James Schiffer

Can't review, since I'm among its authors. My contribution concerns material and ritual Renaissance culture in the play, "'What he wills': Early Modern Rings and Vows in TN." I start with the fact that Renaissance rings did not distinguish, physically, between engagement and marriage. One marriage ring in Italy bears a helmet. Diamonds became standard really after DeBeers' expansion in the late 19C, and gems only in the 18C, often from India. Moreover, the Church courts (or "Bawdy Courts") of Shakespeare's day did distinguish between a contracted marriage (with a clear present tense verb, not the ambiguous, "I will"--I meaning I so will it, but suggesting future tense) and an agreement to marry. And a ring did not suffice; it depended entirely upon what was said during the ring exchange. No witness was required if both parties agreed, but... The case would not be in court then, would it.
So witnesses were required, who often could not testify to the tense of the verb: that's why we have the verb "do" in answer to "WILT thou John have this lady Judy to be thy wife?"
I think Prof Schiffer has done a thorough job of researching previous scholarship and placing
our essays in historic and critical context. This should stead him well in his function as the editor
of the variorum Twelfth Night.… (mais)