kode adsense disini
Hot Best Seller

Tamburlaine the Great

Availability: Ready to download

Due to the very old age and scarcity of this book, many of the pages may be hard to read due to the blurring of the original text.


Compare
kode adsense disini

Due to the very old age and scarcity of this book, many of the pages may be hard to read due to the blurring of the original text.

30 review for Tamburlaine the Great

  1. 4 out of 5

    Alex

    It's the old rags to riches story, really - real America. An ambitious man, born with no spoon in his mouth, rises to power through sheer brilliant audacity. Spoilers follow: He even manages to marry the daughter of a rival of higher social class, after overcoming that rival. He's domineering, ruthless, abusive. He loves his wife but has no concept of her own desires; he thinks of her as a trophy. She was always ambivalent, and eventually she wastes away and dies. He's enraged:The ceaseless lamp It's the old rags to riches story, really - real America. An ambitious man, born with no spoon in his mouth, rises to power through sheer brilliant audacity. Spoilers follow: He even manages to marry the daughter of a rival of higher social class, after overcoming that rival. He's domineering, ruthless, abusive. He loves his wife but has no concept of her own desires; he thinks of her as a trophy. She was always ambivalent, and eventually she wastes away and dies. He's enraged:The ceaseless lamps That gently looked upon this loathsome earth Shine downwards now no more, but deck the heavens To entertain divine Zenocrate.He has three sons; he disowns one who doesn't share his lust for power. He's the kind of guy who takes his sons hunting and insists they take a bite out of the beating heart of a deer. Here, he cuts his own arm: Come boys and with your fingers search my wound, And in my blood wash all your hands at once, While I sit smiling to behold the sight. Now my boys, what think you of a wound?Just as he's about to reach the apogee of his career, he's struck down by cancer: all this conflict, and chance kills him. And shall I die and this unconquered?This is as American a piece as There Will Be Blood. Brutal, unsparing, and featuring Marlowe's unsubtle mastery of the epic line, it's nasty stuff. Nasty stuff.

  2. 4 out of 5

    AGamarra

    "TAMERLÁN EL GRANDE" de Cristopher Marlowe "¡Guarda tu honor! ¡Pues hace mucho no sabías lo que quería decir!" Estoy muy feliz de haber terminado esta obra que consta de dos partes (la segunda a pedido del público) pues ya puedo decir que he leído todas las tragedias de este gran dramaturgo isabelino. La obra nos narra de una manera sucinta y veloz la historia de Tamerlán, el pastor escita (un pueblo bárbaro), que llegó a convertirse en Rey de Persia y asoló diversas ciudades de África y Asia. Este "TAMERLÁN EL GRANDE" de Cristopher Marlowe "¡Guarda tu honor! ¡Pues hace mucho no sabías lo que quería decir!" Estoy muy feliz de haber terminado esta obra que consta de dos partes (la segunda a pedido del público) pues ya puedo decir que he leído todas las tragedias de este gran dramaturgo isabelino. La obra nos narra de una manera sucinta y veloz la historia de Tamerlán, el pastor escita (un pueblo bárbaro), que llegó a convertirse en Rey de Persia y asoló diversas ciudades de África y Asia. Este ascenso no es de ninguna manera pacífico, Tamerlán es muy despiadado y su ira no tendrá límites, humillando de la peor manera a reyes y sacrificando vidas inocentes. Me gustó mucho por la cantidad de acción que entra en escena en sus distintos espacios geográficos, la pintura, digamos, de la crueldad de este rey y las órdenes militares permanentes hacia sus grandes generales como Terídamas, Téqueles y Usuncasan. La caída y el auge de los imperios a través de las escenas también me gustaron. Un día victorioso otro derrotado, y a pesar de la crueldad y salvajismo de Tamerlaán, Marlowe hace ver el comportamiento de su bando, cómo por más que sea como es, tiene una corte de aduladores, una esposa fiel y unos generales dispuestos a dar su vida por la gloria del reino. A veces las perspectivas individuales pueden engañar. Aunque el estilo no sea el más depurado y algunos parlamentos no sean bien logrados la acción y la intensidad de la historia me hacen valorarla muy bien. Luego de leer a Marlowe tengo otro panorama del teatro isabelino y compruebo que su nivel es tan o superior al neoclásico francés.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Sammy

