Saturday, 14 October 2017

Comparison of Aristophanes, Plautus and Shakespeare. (Year 13/NCEA Level 3)

Aristophanes wrote and produced comedies in Greece from 423 BC to 405 BC. These plays and his techniques have had a lasting effect on the future of comedy and its place in human life. This can be shown through comparisons to other legendary comedy playwrights, Plautus and Shakespeare, with a time period spanning more than 2000 years.
Theatre

Aristophanes

Aristophanes’s plays were shown during the festivals The Great Dionysia and Lenaea in an open air theatre called The Theatre of Dionysus, a large circular structure with the ability to accommodate approximately 17,000 people, built into the side of the Acropolis in Athens.  The original structure dates to the 6th Century BC and though it was later updated to stone, in Aristophanes time (5th Century BC) it would have been built using wood and earth. The seats radiate away from the centre of the theatre, the Orchestra. (A) The Orchestra was a circle of hard packed earth encircled in stone, approximately 18m in diameter. It was dug out of the hillside and flattened, allowing the seats to tier back from this. The Orchestra would provide place for the chorus to sing, dance, recite poetry and perform the Parabasis- arguably the most important part of the play where the chorus step out of their roles and address the audience directly. It contributed to the openness of the theatre and connected Aristophanes’s plays to fertility festivals and dances worshipping the gods, from which theatre was derived. The Paradoi (E) were the wide entrance ways, used sometimes by main actors but mostly by the chorus, during their grand first procession of singing, dancing and marching. This procession was a very exciting and engaging part of the play for viewers and the Paradoi attributed to the greatness. The Theatron (B) was the name given to the tiers of seats looking down over the orchestra and the skene. Seats were in concentric arcs, built into a hollowed hillside, radiating away from the centre. The shape of the seats gave excellent acoustics, aiding the actors in speaking and making it possible for all audience members to hear what was being said. An audience member in the back row was 90m from the stage house and a 2m actor would only appear 1.8cm tall. This explains the need for large masks and phalli- so that everybody could see the play. In Aristophanes time, the seats were wooden and could be removed after the festivities. Dividing the arcs into bands were wide passages (called Diaxomata) and these bands were further divided by wide staircases. This helped with ease of access for the audience. The Skene (C) was the stage house, a small wooden hut with stone foundations. It was small and out of proportion for the theatre and this was possibly due to a lack of wood in wartime. It would have been built strongly to withstand kicking and action on the roof, such as in Aristophanes Wasps when Philocleon escapes to and then lowers himself from a tiled roof. The Skene was possibly two storied as in Aristophanes Frogs, Pluto is apparently speaking from higher window.      
Plautus 
Plautus’s plays were performed during religious worship festivals as part of the celebrations called Ludi (meaning festival games). Theatre was not a priority in these times (c. 205BC-184BC), a permanent theatre would be expensive and a moratorium on building permanent theatres was in place till 55BC, so a temporary wooden theatre would be erected for the days of the festival in a public place and then dismantled quickly after. This put some restrictions on the size of the theatre, making it considerably smaller than the Theatre of Dionysus. This placed limits on both seating and action on stage and changed the interaction with the audience.  The set out of the theatre was very similar to that of early Greek theatre. There was a long and narrow stage house at the front and centre of the theatre. It was a lot smaller than Greek theatres again because of the temporary nature of the performances. The stage house had 3 openings/doors, often a brothel, temple and hero’s house.  The set was designed to imitate local settings so that the audience could recognise allusions and easily identify the characters and plot. For instance, in the play Amphitryon, there would have been a god’s house for Jupiter, a normal house front for Alcmena and Amphitryon and a ship/pier setting for the plot line. They would have been made in a style which showed the audience the setting in ancient Thebes. The wooden stage in front of the stage house (Pulpitium) was also a lot smaller than the Proskenian of Greek times. As copied from the Greek theatre, there was a flat Orchestra, except it was altered to be a semi-circle. There was no chorus in Greek theatre so this area was used as overflow for seating. Those who were lower social class would stand in the orchestra, jammed up against the Pulpitium, influencing the nature of the play. As the audience were a lot closer, (those sitting as well those standing) there was no need for the dramatic action and over the top gestures of Aristophanes’s plays. The actors could utilize their voices as the storytellers and the audience felt more involved and a part of the play. For instance, in Amphitryon during Alcmena and Amphitryon’s fight, instead of using large gestures and body language, words and tone would have been used to show each of the character’s anguish.  Plautine theatres also had concentric tiers of bench-like seating, (called Cavea) as well as wings curving around the back of the stage house. This helped carry and amplify the sound so that everyone could hear the actors and prologue.

