serfs.

63. Erik Olin Wright, Classes (London: Verso, 1985), 78.64. Cited in Edward Said, Culture and Imperialism (New York: Random House,

1993).65. See William Shakespeare, The Tempest, ed. Frank Kermode (London:

Routledge, 1988), note 172, Act. II. Sc. ii.66. See Walter Cohen, Drama of A Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance England

and Spain (New York: Cornell University Press, 1985), 401.67. Hulme and Francis Barker, “ ‘Nymphs and reapers heavenly vanish,’ ” in

Alternative Shakespeares, 203.68. Hulme, Colonial Encounters, 122.69. Ibid., 296, fn., 65.70. Paul Brown, “ ‘This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine’: The Tempest and

the Discourse of Colonialism,” in Political Shakespeare, 59.71. Ibid., 55.72. Ibid., 57.73. Ibid., 49.74. See Myra Jehlen’s “History Before the Fact; or, Captain John Smith’s

Unfinished Symphony,” Critical Inquiry 19 (1993): 677–692.75. When Walter Cohen suggests that Prospero shares with Hamlet “his contact

with the audience, his humanism, and perhaps even his bourgeois traits,” orthat the utopianism of the play hints “at the antithesis of capitalism and theabolition of class society, at the formation of a post-bourgeois world,” theassumption is that the play focalizes a series of class antagonisms, much the wayBrown suggests the play tests the bearings of a dominant ideology. But I havesuggested that the play is belated, in the sense that the play works through andoffers a reversal of the unintended effects of prior class antagonisms and socialconduct. See Cohen, Drama of A Nation, 401–402.

76. Lucien Goldmann, Cultural Creation in Modern Society, trans. Bart Grahl(Saint Louis: Telos Press, 1976), 76–78.

77. See Robert Nisbet’s History of the Idea of Progress (New York: Basic Books,1980); and J.B. Bury’s The Idea of Progress: An Inquiry Into Its Origin andGrowth (New York: Macmillan, 1932). For a more balanced assessment ofRenaissance views on progress, see Hans Baron, “Querelle of Ancients and

Notes182

183Notes

Moderns,” in Renaissance Essays, ed. Paul O. Kristeller and Philip P. Wiener(New York: Harper and Row, 1968).

78. Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-CenturyEurope (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), 281–282.

79. Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), 119–129.

80. Ibid., 127.81. Ibid., 126.82. Ibid., 127.83. Ibid., 127.84. Ibid., 128.85. Frye, Anatomy of Criticism, 193.86. Howard Felperin, Shakespearean Romance (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1972), 61.87. Ibid., 64.88. Slavoj Zizek, The Sublime Object of Ideology (London: Verso, 1990), 24.89. Ibid., 26.

Chapter 2

1. See J.G.A. Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thoughtand the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton University Press, 1975), 349.

2. See Arthur Riss, “The Belly Politic: Coriolanus and the Revolt of Language,”ELH 59 (1992): 53–75: Lars Engle, Shakespearean Pragmatism: Market of HisTime (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 164–195.

3. Riss, “The Belly Politic,” 52.4. Ibid., 54.5. Nicos Poulantzas, Political Power and Social Classes (London: Verso, 1978), 161.6. On the non laissez-faire nature of the early modern state, see Ian Shapiro, The

Evolution of Rights in Liberal Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986), 29–40; and C.P. Macpherson, The Political Theory of PossessiveIndividualism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962).

7. See Maurice Dobb, Studies in the Development of Capitalism (New York:International Publishers, 1963), especially chap. 5.

8. See Thomas Sorge, “The Failure of Orthodoxy in Coriolanus,” in ShakespeareReproduced: The Text in History and Ideology, ed. Jean E. Howard and MarionF. O’Connor (New York: Routledge, 1990), 237.

9. For discussions of feudal exploitation see Michael Postan, The MedievalEconomy and Society (Penguin Books, 1972); and Rodney Hilton, Class Conflictand the Crisis of Feudalism: Essays in Medieval Social History (London: Verso,1990).

10. It is surprising that while so many transitionalist readings appropriateRaymond Williams’s distinction between residual and emergent cultures inMarxism and Literature, more do not make reference to Williams’s landmarkwork, The Country and the City, in which he demystifies sentimentalized

accounts of pre-capitalist organicism: “Take first the idealization of a ‘natu-ral’ or ‘moral’ economy on which so many have relied, as a contrast to thethrusting ruthlessness of the new capitalism. . . . the social order within whichthis agriculture was practised was as hard and brutal as anything later experi-enced. Even if we exclude the wars and brigandage . . . the uncountablethousands who grew crops and reared beasts only to be looted and burned andled away with tied wrists, this economy . . . was an order of exploitation of amost thoroughgoing kind: a property in men as well as in land. . . .” RaymondWilliams, The Country and the City (New York: Oxford University Press,1973), 37.

11. Glenn Burgess, Absolute Monarchy and the Stuart Constitution (New Haven:Yale University Press, 1996), 49.

12. Ibid., 167–168.13. Markku Peltonen, Classical Humanism and Republicanism in English Political

Thought, 1570–1640 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 9.14. Ibid., 63.15. See Neal Wood, Cicero’s Social and Political Thought (Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1988). Wood writes that “while Plato and Aristotle maintainquite explicitly that direct economic producers should not rule, they are by nomeans equally explicit that the primary purpose of the state is the protection ofprivate property. They think that the chief goal of the well-ordered polis is toencourage human beings to fulfill their rational nature by the achievement oftrue moral virtue” (130).

16. Marcus Tullius Cicero, On The Commonwealth, trans. George Holland Sabineand Stanley Barney Smith (New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. 1929), 132.

17. Cicero, On Duties, ed. M.T. Griffin and E.M. Atkins (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1991), 9, 95.

18. Ibid., 81.19. Ibid., 111.20. A.A. Long, “Cicero’s Politics in De Officiis,” in Justice and Generosity: Studies in

Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy, ed. Andre Laks and MalcolmSchofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 234.

21. Cited in Long, “Cicero’s Politics,” 235.22. Wood, Cicero’s Social and Political Thought, 132.23. Peltonen, Classical Humanism and Republicanism in English Political

Thought, 132.24. Francesco Guicciardini, Dialogue on the Government of Florence, ed. and trans.

Alison Brown (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 85.25. Ibid., 90.26. Cited in J.P. Sommerville, Politics and Ideology in England, 1603–1640

(London: Longman, 1986), 151.27. Ibid., 161.28. Ibid., 153.29. Cited in Burgess, Absolute Monarchy and the Stuart Constitution, 152–153.30. Ibid., 151–152.

Notes184

185Notes

31. Sir George Nicholls, A History of the English Poor Law, 3 vols. (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1898), 1: 167.

32. Ibid., 213.33. Ibid., 227.34. Ibid., 236.35. See Derek Hirst, Authority and Conflict in England, 1603–1658 (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1986), 21. For an overview of poverty legislation inEngland, see Paul Slack, Poverty and Policy in Tudor and Stuart England(London: Longman, 1988).

36. See Margaret Judson, The Crisis of the Constitution: An Essay in Constitutionaland Political Thought in England, 1603–1645 (New Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 1988), 105. Judson adds, “It would be strange to find Coke, who stoodfor property and other rights in Parliament, talking general welfare at theexpense of the subject’s rights, and it would be unusual to discover royalistjudges admitting the dilemma in ordinary law when they were not facing it inthe wider sphere of government” (106).

37. All cites taken from William Shakespeare, Coriolanus, ed. R.B. Parker (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1994).

38. Quentin Skinner, “The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and HistoricalPerspectives,” in Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy,ed. Richard Rorty, Jerome B. Schneewind, and Quentin Skinner (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1984), 207.

39. Ibid., 213.40. For a provocative account of Coriolanus’s “absolutism,” see Jonathan Goldberg,

James I and The Politics of Literature (Stanford: Stanford University Press,1989), 186–193.

41. John of Salisbury, Policraticus: Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and Footprints ofPhilosophers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 67.

42. Ibid., 67.43. Provision for the Poor (London, 1597).44. William Perkins, A Treatise of Christian Equity (London, 1604), 26.45. Derek Hirst, Authority and Conflict: England, 1603–1658 (Cambridge, 1986),

51, cited in Annabel Patterson, Shakespeare and the Popular Voice (Cambridge:Basil Blackwell, 1989), 136.

46. Ibid., 136, 138.47. Ibid., 138.48. Robert Wilkinson, A Sermon Preached at Northampton (London, 1607), 2–3,

cited in Patterson, Shakespeare and the Popular Voice, 140.49. Wilkinson, A Sermon Preached at Northampton, E4.50. Ibid., E-E1.51. Ibid., E2.52. Ibid., E1.53. See A.L. Beier, Masterless Men: The Vagrancy Problem in England, 1560–1640

(London: Methuen, 1985).54. Shakespeare, Coriolanus, ed. R.B. Parker, 41.

55. On Leveller anti-Normanism see Christopher Hill, Puritanism and Revolution:Studies in Interpretation of the English Revolution of the Seventeenth Century(London: Secker and Warburg, 1995).

