Abstract
William Hazlitt‟s 1816 essay on Shakespeare‟s Coriolanus was supposedly a review of a production by John Kemble. Yet it begins with a reference to Burke and Paine, and develops as a discourse on republic versus monarchy. This would have been more appropriate if Shakespeare had based his play on the account of Dionysius Halicarnassus, but Shakespeare took his material from Plutarch‟s life of Coriolanus, and Plutarch had recast Dionysius‟ account, since he was writing biography and not political history. Hazlitt used his essay to advance his campaign against contemporary poets, especially those of a Tory persuasion, and to vent his spleen against those who had abandoned their rational republican ideals in favour of celebrating the reinstatement of the monarchy in France and the defeat and humiliation of Napoleon.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