Shakespeare
Shakespeare’s plays were shown in The Globe Theatre in London, which was built in 1599. It was an open air three story theatre with 8 sides and a partial roof.  Data suggests it was 30m in diameter and could hold 3000 audience members. The orchestra equivalent in The Globe was called The Pit (2) where people could pay a penny to stand on the earth floor to watch the play. Behind this, rising in 3 levels were box like Galleries (3) with stadium style seats which were considerably more expensive than then standing. The lower seats were tiered seating and there is evidence to suggest that the upper stories were presidential suites with space for a couple of very rich/important people. This created a division in social status, much like in Plautus’s time.  The organisation of the seating created good visibility and sound travel. A rectangular Main Stage (1) also called Apron Stage (1) thrust from the back of the theatre into the centre of the Pit (2). It was 13m wide, 8m deep and had a height of 1.5m. There were 3 doors to the stage, with centre being a window to an inner stage. There was also a balcony over the stage used most famously in Romeo and Juliet but also by Beatrice in the comedy Much Ado about Nothing. This is where musicians played from. The doors led to the Tiring House which is where actors got dressed and entered/exited the stage. The floors above this were used as storage for props and costumes and possibly offices. The thatched roof wrapped around the structure and covered those in stadium seating, but those in the Pit (2) were uncovered.

Summary
We can see that Aristophanes’s theatres layouts had lasting impact on the design and use of theatres through following years. This would partly be because of the success of this set up and how effective the design was at carrying sound and accommodating large audiences. In modern theatre and stages we can see large similarities as well, especially with sloping seating and backstage areas.
The images and details of the theatre remains almost constant throughout the playwrights. All of them have a stage, a stage house and an orchestra. Aristophanes and Plautus both use concentric tiered seating and Shakespeare uses this but adds vertical privileged seating also. This is because the tiered seating was very effective at holding many people who all have a view of the stage, as well amplifying the word, song and music from the stage. The Globe added the vertical seating because of the strict social status divisions. This can be seen in the fact that people who stood on the ground were called groundlings and also ‘stinkards.’ Apparently they were sweaty and dirty and smelt awful. They often started fights and occasionally threw things at the actors. The rich and high status people would have wanted to be separated from this, and in order to make everyone happy, the vertical seating was added.
Aristophanes’s theatre could hold a lot more people because his plays were shown once during festivals and the play would help the population make important political decisions. Therefore, as many people as possible had to attend.  Plautus’s theatre could seat less but his plays were more for entertainment and weren’t a popular form of entertainment in his era. This is because the Romans preferred things such as ritual fights in the infamous Colosseum. It was a society where violence was valued over humorous plays. Shakespeare’s theatre could seat even fewer people, but he put on plays every day and as many as 3000 people attended each day. This means that a smaller theatre was sufficient.  
Aristophanes’s theatre was constructed from a hollowed hillside and utilizes the gradient of the slope, whereas Plautus and Shakespeare showed their plays in built wooden structures. This was because of the advances in technology over time and the unavailability of the perfect hillside. For instance, to cater for the large city population, Shakespeare’s theatre was built in London which is very flat.
The Stage House underwent some minor changes over time also. In Plautus’s era it became smaller, because of the temporary nature of the theatre. Roman society and culture did not value the theatre and so performance venues had to be cheap and temporary constructions. In The Globe, it became larger because of the availability of materials and the 3 story construction. This is because the theatre had become a staple of entertainment in this culture. There is evidence to suggest that in Aristophanes’s time, there was an opening in the skene that looked into a scene or new setting called an Ekkyklema. This was not a feature of Plautus’s theatre as the temporary theatre and stage house was only small and did have the three sets (doors) opening onto the main stage. However, this is a feature of the permanent structure The Globe. There was space and resources to build this, and it allowed Shakespeare to provide more interesting and multi-faceted plays.
The Orchestra also changed a little over time. The Orchestra in the Greek theatre was a large circle, an adaption of the dancing circle from Greek fertility festivals. There wasn’t a chorus in Roman plays and the idea to make it a place for people to stand meant there was more room for audience members. This continued in Shakespeare’s Globe where people stood in The Pit which remained a semi-circle except the stage cut halfway into it. In both Aristophanes’s and Plautus’s theatre, the stage was flush with the orchestra. I expect the change in The Globe is because it meant the audience were more wrapped around the stage, giving them a sense of involvement, as well as supplying a good view to those in the second and third story.
In the Theatre of Dionysus there was a crane, called a mechane which was used to lift gods onto the stage house roof in some plays. This was not a feature in Plautus’s theatre because the theatre was temporary and therefore simpler and cheaper in design.  Also Plautus’s plays reflected real life, so there was need for someone to be flying into a scene. However, there was a crane-like structure in the Globe, where characters flew up and down through a trap door from ‘heaven’ (the partial roof).  
The social and wealth divisions seems to have carried through the centuries. In Aristophanes’s theatre, those who were important figures in the community such as priests and politicians sat in the first rows, meaning they were closer to the action. Those less important sat further away, where it was harder to hear and see the actors. There is little evidence that women attended Aristophanes’s theatre, as men were of much higher status and had political power, whereas women were restricted to home and domestic life. In Plautus’s theatre those who were more valued in society were able to sit, whereas people with lower social status stood. There are conflicting views over whether women were allowed to watch Roman theatre, but if they were, they would have a separated seating section. This was further perpetuated in Shakespeare’s theatre where there were three different social and economic groupings. This is because of changing view of class and women as time progressed. 
Costume