56. See King James VI and I: Political Writings, ed. Johann P. Sommerville(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 187.

57. Janet Adelman, “ ‘Anger’s My Meat’: Feeding, Dependency, and Aggression inCoriolanus,” in Representing Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays, ed. MurrayM. Schwarz and Coppelia Kahn (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UniversityPress, 1980), 132.

58. Ibid., 132.59. Susan Dixon, The Roman Mother (Norman: Oklahoma, 1988), 2.60. Ibid., 135.61. Ibid., 188.62. Ibid., 9.63. Ibid., 120.64. Ibid., 122.65. Ibid., 134.66. Judson, The Crisis of The Constitution, 279.67. Ibid., 286.68. Ibid., 292.69. Lawrence Stone, The Causes of the English Revolution, 1529–1642 (New York:

Harper Torchbooks, 1972), 54.70. Oscar James Campbell, Shakespeare’s Satire (New York: Oxford University Press,

1943), 200, 208. Cited in Maurice Charney, Shakespeare’s Roman Plays: The Functionof Imagery in the Drama (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961), 142.

71. Charney, Shakespeare’s Roman Plays, 142–196.72. James Holstun, “Tragic Superfluity in Coriolanus,” ELH 50 (1983): 485–507.73. Ibid., 489.74. Ibid., 503.75. Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1957), 223.76. Hayden White, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century

Europe (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 37.77. In terms more familiar to post-Marxist class theory, we might say that charac-

ters in the play occupy what Erik Olin Wright describes as “contradictory loca-tions within class relations”: “Instead of regarding all positions as locateduniquely within particular classes and thus as having a coherent class characterin their own right, we should see some positions as possibly having a multipleclass character. . . .” Erik Olin Wright, Classes (London: Verso, 985), 43. For animportant historical survey of early modern class structures, one that alsoacknowledges the fluidity of class positions during the period and in the play,see Theodore B. Leinwand, “Shakespeare and The Middling Sort,” ShakespeareQuarterly 44 (1993): 284–303.

78. Frye, Anatomy of Criticism, 224.79. See Richard Rorty, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1989), especially chap. 4, on irony.

Notes186

187Notes

Chapter 3

1. Walter Cohen, “The Merchant of Venice and the Possibilities of HistoricalCriticism,” in New Casebooks: The Merchant of Venice, ed. Martin Coyle (NewYork: St. Martin’s Press, 1998), 45–72.

2. John Drakakis, “ ‘Jew, Shylock is my name’: Speech Prefixes in The Merchantof Venice as Symptoms of the Early Modern,” in Shakespeare and Modernity:Early Modern to Millennium, ed. Hugh Grady (London: Routledge, 2000),105–121. For other interpretations that rely on transitional schemas or thatfind symptoms of a market economy in the play, see Michael Nerlich, Ideologyof Adventure: Studies in Modern Consciousness, 1100–1750, vol. 1, trans. RuthCrowley (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987), chap. 7; andFrederick Turner, Shakespeare’s Twenty-First Century Economics: The Morality ofLove and Money (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), chap. 5.

3. Eric S. Mallin, “Jewish Invader and the Soul of State: The Merchant of Veniceand Science Fiction Movies,” in Grady, ed., Shakespeare and Modernity,142–167.

4. Eric Roll, A History of Economic Thought (London: Faber and Faber, 1938), 46.5. Odd Langholm, Price and Value in the Aristotelian Tradition: A Study in

Scholastic Economic Sources (Norwegian Research Council for Science and theHumanities, 1979), 32. For an earlier critique of the theory of intrinsic value,see Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis (New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1954), 60–62.

6. I owe much of this summary of the scholastic branches of value theory toLangholm’s Price and Value in the Aristotelian Tradition.

7. Hannah Robie Sewall, The Theory of Value Before Adam Smith, in Publicationsof the American Economic Association, Third Series, vol. II, n. 3 (New York:Macmillan Company, 1901), 15.

8. Langholm, Price and Value, 85–105.9. Ibid, 109.

10. Ibid, 31.11. Sewall, The Theory of Value Before Adam Smith, 16.12. On the relationship between labor and the just price see Lewis H. Haney,

History of Economic Thought (New York: Macmillan Company, 1949), 99–100;Raymond de Roover, “The Concept of the Just Price: Theory and EconomicPolicy,” Journal of Economic History 18 (1958): 418–434; and Langholm, Priceand Value, 61–84.

13. Gerard de Malynes, England’s View, in the Unmasking of Two Paradoxes(London, 1603), 8.

14. Gerard de Malynes, The Maintenance of Free Trade (London, 1622), 6.15. Karl Marx, Capital III (New York: International Publishers, 1967), 378, cited

in Jon Elster, Making Sense of Marx (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1985), 489. As Elster remarks, “Although the view that money might generateprofit independently of production is indeed preposterous, it was the founda-tion of mercantilist reasoning for a long time. We find the seventeenth-century

cameralists arguing that wars would never run an economy down so longas the money remained in the country, as if soldiers could be fed on gold andsilver” (489).

16. Malynes, England’s View, 189.17. Thomas Mun, England’s Treasure by Forraign Trade (London, 1663), 20, cited

in Bruno Suviranta, The Theory of the Balance of Trade in England: A Study inMercantilism (Helsingfors, 1923), 72–73.

18. Cited in Lars Magnusson, Mercantilism: The Shaping of an Economic Language(London: Routledge, 1994), 162. Bacon, though, was quick to point out,along with Machiavelli, that money is decidely not the sinews of war: “Neitheris money the sinews of war (as it is trivially said), where the sinews of men’sarms, in base and effeminate people, are failing.” Francis Bacon, “Of the TrueGreatness of Kingdoms and Estates,” in Francis Bacon: The Essays, ed. andintro. John Pitcher (London: Pengin Books, 1985), 148.

19. Eli F. Heckscher, Mercantilism, 2 vols., trans. Mendel Shapiro (London: GeorgeAllen & Unwin, Ltd., 1935), 2: 138–139.

20. Henry Dunning Macleod, Principles of Economical Philosophy, 2 vols. (London:Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1872–1875), 1: 50, cited in Suviranta,The Theory of the Balance of Trade, 115.

21. Edward Misselden, The Circle of Commerce (London, 1623), 21.22. Thomas Mun, England’s Treasure, cited in Suviranta, The Theory of the Balance

of Trade, 48.23. Adam Smith, An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations,

ed. Edwin Cannan (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1976), 4.1,472, cited in Suviranta, The Theory of The Balance of Trade, 115. Smith’saccount of mercantilism is accurate as a description of the late sixteenth- andearly seventeenth-century economic writers—Bodin, Hales, Malynes,Misselden, and perhaps Mun—but he exaggerated the extent to which laterseventeenth-century mercantilists identified money and wealth, and sawmoney as the principle form of capital. A glance at late seventeenth-centurymercantilist doctrine certainly shows a less reductive identification of moneyand wealth than seems to prevail in early mercantilism. Charles Davenant rec-ognized that, “Gold and Silver are indeed the Measure of Trade, but that theSpring and Original of it, in all Nations, is the Natural or Artificial Product ofthe Country; that is to say, what this land or what this Labour and Industryproduces.” Magnusson, Mercantilism, 153.

24. Suviranta, The Theory of the Balance of Trade, 160.25. All citations taken from William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, ed. Brents

Stirling (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1990). All citations are noted in text.26. Richard Halpern, Shakespeare Among the Moderns (Ithaca: Cornell University

Press, 1997), 190.27. Ibid., 188–190.28. Bernard Grebanier, The Truth About Shylock (New York: Random House,

1962), 250–251.29. Bernardo Davanzati, A Discourse Upon Coins, trans. John Toland (London,

1696), 15.

Notes188

189Notes

30. Ibid., 20.31. Hugo Grotius, The Law of War and Peace, trans. Francis W. Kelsey

(Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1925), 2.12, 351.32. I owe much of this summary of the usury debates to Norman Jones, God and

the Moneylenders: Usury and Law in Early Modern England (Oxford: BasilBlackwell, 1989); and R.H. Tawney’s introduction to his edition of ThomasWilson’s Discourse Upon Usury, intro. and ed. R.H. Tawney (New York:Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1925). See also John T. Noonan, The ScholasticAnalysis of Usury (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957); and BenjaminNelson, The Idea of Usury (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969).

