1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Westkost [7]
3 years ago
10

How did theater change during the days of William Shakespeare and the Globe?

History
1 answer:
Sidana [21]3 years ago
4 0

<u>William Shakespeare </u>still has a profound influence on theater. We can summarize this influence in<u> five big changes</u>: 1. The <em><u>theater was exclusively reserved for the wealthy and the educated</u></em>. With the emergence of his writings, came tales that appealed to the masses. 2. <em><u>His plays were often imbued with universal truths of human existence,</u></em> rather than acting as mirrors of the privileged life. 3. The way in which Shakespeare’s <em><u>plots move forward has helped define modern play-writing.</u></em> 4. A <em><u>new type of storytelling</u></em> in which characters’ choices drive plots forward and as a consequence, journeys in his plays are dynamic. 5. <u>Shakespeare</u> invented <em><u>genres that mixed both tragedy and comedy. </u></em>

You might be interested in
What did many free African Americans do
tester [92]
Fought in the war and became slaves I DONT KNOW IF ITS RIGHT INNOT THAT SMART JUST TO WARN YOU
8 0
4 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Why did the middle colonies have such diverse european population
Andrews [41]
The colonies advertised the middle colonies in Europe to help attract more settlers. People that moved to the middle colonies to escape any type of religious persecutions.
4 0
3 years ago
What kinds of cultural and economic exchanges occur between nations today?
nikitadnepr [17]
Spread of religion and political views
7 0
4 years ago
Which of these is not something soldiers were expected to do when they were not fighting or migrating to another location?
seraphim [82]

<em> A.) Improving Roman infrastructures.</em>

<em>When they were moving to another location Roman soldiers did not have to improve on other Roman infrastructures they came upon along the way, because the building of the infrastructures was not organized by the Roman troops, more so they were organized by an architect and the architect's workers.</em>

<em>The reason I also chose A was because the Roman troops traveled in their groups and whenever they were injured it was up to them to man the camp hospitals to heal the wounded. Also recruiting more soldiers along the way was also very helpful to the Roman legion and allowed a much broader amount of soldiers that could be used for taking over land. Not to mention that soldiers (traveling strictly inside their troops) were responsible for feeding themselves (what I'm saying is that the troops were responsible for cooking and feeding each other I just used "themselves" as the word to describe it).</em>

<em>Since Roman soldiers traveled in groups they did not (I'm assuming here I don't know for sure) take women or other people along with them and they only took the amount of soldiers that were assigned by their higher ups. In other words Roman soldiers were really only expected to do as they were ordered to (in modern times any disobedience to what they were ordered to do would have resulted in them having it put on a disaplinary record, but they did not do that sort of thing during Roman times meaning that they punished the soldiers in ways that I don't factually now about). Basically the key importance in the Roman soldier was to carry out the order he received and complete the order quickly and efficiently. However, they did recruit soldiers along the way as they were instructed and that was to help them benefit for taking over land. The commanding officer was the one who told the Roman soldiers what to do when they were traveling (simple tasks, not the task assigned by the current ruler) and the soldiers were expected to complete it. A few of the tasks assigned by the commanding officer could have been to cook, preform healing measures, and recruit more soldiers.</em>

<em>Hope this helps.</em>

<em>-Northstar</em>

5 0
3 years ago
STRUGGLES IN THE SOUTH (PAGES 160-169)
laiz [17]

Answer:

There were a couple of reasons for moving to the southern colonies. The first would be that they were loosing in the North and wanted to try and pierce the South to get ports and some ground to wage war.

They also believed that many slaves would embrace their liberation and join their cause against their former masters.

If they captured the South ports they could transport troops and equipment a lot quicker and easier from the British West Indies.

And they thought that there were more loyalists in the South and that would mean more domestic manpower for holding the lines.

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What led to the partition of India in 1947?
    7·2 answers
  • In the 1500s, the Catholic Church believed that the Bible should be
    15·2 answers
  • What lead up to the reformation of the roman catholic church?
    15·1 answer
  • Which of the following people was believed to have reached Canada
    9·1 answer
  • Supporters of the atomic bomb argued against the idea that the US should not use the bomb against Japan by.... A) suggesting the
    12·2 answers
  • The Wilmot Proviso called for
    9·2 answers
  • This is worth a lot of points!! It is about Lincoln’s FIRST Inaugural Address. Please help i’ll mark brainliest!
    14·1 answer
  • How did steamboats affect Louisiana’s economy during the antebellum period? Check all that apply.
    13·2 answers
  • The three different plans for reconstruction were Lincoln, Johnson and radical republicans the most used in reconstruction polic
    9·1 answer
  • G
    12·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!