Aristophanes

The three main characters, if playing men (there were only ever 3) wore skin suits with a ‘grotesquely’ padded stomach. They also wore a large leather phallus 45 cm in length, so it was very visible from the back of the theatre. The costume was appropriate to the character and time period so a traditional costume would be a ‘chiton,’ a sleeveless flowing garment. They also might wear a ‘himation,’ a cloak over this. In The Frogs the actor playing Dionysus would have been wearing his lion skin so that the audience could easily identify him. In the scenes after the Parabasis actors switched roles by swapping “the club and the lion skin” and the luggage between Dionysus and Xanthias (slave) to aid the plot and comically show Dionysus’s scared nature. Actors playing females (only men were actors) wore a floor length chiton often yellow in colour. The chorus wore colourful outfits, befitting of whether they were a wasp, a bird or a frog. In The Wasps “they’ve got stings in their butts- and they know how to use them!” This would have had comedic value but also attributed to the meaning behind the jurymen being similar to wasps. The chorus members probably all wore identical outfits. The outfits helped to put the actor or chorus member into character and helped the audience understand the character’s position in the play. A large part of the costuming was the use of masks. The masks were made from linen soaked in plaster and were large and exaggerated with oversized mouths and large eyes, as we can see in the picture on the right. They have to be very large and exaggerated because of the big audience- the people at the back had to be able to recognise who the character was. They could be made in a general ‘stock’ characters type such as soldier, middle aged man and slave, or could be made trying to emulate the face of a living or historical individual. This means that Aristophanes could have recognisable characters even if they themselves were not acting in the play. A stock character’s mask would have different components, for instance white skin showed us that it was a female and red indicated a male. Yellow skin show us that his job was a philosopher whereas an added beard emphasized the character’s masculinity. The masks were a way of completely transforming an actor into a character and meant that the audience knew what Aristophanes was trying to say. They also served as amplifying devices, with the wide gaping mouths projecting the actor’s voice upwards and out into the theatre. They helped the 17,000 viewers hear Aristophanes’s play and therefore his message.

Plautus’s costumes, much like his content, were copied and adapted from those of Aristophanes. Actors wore traditional outfits of the time, depending on their role. The stock standard outfit was a pallium, a piece of cloth draped over and around an actor, similar to a toga with a tunic, a cloak like piece over top.  In Roman theatre, different colours represented different characters. An old man’s was white and a slave’s, woman’s and youth’s were brightly coloured.  Old men also had a cane to show their agedness. Men playing women wore the pallium equivalent, the palla, which was longer, often fringed, thinner and decorated to show that the character was a woman. Women characters also wore jewellery and the more jewellery she was wearing, the richer and higher status the character was. Plautus also used masks, either a full face mask like the Greeks, or a half mask which left the actor’s lips and chin uncovered. (This was more comfortable for the jaw) By the features of the mask, the audience could determine the type of character and in some cases, the temperament of the character. Most were pale, with the more pale representing youth or a young man. Slave’s masks were more ruddy, indicating their working status. This can be seen in the mask on the right, which is what Sosia in Amphitryon would have worn. A youthful man often had black or brown hair, while a kind old man had white hair and a mean old man red hair. Women’s masks were often made to be a bit more yellow, especially when creating an old women. The mouths of the masks were wide to help to project their voices, identically to the Greek Masks. Plautus utilizes the mask in plays such as Amphitryon when Jupiter transforms to be identical to Sosia to trick him. Also in Menaechmi he would have used identical costumes and masks to portray twins which would give a visual reality to the mistaken identity storyline.