33. George Downame, Lectures on the XV Psalme (London, 1604), 316.34. Ibid., 317.35. Ibid., 320.36. Ibid., 320.37. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Book I, cited in Langholm, Price and Value, 135.38. Nicholas Barbon, A Discourse of Trade (London, 1690), 15, cited in Langholm,

Price and Value, 135.39. C.L. Barber, Shakespeare’s Festive Comedy: A Study of Dramatic Form and its

Relation to Social Custom (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958), 168.40. A.D. Moody, “The Letter of the Law,” in The Merchant of Venice: Critical Essay,

ed. Thomas Wheeler (New York: Garland Publishing, 1991), 86.41. René Girard, A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare (New York: Oxford

University Press, 1991), 246.42. Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, trans. Daniel

Heller-Roazen (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 82.43. Ibid., 82–83.44. See “The Camp as the ‘Nomos’ of the Modern,” in Agamben, Homo Sacer,

166–180.45. Alice N. Benston, “Portia, The Law, and the Triparite Structure of The Merchant

of Venice,” in Wheeler, ed. The Merchant of Venice: Critical Essays, 171.46. Gerard de Malynes, Consuetudo, vel lex mercatoria, or the Ancient Law-merchant

(1636), 222–223, cited in Jones, God and the Moneylenders, 161.47. For a foundational essay on the role of New Testament morality in the play, see

Barbara K. Lewalski, “Biblical Allusion and Allegory in The Merchant ofVenice,” Shakespeare Quarterly 13 (1962): 327–433.

48. Karen Newman, “Portia’s Ring: Unruly Women and Structures of Exchange inThe Merchant of Venice,” Shakespeare Quarterly 38 (1987): 26.

49. Ibid., 37.50. Claude Levi-Strauss, Introduction to the Work of Marcel Mauss, in The Logic of

the Gift, ed. Alan Schrift (New York: Routledge, 1997), 55–56.51. Pierre Bourdieu, “The Logic of Practice,” in Schrift, ed. The Logic of the Gift,

190–191.52. Ibid., 235.53. Luce Irigaray, “Women on the Market,” in Schrift, ed. The Logic of the Gift, 185.54. Northrop Frye, The Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 1971), 162. On the “two worlds” of comedy, see Elliot

Krieger, A Marxist Study of Shakespeare’s Comedies (London: Macmillan Press,1979), 1–7.

55. Ernst Bloch, The Utopian Function of Art and Literature: Selected Essays, trans.Jack Zipes and Frank Mecklenburg (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996), 41.

56. Cohen, “The Merchant of Venice and the Possibilities of Historical Criticism,”61; and Krieger, A Marxist Study of Shakespeare’s Comedies,” where Kriegerremarks that “in Venice, possession of material substances, of gold, determinesone’s position within the social order. The Belmont atmosphere emerges or getsarticulated in part so as to contradict the Venetian materialism” (7).

57. Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), 3–23. I owe much of myunderstanding of Lovejoy’s notion of the genesis of ideas to Michael Bristol’sexcellent overview of Lovejoy’s study in Michael D. Bristol, Shakespeare’sAmerica, America’s Shakespeare (London: Routledge, 1990), 145–151.

58. See Georges Bataille, “The Notion of Expenditure,” in Visions of Excess:Selected Writings, 1927–1939, trans. Allan Stoekl, with Carlo Lovitt andDonald M. Leslie, Jr. (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1985),116–129. For a critique of Bataille’s theory of expenditure, see BarbaraHerrnstein Smith, Contingencies of Value: Alternative Perspective for CriticalTheory (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), 134–149.

Chapter 4

1. Richard Tuck, Natural Rights Theories: Their Origins and Development(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 53.

2. Ibid., 55.3. H.L.A. Hart, “Are There Any Natural Rights,” in Rights, ed. David Lyons

(California: Wadsworth, 1979), 17.4. Cited in J.L. Mackie, “Can There Be A Right-Based Moral Theory,” in

Theories of Rights, ed. Jeremy Waldron (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1984), 186.

5. Mackie, “Can There Be A Right-Based Moral Theory,” 171.6. All cites taken from William Shakespeare, King Lear: A Parallel Text Edition, ed.

René Weis (London: Longman, 1993). For the sake of convenience, all pas-sages will be cited from the First Folio text, The Tragedy of King Lear (1623),unless otherwise noted.

7. Richard Strier, Resistant Structures: Particularity, Radicalism, and RenaissanceTexts (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), 183.

8. Ibid., 184.9. Ibid., 184.

10. Stanley Cavell, Disowning Knowledge in Six Plays of Shakespeare (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1987), 50.

11. Ibid., 57–58.12. Ibid., 62.

Notes190

191Notes

13. Ibid., 70.14. Susan Schreiner, “Calvin’s Use of Natural Law,” in A Preserving Grace:

Protestants, Catholics, and Natural Law, ed. Michael Cromartie (Grand Rapids:W.B. Eerdman’s, 1997), 57.

15. G. Wilson Knight, The Wheel of Fire: Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Tragedy(Cleveland: World Publishing Company, 1964), 188.

16. See John F. Danby, Shakespeare’s Doctrine of Nature: A Study of King Lear(London: Faber and Faber, 1961), 116.

17. Ibid., 116.18. William Lowith, The Christian Man’s Closet (London, 1581), 26.19. See Jeffrey Blustein, Parents and Children: The Ethics of the Family (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1982).20. A Discourse of Parent’s Honour and Authority Over Their Children (London,

1591), 28.21. See A.C. Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy (London: MacMillan and Company,

1904), 235.22. Shakespeare’s Christian Dimension: An Anthology of Commentary, ed. Roy

Battenhouse (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 444.23. Cited in Sylvan Barnet, “A Christian Approach to Shakespeare,” A Journal of

English Literary History 22 (1955): 90.24. Ibid., 91.25. Cited in Jonathan Dollimore, Radical Tragedy: Religion, Ideology and Power in

the Drama of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries (Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1984), 194.

26. Thomas Wright, The Passions of the Minde in Generall (1604), ed. Thomas O.Sloan (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1971), 149–294.

27. Judy Kronenfeld, “‘So Distribution Should Unto Excess, And Each Man MayHave Enough’: Shakespeare’s King Lear—Anabaptist Egalitarianism, AnglicanCharity, Both, Neither?” ELH 59 (1992): 756.

28. Ibid., 758.29. Sir Thomas Browne, Religio Medici, in Sir Thomas Browne: The Major Works,

ed. C.A. Patrides (Penguins Books, 1977), 35.30. Bernard Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees, ed. Phillip Harth (Harmondsworth:

Penguin Books, 1989), 268.31. John Downame, Treatise of Beneficence (London, 1617), 170.32. Ibid., 170.33. Ibid., 170–171.34. Hugo Grotius, The Rights of War and Peace, trans. A.C. Campbell (Westport:

Hyperion Press, 1993), 86.35. Ibid., 92.36. Ibid., 24.37. Ibid., 22.38. Ibid., 92.39. Tuck, Natural Rights Theories, 76–100,143–173.40. Dollimore, Radical Tragedy, 192.

41. Ibid., 192–193.42. See John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

1971), chap. 3. For useful commentaries on Rawls’s theory of justice seeReading Rawls: Critical Studies on Rawls’ Theory of Justice, ed. and intro.Norman Daniels (New York: Basic Books,); and Michael J. Sandel, Liberalismand the Limits of Justice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).

43. Sandel, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, 27.44. R.S. White, Natural Law in English Renaissance Literature (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1996), 202.45. Ibid., 202.46. Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, trans. Daniel

Heller-Roazen (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 128.47. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harcourt, Brace,

Jovanovich, 1979), 299, cited in Agamben, Homo Sacer, 126.48. On Agamben’s recent considerations on the relationship of potentiality to

actuality, see Giorgio Agamben, Potentialities: Collected Essays in Philosophy, ed.and trans. Daniel Heller-Roazen (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999),parts 3–4.

49. Danby, Shakespeare’s Doctrine of Nature, 138.50. Ibid., 8.51. James I, Trew Lawe of Free Monarchies, in The Political Works of James I, ed.

Charles Howard McIlwain (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1917), 62,cited in Richard Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation: EnglishRenaissance Culture and the Genealogy of Capital (Ithaca: Cornell UniversityPress, 1991), 221.

52. Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation, 222.53. Ibid., 223.54. Ibid., 224.55. Ibid., 224.56. See Michael Hicks, Bastard Feudalism (London: Longman, 1995); John

Hudson, The Formation of The English Common Law: Law and Society inEngland from the Norman Conquest to Magna Carta (London: Longman,1996); H.E. Bell, An Introduction to the History and Records of the Court ofWards and Liveries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953).

57. Bell, An Introduction to the History and Records of the Court of Wards andLiveries, 112.

58. Ibid., 142.59. Cobbett’s Parliamentary History of England (London: T. Curson Hansard,

1806), 1,127.60 Ibid., 1,127.61. Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation, 222.62. Rosalie Colie, “Reason and Need: King Lear and the ‘Crisis’ of the Aristocracy,”

in Some Facets of King Lear: Essays in Prismatic Criticism, ed. Rosalie L. Colieand F.T. Flahiff (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974), 193.

63. Ibid., 204.64. Halpern, The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation, 244.

Notes192

193Notes

65. Danby, Shakespeare’s Doctrine of Nature, 46.66. See Michael Hicks, Bastard Feudalism.67. Ibid., 98.68. Ibid., 101.69. Cohen, Drama of a Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance England and Spain

(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985), 334–335.70. Arnold Kettle, “From Hamlet to King Lear,” in Shakespeare in a Changing

World, ed. Arnold Kettle (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1964), 171.71. Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question”, in ed. The Collected Works Karl Marx

and Friedrich Engels, (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1975), 3: 162, citedin Steven Lukes, Marxism and Morality (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1985), 63.

