a continuous series to the beginning of theRepublic” (Cornell, 13). A more detailedbut equally ancient source of informationwas the Annales maximi, “a chronicle keptby the pontifex maximus . . . that . . . recorded,year by year, all important public events”(Cornell, 14). It is probable that otherreligious and civil institutions had theirown records and that some survived. Afterall, “during the invasion by the Gauls,” theneighboring Etruscan city-state of Caere had“helped Rome . . . by giving refuge to thesacred objects from its temples” (Grant, 54).In the light of such evidence (andthe work of later Roman historians),T.J. Cornell is almost ready to guaranteeCoriolanus’ existence. He writes,“Capturing one city after another,Coriolanus’ forces advanced as far as the . .. outskirts of Rome. . . . Leaving aside theromantic details, we can reasonably acceptthat the story reflects a genuine popularmemory. . . . The chronology is insecure,however, since none of the leading personsin the story appears in the consular Fasti;but the Romans’ belief that the events tookplace in the early years of the fifth century isprobably correct” (307).An informed judgement aboutCoriolanus must also include some estimateof Livy and Plutarch, who were notonly vital to Shakespeare but also two ofthe most important sources for much ofRoman history. It is clear that though theywere writing centuries after the eventsthey chronicled, they consulted materialsthat were contemporary to their subjects.Livy, in fact, “alludes to his sources witha frequency unusual among ancient historians”(M.L.W. Laistner, The GreaterRoman Historians [Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1963], 84). He is at oncea careful and elegant writer, unwilling toaccept any assertion without an examination.For instance, here is how he weighs thequestion of Coriolanus’ death, “There arevarious accounts of his ultimate fate: He issaid by some to have sunk under the burdenof resentment which his behaviour broughtupon him, though the manner of his deathis not known. I have read in Fabius, ouroldest authority, that he survived to oldage: Fabius states at least, that he used oftento say towards the end of his life that exilewas a more bitter thing when one was old”(Livy, The History of Early Rome [Norwalk,Connecticut: The Easton Press, 1978],160). Livy’s work was so successful that hesurpassed and suppressed his predecessorsand competitors. “Narratives on a largescale of Republican Rome ceased to be composed,at least in Latin” (Laistner, 101).Luckily for Plutarch, who was bornnearly thirty years after Livy’s death, hewrote in Attic Greek. He served as a priestof Apollo at the Delphic Oracle, and hisParallel Lives were so popular that theysurvived nearly intact, emerging as an internationalhit in the Renaissance. As T. J.Cornell says, “Plutarch is important becausehe read voraciously and faithfully reportedwhat he found. . . . He drew heavily on Livyand . . . Dionysius of Halicarnassus, but healso provides much additional informationnot contained in their accounts, including. . . material taken from antiquarians andothers” (3). So, to conclude, Shakespearehas a subject for his play who was probablyreal and a set of political and emotionalissues which are very likely true even if theyaren’t completely factual. Plus, Shakespeare’ssources are intelligent scholars and skilledwriters (good enough to steal from). LikeShakespeare, Livy and Plutarch are as muchconcerned with philosophy as they are withhistory, with the meaning of life as well asthe happenings in lives. Shakespeare did notwrite (and was not trying to write) a documentary;this is a tragedy with much historyin it.Fine Dining in a Unique,Comfortable Atmosphere.Featuring:Seafood • Choice Black Angus BeefVariety Specials • Catering164 South 100 West • Cedar City, UT16 • <strong>Midsummer</strong> <strong>Magazine</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
June 23–September 1Adams <strong>Shakespearean</strong> TheatreKing Lear:“Ay,Every Incha King!”By Diana Major SpencerOF THE VARIOUS ROLES INhis cosmic repertoire,Shakespeare’s King Lear knowsonly one—and that one imperfectly.He is King—autocratic, absolute and,presumably, invulnerable. The tragedy ofKing Lear follows his imprudent abdicationof the only role he knows or has everknown, an act which eradicates his identity.Father, friend, guest, human being—roleswithout the trappings of crown andthrone—lie beyond his understanding. Hisjourney in this three hours’ traffic on thestage takes him toward his humanity.Though Regan recognizes that “hehath ever but slenderly known himself”(1.1.293–94) and Gloucester remarksthat “the king falls from bias of nature”(1.2.111) with regard to his daughters andSusan Shunk (left) as Desdemona and David Toneyas Othello in Othello, 2002