Shakespeare                                                                       
Characters in Shakespeare’s plays wore clothes of the time of the play that they were performing. For plays based in the 1500’s (then present day) actors wore colourful dresses and tunics, padded in a way that created a twisted version of the reality of a human body. The padding on shoulders and hips as well as large ruffs around the neck were a trend in the 1500’s and these costumes grew larger over this century. The aim was to wear as many fabrics and colours as possible simultaneously as this showed status, so making the outside of the costume larger meant that more could be fitted in and worn together. In these days there were strict laws about clothes as they were a sign of rank, and people caught dressing above their own rank could be put in the stocks. Actors however, were the only ones allowed to dress out of their rank, which let them play noblemen and women on the stage. Men wore a shirt called a doublet and often had a padded belly underneath and puffy trunk hose covering their pelvis. They wore ¾ tight pants and tights underneath this. You tell the rank of the men apart because a gallant man always had a sword, and a lower ranked man wore cheaper fabrics and did not have tights underneath their outfit. Men acting as women wore wide dresses with huge padded sleeves and hips. The more impractical the dress was, the higher rank the character was. Woman characters covered themselves in jewels with necklaces, rings and earrings. Very high ranked characters had diamonds and pearls sewn into their dresses. However, the costume would have had cut glass rather than diamond, as no one would lend their expensive jewellery. Women characters also wore perfumed gloves. In Much Ado about Nothing, Hero says “these gloves the Count sent me, they are an excellent perfume.” Gloves indicated femininity and that the woman was very fashionable. Shakespeare occasionally spoke of costume in his pays and used it as a comedic device such as in Twelfth Night, when a joker pretending to be Olivia demands that Malvolio wear yellow stockings with cross garters. Stage make up also gave the audience an idea about who the character was. Different colours could be used to emulate dark skin or very pale characters. It was a vital part of transforming a boy into a young woman. The boy would have a white face, red cheeks and a blond wig. Crushed pearls were sometimes added to create a shining affect for actors playing fairies, such as in Midsummers Night Dream.

Summary
Masks were used in Aristophanes and Plautus. Mostly, this is due to their success at total and fast transformation from an actor to any character. This device also meant that one actor could play many different actors in one play, saving money and also ensured that the rules of how many actors could be on the stage could be enforced, without sacrificing how many characters the play had. The Greek and Roman theatres were huge and so the masks were used to project the voice so that all audience members could hear the play and therefore the playwright’s message. However, the Globe theatre was a lot smaller in comparison and the projection wasn’t needed. The disadvantage of masks were that they meant that the actor could show no facial emotion. Shakespeare needed the characters to show many different emotions to make the plays more relatable, so the use of masks was abandoned.
All playwrights used costumes of the time in which the play was set. To the audience this would have made the play more lifelike and therefore more interesting. The costumes were a big part of how visually convincing the play was, so that the messages also became real and of importance.
All playwrights also used costume as a way to show what class or what type of person the character was. In all of the societies we are talking about, the class of a person was an important part of who they were. Therefore it was important that this was reflected in their costume. The audience had more understanding of how they should feel about them.