72. Marx and Engels, Theses on Feurbach, in Collected Works, 5: 133, cited in Lukes,Marxism and Morality, 63.

73. Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme, in Selected Works, 2 vols.(Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1962), 2: 24, cited in Lukes,Marxism and Morality, 57.

74. Will Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community and Culture (Oxford: Clarendon Press,1989), 118.

75. René Girard, Violence and the Sacred, trans. Patrick Gregory (Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press, 1977), 13, cited in Shakespearean Tragedy, ed. JohnDrakakis (New York: Longman, 1992), 15.

76. See Drakakis, Shakespearean Tragedy, 11–13.77. Augusto Boal, Theater of the Oppressed, trans. Charles A. and Maria-Odilia Leal

McBride (New York: Urizen Press, 1979), cited in Drakakis, ShakespeareanTragedy, 6.

78. Franco Moretti, “The Great Eclipse: Tragic Form as the Deconsecration ofSovereignty,” in Drakakis, Shakespearean Tragedy, 46–47.

79. Dollimore, Radical Tragedy, 4.

Chapter 5

1. For recent Marxist interpretations of Hamlet, see Peter Stallybrass, “ ‘Wellgrubbed, old mole’: Marx, Hamlet, and the (un)fixing of representation,” inMarxist Shakespeares, ed. Jean E. Howard and Scott Cutler Shershow (London:Routledge, 2001), 16–30; and Richard Halpern, “An Impure History ofGhosts: Derrida, Marx, Shakespeare,” in the same volume, 31–52.

2. See Derek Parfit, Reasons and Persons (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), particu-larly part three, for Parfit’s radical conception of personhood as successive selves.

3. A.P. Rossiter, Angel With Horns and Other Shakespeare Lectures, ed. GrahamStorey (New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1961), 187.

4. Ibid., 172.5. Ibid., 185.6. William Kerrigan, Hamlet’s Perfection (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University

Press, 1991), 65.

7. Francis Barker, The Tremulous Private Body (London: Methuen, 1984), 36.8. Ibid., 37.9. Terry Eagleton, William Shakespeare (London: Basil Blackwell, Ltd., 1986), 74.

10. Lena Ashwell, “Reflexions from Shakespeare” (1923), cited in Readings on theCharacter of Hamlet, ed. Claude C.H. Williamson (London: George Allen &Unwin, Ltd., 1950), 423.

11. George Santayana, Obiter Scripta (1936), in Readings on the Character ofHamlet, 639.

12. Cited in L.C. Knights, Some Shakespearean Themes and An Approach to Hamlet(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1959), 198.

13. William Shakespeare, Hamlet, ed. A.R. Braunmuller (New York: PenguinBooks, 2001). Citations will be quoted in text.

14. Katharine Eisaman Maus, Inwardness and Theater in the English Renaissance(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 1.

15. Anne Ferry, The “Inward” Language: Sonnets of Wyatt, Sidney, Shakespeare, andDonne (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 6.

16. Maus, Inwardness and Theater, 4.17. Ernst Tugendhat, Self-Consciousness and Self-Determination, trans. Paul Stern

(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986), 27.18. See Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (Berkeley: University of

California Press, 1967), 148.19. See Pelagius’s Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, trans. Theodore de

Bruyn (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 103–104.20. Brown, Augustine of Hippo, 170.21. Peter Brown, “Pelagius and His Supporters: Aims and Environment,” Journal

of Theological Studies 19 (1968): 104.22. Saint Augustine, Confessions, trans. R.S. Pine-Coffin (Baltimore, MD Penguin

Books, 1961), 164.23. Ibid., 172.24. Saint Augustine, On Free Choice of the Will, trans. Thomas Williams

(Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1993), 106.25. Thomas Goodwin, The Aggravation of Sin (1637), in The Works of Thomas

Goodwin, 12 vols., ed. John C. Miller and Robert Halley (Edinburgh: JamesNichol, 1864), 4: 158.

26. William Perkins, A Commentarie or Exposition Upon the First Five Chapters ofthe Epistle to the Galatians, in Workes, 3 vols. ed. T. Pickering (1631), 2: 269.

27. Sir Thomas Browne, Christian Morals, in Sir Thomas Browne: The Major Works,ed. C.A. Patrides (London: Penguin Books, 1977), 432.

28. Jeremy Taylor, Unum Necessarium (1655), in The Whole Works of the RightReverend Jeremy Taylor, 10 vols. (London: Longman, 1861), 7: 152.

29. Richard Baxter, A Christian Directory (1678), in The Practical Works of TheReverend Richard Baxter, 23 vols., ed. William Orme (London: James Duncan,1830), 2: 531.

30. I am assuming that Shakespeare had been sorting through these Augustiniantheological niceties in advance of the full-scale preoccupation with sinful habit-uation that begins in the early decades of the seventeenth century. But given

Notes194

195Notes

the Augustinian background on the subject of sinful habituation, I woulddescribe Shakespeare as precocious but certainly not prophetic in his handlingof the nuances of the theology of habit before the subject exercises the imagi-nation of post-Elizabethan Puritans and Anglicans.

31. Sir Edmund K. Chambers, Hamlet (1894), in Readings on the Character ofHamlet, 189.

32. Thomas Goodwin, Aggravation of Sin, in The Works of Thomas Goodwin, 12vols., ed. John C. Miller and Robert Halley (Edinburgh: James Nichol, 1864),4: 158.

33. William Hazlitt, Characters of Shakespeare’s Plays (1818), in Readings on theCharacter of Hamlet, 48.

34. Dr. Maudsley, Body and Mind (1875), in Readings on the Character ofHamlet, 135.

35. Reverend C.E. Moberly, Introduction to Hamlet (1873), in Readings on theCharacter of Hamlet, 123.

36. Wylie Sypher, The Ethic of Time Structures of Experience in Shakespeare (NewYork: Seabury Press, 1976), 69, cited in Bert O. States, Hamlet and TheConcept of Character (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 17.For a discussion of Hamlet’s role-playing see David Leverenz, “The Womanin Hamlet : An Interpersonal View,” in Representing Shakespeare: NewPsychoanalytic Essays, ed. Murray M. Schwarz and Coppelia Kahn (Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980), 110–128.

37. See Marjorie Garber, Shakespeare’s Ghost Writers (New York: Methuen, 1987).38. See Howard C. Warren, A History of Association Psychology (New York: Charles

Scribner’s Sons, 1921), 25.39. Ibid., 31.40. René Descartes, Treatise of Man, trans. Thomas Steel Hall (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1972). 90.41. Thomas Hobbes, Human Nature and De Corpore Politico (Bristol: Thoemmes

Press, 1994). 17.42. Michel de Montaigne, “Of Custom, and That We Should Not Easily Change

a Law Received” (1595), in The Essays of Michel de Montaigne, 3 vols., ed. andtrans. Jacob Zeitlin (New York: Alfred A. Knopf ), 1: 95.

43. Pascal, Pensées, trans. A.J. Krailsheimer (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1966),274, cited in Pierre Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice, trans. Richard Nice(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990), 48.

44. Descartes, The Passions of the Soul (1649), cited in Vance G. Morgan,Foundations of Cartesian Ethics (New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1994), 168.

45. Jon Elster, Ulysses and the Sirens: Studies in Rationality and Irrationality(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 56.

46. Gilbert Ryle, The Concept of Mind (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,1949), 19.

47. Ibid., 87.48. Ibid., 90.49. Ibid., 43. For an informative discussion of Ryle’s theory of dispositional

properties, see D.M. Armstrong, The Nature of Mind in Readings in

Philosophy of Psychology, vol. I, ed. Ned Block (Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press, 1980).

50. See John Dover Wilson, What Happens in Hamlet (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1986), 244–246.

51. Etienne Gilson, The Christian Philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas (New York:Octagon Books, 1983), 256.

52. Taylor, Unum Necessarium, 166.53. Jonathan Edwards, Original Sin (1758), in The Works of Jonathan Edwards,

17 vols., ed. Clyde A. Holbrook (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970),3:405.

54. See Lars Engle, Shakespearean Pragmatism: Market of His Time (Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1993).

55. John Dewey, Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology(New York: The Modern Library, 1922), 24.

56. John Donne, Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions (1624) (Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press, 1959), 149.

57. William Ames, Marrow of Theology, ed. John D. Eusden (Grand Rapids: BakerBooks, 1965). 224.

58. Lancelot Andrewes, Ninety-Six Sermons (1606), cited in Jonathan F.S. Post, HenryVaughan: The Unfolding Vision (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 79.

59. René Descartes, The Passions of the Soul (1649), cited in John Cottingham,Partiality and the Virtues, in How Should One Live? Essays on the Virtues, ed.Roger Crisp (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 71.

60. See Richard Hooker, The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, Book V (1597), in Works,3 vols., ed. John Keble (Clarendon Press, 1971), 2: 309–311, 2: 392–393.

61. On the history of the doctrine of emergence, see Brian P. McLaughlin, “TheRise and Fall of British Emergentism,” in Emergence Or Reduction? ed.A. Berckermann, J. Kim, and H. Flohr (De Gruyter, 1992), 49–93.

62. Jean-Claude Schmitt explains Augustinian pneumatology in Ghosts in theMiddle Ages: The Living and the Dead in Medieval Society, trans. TeresaLavender Fagen (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 17–24.Schmitt’s work is described in illuminating detail in Stephen Greenblatt,Hamlet in Purgatory (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001).

63. Schmitt, Ghosts in the Middle Ages, 21.64. Greenblatt, Hamlet in Purgatory, 102–150.65. Eleanor Prosser, Hamlet and Revenge (Stanford: Stanford University Press,

1967), 118–142.66. Roy W. Battenhouse, “The Ghost in Hamlet : A Catholic ‘Linchpin,’ “Studies

in Philology XLVIII (1951): 161–192; Prosser, Hamlet and Revenge, 111–114.67. William Hazlitt, Characters of Shakespeare’s Plays (London: J.M. Dent and Sons,

1906), 81.68. Ibid., 87.69. Ibid., 80.70. Ibid., 79.71. John Kinnaird, “Hazlitt and the ‘Design’ of Shakespearean Tragedy: A

‘Character’ Critic Revisited,” Shakespeare Quarterly 28 (1977): 38.

Notes196

197Notes

72. George Steiner, The Death of Tragedy (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961), 133.73. A.C. Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy (London: Macmillan and Company,

1965), 83.74. Ibid., 86.75. Ibid., 86.76. Ibid., 102.77. Ibid., 102.78. Ibid., 82.79. Jonathan Lear, Open Minded: Working Out the Logic of the Soul (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1998), 191–218.80. Ibid., 196.81. Howard Felperin, Shakespearean Romance (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1972), 51.

This page intentionally left blank

Selected Bibliography

Abercrombie, Nicholas, Stephen Hill, and Bryan S. Turner. The Dominant IdeologyThesis. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980.

Adelman, Janet. “ ‘Anger’s My Meat’: Feeding, Dependency, and Aggression inCoriolanus.” Representing Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays. Ed. Murray M.Schwarz and Coppelia Kahn. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press,1980, 129–149.

Adorno, Theodor. Negative Dialectics. New York: The Seabury Press, 1973.Aers, David. “A Whisper in the Ear of Early Modernists; or Reflections on Literary

Critics Writing the ‘History of the Subject.’ ” Culture and History, 1350–1600:Essays on English Communities, Identities, and Writing. Ed. David Aers. Detroit:Wayne State University Press, 1992, 177–202.

Agamben, Giorgio. Potentialities: Collected Essays in Philosophy. Ed. and Trans.Daniel Heller-Roazen. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999.

———. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Trans. Daniel Heller-Roazen.Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995.

Althusser, Louis. Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly ReviewPress, 1971.

———. For Marx. Trans. Ben Brewster. London: Verso, 1969.Archer, Ian. The Pursuit of Stability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.Aston, T.H. and C.H.E. Philpin, eds. The Brenner Debate. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1985.———. On Free Choice of the Will. Trans. Thomas Williams. Indianapolis: Hackett

Publishing, 1993.Augustine. Confessions. Trans. R.S. Pine-Coffin. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books,

1961.Barber, C.L. Shakespeare’s Festive Comedy: A Study of Dramatic Form and Its Relation

to Social Custom. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958.Barbour, Philip, ed. The Complete Works of Captain John Smith. 3 vols. Chapel Hill:

University of North Carolina Press, 1986.Barker, Francis. The Tremulous Private Body. London: Methuen, 198.Bataille, Georges. Visions of Excess: Selected Writings, 1927–1939. Trans. Allan

Stoekl, with Carlo Lovitt and Donald M. Leslie, Jr. Minneapolis: The Universityof Minnesota Press, 1985.

Battenhouse, Roy, ed. Shakespeare’s Christian Dimension: An Anthology ofCommentary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994.

———. “The Ghost in Hamlet : A Catholic ‘Linchpin.’ ” Studies in Philology 48(1951): 161–192.

Beier, A.L. “Poverty and Progress in Early Modern England.” The First ModernSociety: Essays in English History in Honour of Lawrence Stone. Ed. A.L. Beier,David Cannadine, and James M. Rosenheim. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1989.

———. Masterless Men: The Vagrancy Problem in England, 1560–1640. London:Methuen, 1985.

Bell, H.E. An Introduction to the History and Records of the Court of Wards andLiveries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953.

Benhabib, Seyla. Critique, Norm, and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of CriticalTheory. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986.

Bloch, Ernst. The Utopian Function of Art and Literature: Selected Essays. Trans. JackZipes and Frank Mecklenburg; Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996.

Blustein, Jeffrey. Parents and Children: The Ethics of the Family. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 1982.

Bourdieu, Pierre. The Logic of Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990.Bradley, A.C. Shakespearean Tragedy. London: MacMillan and Company, 1904.Braunmuller, A.R., ed. William Shakespeare, Hamlet. New York: Penguin Books,

2001.Brenner, Robert. Merchants and Revolution: Commercial Change, Political Conflict,

and London’s Overseas Traders, 1550–1653. Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress, 1993.

———. “Bourgeois Revolution and Transition to Capitalism.” The First ModernSociety. Ed. A.L. Beier, et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989,271–304.

———. “The Origins of Capitalist Development: A Critique of Neo-SmithianMarxism.” New Left Review 104 (1977): 25–92.

Bristol, Michael D. Shakespeare’s America, America’s Sakespeare. London: Routledge,1990.

Brown, Paul. “‘This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine’: The Tempest and theDiscourse of Colonialism.” Political Shakespeare: New Essays in CulturalMaterialism. Ed. Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield. Ithaca: CornellUniversity Press, 1985, 48–71.

Brown, Peter. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 1967.

Bruster, Douglas. “The New Materialism in Renaissance Studies.” Material Cultureand Cultural Materialisms in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Ed. CurtisPerry. Belgium: Brepols Publishers, 2001, 225–238.

Burgess, Glenn. Absolute Monarchy and the Stuart Constitution. New Haven: YaleUniversity Press, 1996.

Callinicos, Alex. Making History: Agency, Structure and Change in Social Theory.Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988.

Campbell, Oscar James. Shakespeare’s Satire. New York: Oxford University Press,1943.

Carew, Thomas. Coelum Britannicum. The Poems of Thomas Carew. Ed. RhodesDunlap. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949.

Carling, Alan H. Social Division. London: Verso, 1991.

Selected Bibliography200

201Selected Bibliography

Cartelli, Thomas. “Prospero in Africa: The Tempest as Colonialist Text and Pretext.”Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology. Ed. Jean E. Howardand Marion F. O’Connor. Methuen: New York, 1987, 99–115.

Caudwell, Christopher. “English Poets: The Period of Primitive Accumulation.”Marxist Literary Theory. Ed. Terry Eagleton and Drew Milne. London:Blackwell, 1996, 91–102.

Cavell, Stanley. Disowning Knowledge in Six Plays of Shakespeare. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Charney, Maurice. Shakespeare’s Roman Plays: The Function of Imagery in the Drama.Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961.

Christianson, Paul. “The Causes of the English Revolution.” Journal of BritishStudies 15 (1976): 40–75.

Cicero, Marcus Tullius. On Duties. Ed. M.T. Griffin and E.M. Atkins. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1991.

———. On The Commonwealth. Trans. George Holland Sabine and Stanley BarneySmith. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1929.

Clark, J.C.D. Revolution and Rebellion: State and Society in England in the Seventeenthand Eighteenth Centuries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Cohen, Stephen. “Between Form and Culture: New Historicism and the Promiseof a Historical Formalism.” Renaissance Literature and Its Formal Engagements.Ed. Mark David Rasmussen. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002, 18–41.

Cohen, Walter. “The Merchant of Venice and the Possibilities of HistoricalCriticism.” New Casebooks: The Merchant of Venice. Ed. Martin Coyle. NewYork: St. Martin’s Press, 1998, 45–72.

———. Drama of A Nation: Public Theater in Renaissance England and Spain.Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985.

Colie, Rosalie. “Reason and Need: King Lear and the ‘Crisis’ of the Aristocracy.”Some Facets of King Lear: Essays in Prismatic Criticism. Ed. Rosalie L. Colie andF.T. Flahiff. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974, 185–219.

Craven, Wesley. The Dissolution of the Virginia Company: The Failure of a ColonialExperiment. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1964.

Cust, Richard and Ann Hughes, eds. Conflict in Early Stuart England: Studies inReligion and Politics, 1603–1642. London: Longman, 1989.

Danby, John. Shakespeare’s Doctrine of Nature: A Study of King Lear. London: Faberand Faber, 1961.