Humour and Content

Aristophanes
Aristophanes used many different comedic devices to connect with his audience, including bawdiness, parody, visual, scatology, satire, surrealism, slapstick, puns, ridicule and verbal wit. Humour was a very important part of Greek theatre as it captured the attention of the audience. This meant that Aristophanes could draw the audience in and then tell them important messages about political decisions and Athenian society. The humour would help the audience listen to his messages about the Peloponnesian War, Cleon and the aftermath of Arginusae. However, the sole purpose of the plays was not only to speak Aristophanes’s thoughts, but to celebrate creativity and theatre. He used bawdy humour often.  Bawdy humour reminds us of the fertility festival origins of Greek theatre and shows the audience what joy and pleasure they have lost by going to war and leaving the old Athenian ideas. He uses both verbal and physical bawdiness. For example in The Wasps, when Philocleon exclaims “This is dreadful: what’s happening to me? I’m softening.” And the scene with the slave girl when Philocleon says “Hold onto this rope. Be careful, it’s a bit old and worn; but you’d be surprised what it’ll stand up to!” In The Frogs, when the two poets are arguing, Aeschylus comments that “No one can say that I have ever put an erotic female into any play of mine.” And Euripides interjects with “How could you? You’ve never even met one!” Visual humour was very strong in his plays. This comes from the animal costumes of the fertility phallic processions that theatre originated from. One example of this is the large ‘stings’ which the jurymen wore in The Wasps. The naked flute girl in the same play would have been funny because everybody would have known the actor was male. The sight of Dionysos in The Frogs would have been funny because he was trying to disguise himself as hero Heracles, but visible is his long feminine nightshirt. The Wasps is also rich in satire in the Trial of the Dog, which helps Aristophanes criticise the jury system, the jurymen and Cleon. The entire trial of the dog stealing cheese scene is a satire of a current Athenian situation, where “the Dog of Cydathenaeum” is Cleon and the dog is Labes. The guilty/ not guilty decision is decided before the entire trial when Philocleon comments “Ha, wait till he hears his sentence!” also, the jury infers guilt from the dog’s look, Philocleon commenting “The filthy scum, look at his furtive look!” Also, in Cleon’s opinion the greater crime is not sharing the stolen cheese. All of this satire of the real jury system in Greece shows the audience how unjust and corrupt the system and Cleon are. These ideas would challenge what audiences at the time thought of their leader and their jury system.
Plautus

Plautus borrowed a lot of his plot line and stories from New Greek comedy playwrights. Although most of his plays are Greek stories, he has incorporated Roman concepts and terms. The New Greek comedy was different from that of Aristophanes- it was more about home life and not about politics and Society as Aristophanes was. Roman people would not have cared to see a play such as The Wasps because it held many issues which did not concern them. Plautus wrote in a lively way, most of his humour being slapstick, but also having puns, irony, visual humour, and funny plot lines. However, he seems to have used slapstick comedy the most. This is because this type of humour was what the audience liked. An example of this in in the play The Swaggering Soldier when the audience is told to watch the movements of Palaestrio very carefully, as the actor is dramatically thinking. Another slightly bawdy example is in the play Casina, a Chalinus (male servant) is disguised as the woman Casina so that Casina will not have to have sex with two older men. The following "I put my hands on a... a... handle. But now that I think about it, she didn't have a sword: that would have been cold... It's so embarrassing!!" This would have been very funny and with humour humiliated the old men that the audience disliked.
However, unlike in the time of Aristophanes, the audience also needed to see violence to capture their attention. This is because violence and bloodshed were the norm of entertainment in Roman society- because of the amphitheatre. To capture audiences and make it popular, Plautus had to bring this violence onto the stage. He involved energetic mimed action and on some occasions real fights.  Violent fight scenes were common in his plays, and so were random acts of violence as a way to solve problems or for no reason, punish others. For example in the play Captiui, a slaveholder brutalizes a young man, who ironically is actually his long lost son. Another man in the same play, Hegio, says that if the slave does not do as he is told, he “shall at once have something to be giving to you.” In the play Casina, the enslaved girl Casina is bribed for sex with presents but these do not work so she is whipped and starved into submission. The violence is a strong content in Plautus’s play because of Roman society’s values at this time.