Davanzati, Bernardo. A Discourse Upon Coins. Trans. John Toland. London, 1696.Roover, Raymond de. “The Concept of the Just Price: Theory and Economic

Policy.” Journal of Economic History, 18 (1958): 418–434.Delany, Paul “King Lear and the Decline of Feudalism.” Materialist Shakespeare: A

History. Ed. Ivo Kamps. London: Verso, 1995, 20–38.Deleuze, Gilles and Felix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus. Trans. Brian Massumi.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987.Descartes, René. Treatise of Man. Trans. Thomas Steel Hall. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1972.Dewey, John. Human Nature and Conduct: An Introduction to Social Psychology.

New York: The Modern Library, 1922.

Dixon, Susan. The Roman Mother. Norman: Oklahoma, 1988.Dobb, Maurice. Studies in the Development of Capitalism. New York: International

Publishers, 1947.Downame, George. Lectures on the XV Psalme. London, 1604.Downame, John. Treatise of Beneficence. London, 1617.Duplessis, Robert S. Transitions to Capitalism in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1997.Eagleton, Terry. Ideology: An Introduction. London: Verso, 1991.———. The Ideology of the Aesthetic. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990.———. William Shakespeare. London: Basil Blackwell, Ltd., 1986.Elster, Jon. Making Sense of Marx. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.———. Ulysses and the Sirens: Studies in Rationality and Irrationality. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1979.Elton, G.R. The Parliament of England, 1559–1581. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1987.Engle, Lars. Shakespearean Pragmatism: Market of His Time. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1993.Felperin, Howard. Shakespearean Romance. Princeton: Princeton University Press,

1972.Ferry, Anne. The “Inward” Language: Sonnets of Wyatt, Sidney, Shakespeare, and

Donne. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.Force, Peter, ed. Tracts and other papers relating principally to the origin, settlement,

and progress of the colonies in North America, from the discovery of the country tothe year 1776. 4 vols. Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1963.

Foucault, Michel. Madness and Civilization. New York: Vintage Books, 1965.Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays. Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1957.Garber, Marjorie. Shakespeare’s Ghost Writers. New York: Methuen, 1987.Giddens, Anthony. A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism. Stanford:

Stanford University Press, 1995.Gilson, Etienne. The Christian Philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas. New York:

Octagon Books, 1983.Girard, René. A Theater of Envy: William Shakespeare. New York: Oxford University

Press, 1991.———. Violence and the Sacred. Trans. Patrick Gregory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1977.Goldberg, Jonathan. James I and The Politics of Literature. Stanford: Stanford

University Press, 1989.Goldmann, Lucien. Cultural Creation in Modern Society. Trans. Bart Grahl. Saint

Louis: Telos Press, 1976.Grady, Hugh. The Modernist Shakespeare: Critical Texts in a Material World. Oxford:

Clarendon Press, 1991.Grebanier, Bernard. The Truth About Shylock. New York: Random House, 1962.Greenblatt, Stephen. Hamlet in Purgatory. Princeton: Princeton University Press,

2001.

Selected Bibliography202

203Selected Bibliography

———. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in RenaissanceEngland. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.

Greenblatt, Stephen and Catherine Gallagher. Practicing New Historicism. Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Greene, Jack. Pursuits of Happiness. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,1988.

Grotius, Hugo. The Law of War and Peace. Trans. Francis W. Kelsey. Indianapolis:Bobbs-Merrill, 1925.

Guicciardini, Francesco. Dialogue on the Government of Florence. Ed. and Trans.Alison Brown. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Halpern, Richard. Shakespeare Among the Moderns. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1997.

———. The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation: English Renaissance Culture and theGenealogy of Capital. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991.

Harrison, William. A Description of England. Ed. George Eden. New York: DoverPublications, 1994.

Heckscher, Eli F. Mercantilism. 2 vols. Trans. Mendel Shapiro. London: GeorgeAllen & Unwin, Ltd., 1935.

Hicks, Michael. Bastard Feudalism. London: Longman, 1995.Hill, Christopher. Puritanism and Revolution: Studies in Interpretation of the English

Revolution of the Seventeenth Century. London: Secker and Warburg, 1995.Hilton, Rodney. Class Conflict and the Crisis of Feudalism: Essays in Medieval Social

History. London: The Hambledon Press, 1985.———. Ed. Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism. London: Verso, 1976.Hirst, Derek. Authority and Conflict: England, 1603–1658. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1986.Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Ed. C.B. Macpherson. Penguin Books, 1968.Holstun, James. Ehud’s Dagger: Class Struggle in the English Revolution. London:

Verso, 2000.———. “Tragic Superfluity in Coriolanus.” ELH 50 (1983): 485–507.Hudson, John. The Formation of The English Common Law: Law and Society in

England from the Norman Conquest to Magna Carta. London: Longman, 1996.Hulme, Peter. Colonial Encounters: Europe and the Native Caribbean, 1492–1797.

London: Routledge, 1986.Hulme, Peter and Francis Barker, “‘Nymphs and reapers heavenly vanish’: the dis-

cursive con-text of The Tempest.” Alternative Shakespeares. Ed. John Drakakis.London: Routledge, 1985, 191–205.

Hunter, G.K. “A.C. Bradley’s Shakespearean Tragedy.” Essays and Studies 21 (1968):101–117.

James, Margaret. Social Problems and Policy During the Puritan Revolution,1640–1660. New York, Barnes and Noble, 1966.

Jameson, Fredric. The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act.Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981.

Jehlen, Myra. “History Before the Fact; or, Captain John Smith’s UnfinishedSymphony.” Critical Inquiry 19 (1993): 677–692.

Jones, Norman. God and the Moneylenders: Usury and Law in Early Modern England.Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989.

Jordan, W.K. Philanthropy in England: 1480–1660: A Study in the Changing Patternof English Social Aspirations. London: Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1959.

Judson, Margaret. The Crisis of the Constitution: An Essay in Constitutional andPolitical Thought in England, 1603–1645. New Haven: Yale University Press,1988.

Kerrigan, William. Hamlet’s Perfection. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,1991.

Kettle, Arnold, ed. Shakespeare in a Changing World. New York: InternationalPublishers, 1964.

Kinnaird, John. “Hazlitt and the ‘Design’ of Shakespearean Tragedy: A ‘Character’Critic Revisited.” Shakespeare Quarterly 28 (1977): 22–39.

Kirschbaum, Leo. Character and Characterization in Shakespeare. Detroit: WayneState University Press, 1962.

Kishlansky, Mark. Parliamentary Selection: Social and Political Choice in EarlyModern England. London, 1986.

Knight, G. Wilson. The Wheel of Fire: Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Tragedy.Cleveland: World Publishing Company, 1964.

Krieger, Elliot. A Marxist Study of Shakespeare’s Comedies. London: Macmillan Press,1979.

Kronenfeld, Judy. “ ‘So Distribution Should Unto Excess, And Each Man MayHave Enough’: Shakespeare’s King Lear—Anabaptist Egalitarianism, AnglicanCharity, Both, Neither?” ELH 59 (1992): 755–784.

Kupperman, Karen Ordahl. Captain John Smith: A Select Edition. Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press, 1988.

Lachman, Richard. Capitalists in Spite of Themselves: Elite Conflict and EconomicTransitions in Early Modern Europe. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Lang, James. Conquest and Commerce: Spain and England in The Americas. NewYork: Academic Press, 1975.

Langbaum, Robert, ed. The Tempest. New York: Signet, 1964.Langholm, Odd. Price and Value in the Aristotelian Tradition: A Study in Scholastic

Economic Sources. Norwegian Research Council for Science and the Humanities,1979.

Larkin, James F. and Paul L. Hughes. Stuart Royal Proclamations. 2 vols. Oxford:Clarendon Press, 1973.

Larrain, Jorge. Marxism and Ideology. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1983.Lear, Jonathan. Open Minded: Working Out the Logic of the Soul. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1998.Leinwand, Theodore B. “Shakespeare and The Middling Sort.” Shakespeare

Quarterly 44 (1993): 284–303.Leverenz, David. “The Woman in Hamlet : An Interpersonal View.” Representing

Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays. Ed. Murray M. Schwarz and Coppelia Kahn. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980,110–128.

Selected Bibliography204

205Selected Bibliography

Lovejoy, Arthur O. Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.

Lowith, William. The Christian Man’s Closet. London, 1581.Lukes, Steven. Marxism and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.Mackie, J.L. “Can There Be A Rights-Based Moral Theory.” Theories of Rights. Ed.

Jeremy Waldron. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984, 168–181.Macherey, Pierre. A Theory of Literary Production. Trans. Geoffrey Wall. London:

Routledge, 1978.Macleod, Henry Dunning. Principles of Economical Philosophy. 2 vols. London:

Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer, 1872–1875.Macpherson, C.B. Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 1962.Magnusson, Lars. Mercantilism: The Shaping of an Economic Language. London:

Routledge, 1994.Mallin, Eric S. “Jewish Invader and the Soul of State: The Merchant of Venice and

Science Fiction Movies.” Shakespeare and Modernity: Early Modern to Millenium.Ed. Hugh Grady. London: Routledge, 2000, 142–167.

———. Inscribing the Time: Shakespeare and the End of Elizabethan England.Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995.

Malthus, Thomas. An Essay on The Principle of Population. Ed. Anthony Flew.Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1970.

Malynes, Gerard de. Consuetudo, vel lex mercatoria, or the Ancient Law-merchant.London, 1636.

———. The Maintenance of Free Trade. London, 1622.———. England’s View, in the Unmasking of Two Paradoxes. London, 1603.Mandeville, Bernard. The Fable of the Bees. Ed. Phillip Harth. Penguin Books, 1989.Mantoux, Paul. The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century. New York:

Harper and Row, 1962.Marx, Karl. Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations. Trans. Jack Cohen. Ed. and Intro.

E.J. Hobsbawm. New York: International Publishers, 1989.———. Capital, Vol. I. Ed. Frederick Engels. New York: International Publishers,

1967.Marx, Karl and Frederick Engels. The German Ideology, Part One. Ed. C.J. Arthur.

New York: International Publishers, 1993.Maus, Katharine Eisaman. Inwardness and Theater in the English Renaissance.

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.McLaughlin, Brian P. “The Rise and Fall of British Emergentism.” Emergence Or

Reduction? Ed. A. Berckermann, J. Kim, and H. Flohr. New York: De Gruyter,1992.

Misselden, Edward. The Circle of Commerce. London, 1623.Montrose, Louis. The Purpose of Playing: Shakespeare and the Cultural Politics of the

Elizabethan Theatre. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1996.Moody, A.D. “The Letter of the Law.” The Merchant of Venice: Critical Essay. Ed.

Thomas Wheeler. New York: Garland Publishing, 1991, 79–101.Morgan, Edmund S. American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial

Virginia. New York: Norton, 1975.

Moretti, Franco. “The Great Eclipse: Tragic Form as the Deconsecration ofSovereignty.” Shakespearean Tragedy, ed. John Drakakis. London: Longman,1992, 45–83.

Mun, Thomas. England’s Treasure by Forraign Trade. London, 1663.Nelson, Benjamin. The Idea of Usury. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969.Newman, Karen. “Portia’s Ring: Unruly Women and Structures of Exchange in The

Merchant of Venice.” Shakespeare Quarterly 38 (1987): 19–33.Nerlich, Michael. Ideology of Adventure: Studies in Modern Consciousness,

1100–1750. Vol. 1. Trans. Ruth Crowley. Minneapolis: University of MinnesotaPress, 1987.

Nicholls, Sir Henry. A History of The English Poor Law. 3 vols. New York: G.P.Putnam’s Sons, 1898.

Noonan, John T. The Scholastic Analysis of Usury. Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress, 1957.

Palliser, D.M. “Tawney’s Century: Brave New World or Malthusian Trap?”Economic History Review 35 (1982): 339–353.

Parfit, Derek. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984.Parker, R.B. ed., William Shakespeare, Coriolanus. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1994.Patterson, Annabel. Shakespeare and the Popular Voice. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell,

1989.Peltonen, Markku. Classical Humanism and Republicanism in English Political

Thought, 1570–1640. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.Perkins, William. A Commentarie or Exposition Upon the First Five Chapters of the

Epistle to the Galatians. Workes. 3 vols. Ed. T. Pickering. London, 1631.———. A Treatise of Christian Equity. London, 1604.Pocock, J.G.A. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the

Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975.Polanyi, Karl. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our

Time. Boston: Beacon Press, 1944.Postan, Michael. The Medieval Economy and Society. London: Pelican, 1975.Poulantzas, Nicos. Political Power and Social Classes. London: Verso, 1978.Pratt, Mary Louis. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. Routledge,

London 1992.Prosser, Eleanor. Hamlet and Revenge. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1967.Rappaport, Steve. Worlds Within Worlds: Structures of Life in Sixteenth-Century

London. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.Reynolds, Bryan. Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical

Future. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Press, 2003.Riss, Arthur “The Belly Politic: Coriolanus and the Revolt of Language.” ELH 59

(1992): 53–75.Robinson, Henry. The Office of Addresses and Encounters. London, 1650.Roll, Eric. A History of Economic Thought. London: Faber and Faber, 1938.Rorty, Richard. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1989.

Selected Bibliography206

207Selected Bibliography

Rossiter, A.P. Angel With Horns and Other Shakespeare Lectures. Ed. Graham Storey.New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1961.

Russell, Conrad. The Causes of the English Civil War. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990.———. Unrevolutionary England, 1602–1649. London: Hambledon Press, 1990.Ryle, Gilbert. The Concept of Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1949.Sandel, Michael. Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1982.Schmitt, Jean-Claude. Ghosts in the Middle Ages: The Living and the Dead in

Medieval Society. Trans. Teresa Lavender Fagen. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press, 1994.

Schrift, Alan, ed. The Logic of the Gift. New York: Routledge, 1997.Schucking, Levin L. Character Problems in Shakespeare’s Plays. Gloucester: Peter

Smith, 1959.Sewall, Hannah Robie. The Theory of Value Before Adam Smith. Publications of the

American Economic Association. Third Series, vol. 2, no. 3. New York: MacmillanCompany, 1901.

Sharp, Kevin. Remapping Early Modern England:The Culture of Seventeenth-CenturyPolitics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Sinfield, Alan. Faultlines: Cultural Materialism and the Politics of Dissident Reading.Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

Skinner, Quentin. “The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and HistoricalPerspectives.” Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy. Ed.Richard Rorty, Jerome B. Schneewind, and Quentin Skinner. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1984.

Slack, Paul. Poverty and Policy in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman,1988.

Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into The Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations. Ed.Edwin Cannan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976.

Smith, Dennis. The Rise of Historical Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991.Sommerville, Johann P. ed. King James VI and I: Political Writings. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1994.———. Politics and Ideology in England, 1603–1640. London: Longman, 1986.Sorge, Thomas. “The Failure of Orthodoxy in Coriolanus.” Shakespeare Reproduced:

The Text in History and Ideology. Ed. Jean E. Howard and Marion F. O’Connor.New York: Routledge, 1990, 225–241.

States, Bert O. States. Hamlet and The Concept of Character. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press, 1992.

Steiner, George. The Death of Tragedy. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961.Stirling, Brents, ed. William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice Baltimore, MD:

Penguin Books, 1990.Stoll, Elmer Edgar. Art and Artifice in Shakespeare: A Study in Dramatic Contrast and

Illusion. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1933.Stone, Lawrence. The Causes of the English Revolution, 1529–1642. New York:

Harper and Row, 1972.Strier, Richard. Resistant Structures: Particularity, Radicalism, and Renaissance Texts.

Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995.

Suviranta, Bruno. The Theory of the Balance of Trade in England: A Study inMercantilism. Helsingfors, 1923.

Tawney, R.H. The Agrarian Problem in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Harper andRow, 1967.

Taylor, Jeremy. Unum Necessarium (1655). The Whole Works of the Right ReverendJeremy Taylor. 10 vols. London: Longman, 1861.

Tennenhouse, Leonard. Power on Display: The Politics of Shakespeare’s Genres. NewYork: Methuen,1988.

Tuck, Richard. Natural Rights Theories: Their Origins and Development. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1979.

Tugendhat, Ernst. Self-Consciousness and Self-Determination. Trans. Paul Stern.Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.

Turner, Frederick. Shakespeare’s Twenty-First Century Economics: The Morality of Loveand Money. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Turner, Henry S. ed. The Culture of Capital: Properties, Cities, and Knowledge inEarly Modern England. New York: Routledge, 2002.

Underdown, David. Revel, Riot and Rebellion: Popular Politics and Culture inEngland, 1603–1660. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.

Warren, Howard C. A History of Association Psychology. New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons, 1921.

Weis, René, ed. William Shakespeare, King Lear: A Parallel Text Edition. London:Longman, 1993.

White, Hayden. Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-CenturyEurope. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973.

White, R.S. Natural Law in English Renaissance Literature. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1996.

Wilkinson, Robert. A Sermon Preached at Northampton. London, 1607.Williams, Raymond. The Country and the City. New York: Oxford University Press,

1973.Williamson, Claude C. H., ed. Readings on the Character of Hamlet. London:

George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1950.Wilson, John Dover. What Happens in Hamlet. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1986.Wilson, Thomas. Discourse Upon Usury. Ed. and Intro. R.H. Tawney. New York:

Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1925.Wood, Ellen Meiksins, The Origin of Capitalism. New York: Monthly Review Press,

1999.———. The Pristine Culture of Capitalism: An Historical Essay on Old Regimes and

Modern States. London: Verso, 1991.Wood, Neal. Cicero’s Social and Political Thought. Berkeley: University of California

Press, 1988.Wright, Erik Olin. Classes. London: Verso, 1985.Wright, Thomas. The Passions of the Minde in Generall (1604). Ed. Thomas O.

Sloan. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1971.Zizek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 1990.