Shakespeare

Shakespeare wrote many different comedic plays, and used many different comedic devices, such as irony, language play, verbal wit, visual humour, mistaken identity, insults and bawdy humour. Shakespeare’s comedies were mostly light-hearted romantic plays with a happy ending. Shakespeare wrote comedy to entertain and amuse as well as to engage the audience so that he could show important ideas. The comedy was used to involve the audience and make them laugh. Audience laugh often because of the action, words and mistakes of characters. If his plays were not entertaining, then he would go out of business. Elizabethan people wanted to go to the theatre as a sort of escapism, because of the hard working society that they were in. Many of his comedies had fantasy settings or hard to believe story lines- which served as an escape for both the characters and the audience.
One of Shakespeare’s funniest comedies is Midsummers Night’s Dream. One example of humour is what happens between Puck and Bottom. Puck replaces Bottoms head with the head of a donkey (ass) so that the queen of the fairies who is under a spell will fall in love with him. The fact that the character is called Bottom is funny, but Shakespeare also makes Bottom turn into an Ass. Another humorous scene is when Tom Snout becomes a wall for the play and must spread his fingers to symbolize a hole in the wall through which Pyramus and Thisbe must kiss. Pyramus remarks “O kiss me through the hole of this vile wall!” and Thisbe replies “I kiss the wall’s hole, not your lips at all.” This is a mix of bawdy and visual humour.
Mistaken identity and cross dressing is a plot line that Shakespeare often used for comedy. An example is in the plays the Merry Wives of Windsor and Twelfth Night. In the Merry Wives of Windsor the huge beast of a man Falstaff dresses up as the Witch of Brenford and it’s very funny because he is a huge man with a beard and the other characters are laughing at him. In Twelfth Night, the girl Viola dresses up a boy and this causes a lot of confusion and as she is mistaken for her twin Sebastian. That creates a lot of chaos within the play because there are characters that mistake Viola for Sebastian and Sebastian for Viola. The ensuing mix-up is amusing and the audience feels a little superior because we know the real identities of the twins. This is a technique called dramatic irony.
Insults are also something that Shakespeare uses to unite the audience and they often have a slapstick affect. One example is in the play Twelfth Night. When Sir Andrew and Sir Toby Belch are talking about Andrew’s hair which is visually flat and lifeless. Andrew says “but it becomes me well enough, does’t not?” Toby says “Excellent; it hangs like a flax on a distaff; and I hope to see a housewife take thee between her legs and spin it off.” Here, Toby is not only comparing his hair to a woman spinning thread from flax. He is also insulting Toby by saying that he hopes that a woman will take him between her legs and that he contracts Syphilis, an STD which causes hair loss, hence the “spin it off.”
Summary
Many comedic devices have survived since Aristophanes and have continued to make audiences laugh. All playwrights used bawdy humour, visual humour and language wit.
Bawdy humour is evident in all of the playwrights’ work. It would seem that humans over the course of history have found humour in sexually suggestive jokes, no matter the society at the time, and humour found in women’s and men’s sexuality looks to have always appealed to audiences. It did change a little over time, with Roman bawdiness often involving more violent and oppressive situations toward women. This is because of how the society treated women and prostitutes at the time.
Visual humour has also lasted throughout all three playwrights’ work. Theatre is a very visual medium and it seems very natural for the writer to make the actors do funny and comedic things to make the audience laugh. Therefore, Aristophanes used it to appeal to his audience so that they would also take in his messages. Plautus used it so that the audience would find humour in the characters and be entertained. Likewise, Shakespeare used it to amuse his audience and make them remember the play and its themes.
Also all playwrights have used witty language. All audiences seem to have enjoyed this. It is a very entertaining form of humour and makes the audience feel good as they feel they are clever enough to get the joke. It connects the audience to the play and encourages them to listen closely to hear the puns. In listening closely, they listen also to the messages of the plays.
Mistaken identity was something introduced by Plautus and the comedy and confusion created by this was so successful and funny that it became a large part of Shakespeare’s comedies.
Conclusion
As discussed, the comedies of Aristophanes had long lasting impact on the works of Plautus and Shakespeare. Some things have hardly changed, while others have adapted to the society and audience expectations of the time. The theatre, costuming and comedic devices are just three aspects of Aristophanes’s plays which have had significant impacts on the playwrights and theatre which have followed him. It is due to the success and genius of Aristophanes’s works that he has had such a lasting influence. 


Bibliography
“William Shakespeare.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 2016. Web.
“Plautus.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 2016. Web.
Holloway, P. University Bursary and Scholarship Classical Studies, 1999, ESA Publications (NZ) Ltd
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre_of_Dionysus
Славен Косановић, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=11986938
http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/interactive_learning/yr7greecefiles/yr_7_g1.gif
http://www2.springfield.k12.il.us/schools/springfield/eliz/costumes.html
 http://www.shakespearesglobe.com/about-us/history-of-the-globe/original-globe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globe_Theatre
"Plautus." Encyclopedia of World Biography. 2004. Encyclopedia.com. (June 16, 2016).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plautus#Greek_Old_Comedy
Nilsen, D and Nilsen, A.P, Shakespeare’s Humor, Irony, and Language Play Power Point Presentation
Findlay, M. 2005. Roman Social Life. In NCEA Level 2 Classical Studies. 2nd Edition, p299-343. ESA Publications (NZ) Ltd.
 Aristophanes, this translation 1964, revised 2007. Frogs and Other Plays. Penguin Books.
 http://www.messagetoeagle.com/ancient-greek-costumes-masks-and-theater/
 http://www.nthuleen.com/papers/C14paper2.html
 Bryson, B. 2007. Shakespeare. HarperCollins Publishers
 Mulherin, J. and Frost, A. 2004. The Best Loved Plays of Shakespeare. Cherrytree Books.
 Blackledge, A. 2002. DK Eyewitness Shakespeare. Dorling Kindersley Ltd.
 

No comments:

Post a Comment