Selected Bibliography208

Index

Adelman, Janet, 70–71Adorno, Theodor, 176, n. 37Aers, David, 173, n. 3Agamben, Giorgio, 99, 101, 133–134Althusser, Louis, 7, 9–11Ames, William, 154Andrewes, Lancelot, 164Aquinas, Thomas, 82Archer, Ian, 28Arendt, Hannah, 192, n. 47Aristotle, 157Armstrong, D.M., 195, n. 49Ashwell, Lena, 147Augustine, Saint: Confessions, 154;

Libero Arbitrio, 154

Barber, C.L., 98Barbon, Nicholas, 97Barker, Francis, 45–46, 147Battenhouse, Roy, 167Baxter, Richard, 194, n. 29Becon, Thomas, 119Beier, A.L., 28, 29Bell, H.E., 192, n. 56Bellamy, J.G., 140Benhabib, Seyla, 175, n. 12Benston, Alice, 100Bloch, Ernst, 109Blustein, Jeffrey, 191, n. 19Boal, Augusto, 193, n. 77Bourdieu, Pierre, 7, 106–107Bradley, A.C., 19, 169

Brenner, Robert, 11–13, 29, 33–34, 138

Bristol, Michael, 190, n. 57Brooks, Cleanth, 21Brown, Paul, 6, 47–48Brown, Peter, 194, n. 21Browne, Sir Thomas, 124Bruster, Douglas, 173, n. 3Bucknill, J.C., 155Burgess, Glenn, 56Buridan, Jean, 81–82, 97

Campbell, O.J., 74Carew, Thomas, 30Carroll, William C., 174, n. 12Caudwell, Christopher, 1–2Cavell, Stanley, 117–118Chamberlen, Peter, 27Chambers, E.K., 155Character (function), 19–22, 45, 47,

49–52, 108, 122, 142–144, 146,171–172

Charney, Maurice, 74Cicero, Marcus Tullius, 57Clarke, J.C.D., 4Claude-Schmitt, Jean, 166Cohen, Walter, 79, 182, n. 75Colie, Rosalie, 138Coriolanus, 14–16, 53–77:

custom, 69–70; MidlandsRising, 66–68; negative liberties,62–63; paternalism, 63–65;

Coriolanus—continuedrepublicanism, 61–62; tragic irony,74–77; Volumnia, 70–73

Cowell, John, 59Craven, Wesley, 37Cust, Richard, 8–9

Danby, John, 2, 119, 135Davanzati, Bernardo, 93Delany, Paul, 177, n. 55Deleuze, Gilles, 32Descartes, René, 157, 159Dewey, John, 164Dixon, Susan, 71Dobb, Maurice, 33Dollimore, Jonathan, 8, 128–130Donne, John, 196, n. 56Doran, Madeline, 20Downame, George, 95Downame, John, 125Drakakis, John, 79

Eagleton, Terry, 147Elster, Jon, 159, 187, n. 15Elton, G.R., 8Engle, Lars, 164

Felperin, Howard, 51, 171Ferry, Anne, 148Feudalism, 11–13, 41–42, 55,

136–137, 139–140Foucault, Michel, 29Frye, Northrop, 18, 50, 108Fuller, Nicholas, 58Functional contradictions, 5–9; and

class, 33–34

Garber, Marjorie, 195, n. 37Genre, 17–19: comedy (Merchant

of Venice), 107–110; irony(Coriolanus), 74–77; romance (TheTempest), 49–51; tragedy (KingLear), 142–144; (Hamlet), 169–172

Gilson, Etienne, 163Girard, René, 98, 142Goldmann, Lucien, 182, n. 76Goodwin, Thomas, 154Grady, Hugh, 20Grebanier, Bernard, 92Greenblatt, Stephen, 166, 178, n. 62,

196, n. 62Greene, Jack, 36Grotius, Hugo, 93, 125–127Guattari, Felix, 32

Hakluyt, Richard, 34Halpern, Richard, 4–5, 27, 90–91,

135–136, 138Hamlet, 16–17, 145–172: ghosts,

166–168; habitual sin, 152–160,164–166; inwardness, 146–152;radical behaviorism, 160–163;tragedy, 169–172

Haney, Lewis H., 187, n. 12Harrison, William, 27Hart, H.L.A., 112Hartlib, Samuel, 27Hazlitt, William, 169Hekscher, Eli, 84Hill, Christopher, 140Hirst, Derek, 29, 66Hobbes, Thomas, 30, 97,

119, 157Holstun, James, 74–75Hooker, Richard, 164Hudson, John, 192, n. 56Hughes, Ann, 8–9Hulme, Peter, 45–46

Irigaray, Luce, 107

Jameson, Fredric, 21–22, 50–51

Jones, Norman, 94Jordan, W.K., 180, n. 17Judson, Margaret, 60

Index210

211Index

Kermode, Frank, 44Kerrigan, William, 193, n. 6Kettle, Arnold, 140King Lear, 16, 111–144: bastard

feudalism, 139–140; class, 138–139; distribution, 125–131;duty, 115–117; feudal incidents,136–138; justice, 140–142; passion,121–124; rights, 112–115,133–134; tragedy, 142–144; twomoralities, 134–135; veil ofignorance, 131–133

Kinnaird, John, 169Kirschbaum, Leo, 20Kishlansky, Mark, 8Knight, G. Wilson, 21, 119Kronenfeld, Judy, 124Kymlicka, Will, 193, n. 74

Lamming, George, 44Langholm, Odd, 82Lear, Jonathan, 171Lever, J.W., 121Leverenz, David, 195, n. 36Levi-Strauss, Claude, 106Long, A.A., 57Lovejoy, Arthur O., 109Lowith, William, 119

Macherey, Pierre, 13Macpherson, C.B., 30Magnusson, Lars, 188, n. 18Mallin, Eric, 176, n. 38,

177, n. 61Malthus, Thomas, 32Malynes, Gerard de, 83–88Mann, Michael, 24Mantoux, Paul, 32Marx, Karl: The German Ideology, 7;

The Holy Family, 141; On the Jewish Question, 141, 179, n. 11

Maus, Katharine Eisaman, 148–149

McLaughlin, Brian P., 196, n. 61Mercantilism, 83–86Merchant of Venice, 15, 79–110:

comedy, 107–110; gift exchange,102–107; homo sacer (Shylock),99–102; objective value, 86–91;subjective value, 92–94; usury,94–96

Moberly, C.E., 155Molina, Luis de, 111–112Montaigne, Michel de, 158Montrose, Louis, 8Moody, A.D., 98Moretti, Franco, 142Mun, Thomas, 85

New Historicism, 23–24, 47–49Newman, Karen, 105

Palliser, D.M., 29Parfit, Derek, 145Parker, R.B., 63, 69Pascal, Blaise, 159Patterson, Annabel, 66–67Peltonen, Markku, 56–58Perkins, William, 64, 154Pocock, J.G.A., 53Polanyi, Karl, 32Postan, Michael, 41, 182, n. 62Poulantzas, Nicos, 183, n. 5Poverty: 27–33 (The Tempest); 66–69

(Coriolanus); 123–128 (King Lear)Prosser, Eleanor, 196, n. 65

Rappaport, Steve, 28Rawls, John, 131–132, 143–144Reynolds, Bryan, 18Riss, Arthur, 54–55Robinson, Henry, 32Rorty, Richard, 76Rossiter, A.P., 146Russell, Conrad, 3, 8Ryle, Gilbert, 160–161, 163

Saint Croix, G.E.M. de, 57Salisbury, John of, 63Saltern, George, 58Sandel, Michael, 132Santayana, George, 147Schreiner, Susan, 191, n. 14Schucking, L.L., 20Selden, John, 127Sharpe, Kevin, 9Skinner, Quentin, 61–62, 76Smith, Adam, 32, 85Smith, Captain John, 34–35, 38–39Sommerville, Johann P., 58Sorge, Thomas, 55Stallybrass, Peter, 193, n. 1States, Bert O., 195, n. 36Steiner, George, 169Stoll, E.E., 19–20Stone, Lawrence, 2–3Strachey, William, 35, 44Strier, Richard, 116–117Suarez, Francisco, 112Suviranta, Bruno, 188, n. 23Sypher, Wylie, 195, n. 36

Tawney, R.H., 94Taylor, Jeremy, 154, 164The Tempest, 14, 40–52:

commodification, 42–45;

fetishization, 51–52; master-servantrelations, 41–48; new historicism,47–48; romance, 50; utopianism,50–51

Tuck, Richard, 190, n. 1Tugendhat, Ernst, 150Turgenev, Ivan, 147Turner, Henry, S., 173, n. 3

Underdown, David, 29Usury, 94–96

Virginia colony, 34–40Vives, Juan Luis, 157

Warren, Howard C., 195, n. 38Weis, René, 122White, Hayden, 18, 49, 76White, R.S., 132–133Whitelocke, James, 59Wilkinson, Robert, 67–68Williams, Raymond, 183, n. 10Wilson, John Dover, 162Wood, Neal, 184, n. 15Woodbridge, Linda, 174, n. 12Wright, Erik Olin, 42, 186, n. 77Wright, Thomas, 121

Zizek, Slavoj, 51–52

Index212