    "The god of war resigns his room to me, Meaning to make me general of the world." - Tamburlaine (Part One, Act 5, scene 1) Tamburlaine, Tamburlaine, Tamburlaine... It's not hard to see why "Tamburlaine the Great" caused such a stir on its initial performance in the late 16th century. The powerful poetry, the seemingly endless array of battles, the inventive methods of torture and death, the sudden explosions of bilious insults... "Tamburlaine" is an important step in the development of drama, true. "The god of war resigns his room to me, Meaning to make me general of the world." - Tamburlaine (Part One, Act 5, scene 1) Tamburlaine, Tamburlaine, Tamburlaine... It's not hard to see why "Tamburlaine the Great" caused such a stir on its initial performance in the late 16th century. The powerful poetry, the seemingly endless array of battles, the inventive methods of torture and death, the sudden explosions of bilious insults... "Tamburlaine" is an important step in the development of drama, true. However, it's also fair to say that it is by no means a great play, or even a great work of art. "Part One" is by far the superior work, telling the tale of the rise of an usurper who begins to systematically conquer the known world. The creation of Tamburlaine himself is the creation of a great monster, and he's endlessly speechifying, giving us plenty of insight into his character. The development of his concubine-turned-wife Zenocrate is particularly interesting, even if she remains quite an opaque character. There are also plenty of fascinating moments, as various cities and countries fall before the Conqueror. The most affecting moment is the reveal of Tamburlaine's approach to an invasion: first coming in white, to offer a peaceful takeover; then in red, to offer a merciful takeover, in which only the defiers are killed; then in black, to offer a truly take-no-prisoners approach. It's a heartbreaking speech. At the same time, the play is often filled with bathos, particularly in the melodramatic deaths of secondary characters. It's also ponderously long, and it's not hard to imagine any modern production trimming the whole play down to a manageable seventy-minute act. It's not so much the scenes (although there are still a few too many) but the fact that everyone speaks in expansive, page-long speeches filled with literary and mythical references. Of course, Marlowe was a poet first and foremost and this was, to an extent, the state of drama when he began writing (in the years before Shakespeare gained prominence). I have no inherent problem with this, after all, since anyone who has studied theatregoing of the era will understand the differences. Yet it's fair to argue that this is more poetry than theatre and, even then, it's truthfully too lengthy. Many of the speeches - particularly those of Tamburlaine - cover the same ground with only minor variation. As a rather lofty attempt at theatre of gore and pomp, it would've been amazing back in the day. Not so much now. It's influential and in fact fascinating, but certainly is an academic exercise in many ways. That's not to say the power of the language fails; by all accounts, it's wondrous. The opening lines - "From jigging veins of rhyming mother-wits and such conceits as clownage keeps in pay, we'll lead you to the stately tent of war, where you shall hear the Scythian Tamburlaine threat'ning the world with high astounding terms, and scourging kingdoms with his conquering sword." - who can beat that? "Part Two" is much the lesser, clearly a sequel demanded by the original play's popularity. With little left of his historical subject's life, Marlowe is reduced to basically telling four acts of the same thing - people gather together in increasingly-large groups to repel Tamburlaine, and he cuts them down - followed by a final act of Tamburlaine making speeches as he succumbs to illness. The first two acts are probably the most fascinating. Seeing this band of such distinct personages - Christians, Jews and Muslims - banding against Tamburlaine is quite impressive. The very idea of this man literally conquering the world is given its full weight in the pained reactions of this men and women, and it's just a pity that each subsequent act does the same without even variation. The second act is probably the height, centering on Zenocrate's final days. I often wonder why Zenocrate was so popular in the era - as is seen by her prominence in "Part Two"'s prologue - but whatever it was, she clearly affected Marlowe the most, or at least the idea of something much more emotionally immediate than war did. Tamburlaine's elegy is the most powerful passage, and every moment that reflects upon Zenocrate is filled with weight. Indeed, the couple are the only two characters of note in the play. Tamburlaine's sons are not individual characters, but still there is an interesting nascent psychological study there, of the power that this great men has had over these boys and their differing responses to him as leader. Not much can be said of Acts III and IV, which really just repeat the play's premise several times over. Again, it's a great populist display of gore and pomp, and I don't take issue with that: people rise up together and are then cut down by Tamburlaine with his speeches and his armies. It's beautifully poetic, but is largely set up, and at times becomes very silly with an almost comical amount of self-sacrifices. Again, as anyone who has studied the theatre of the era will know, it's perfectly reasonable, but it veers too close to parody too often (although it's harder for us now to get a grasp on the complex mixture of comedy and tragedy that made up the tastes of the day). The height of silliness comes in Act IV, when Olympia - a rather unnecessary side-figure (existing, as my edition's notes suggests, to provide a thematic rather than dramatic unity) - convinces her captor that she is wearing a charm that will make her immortal to wounds, and he should stab her to test it out. It's a charmingly inventive method of suicide, but I'm not buying it. The final act is not really redemptive, sadly. Tamburlaine succumbs to an illness and dies. This does allow him some great musings on the irony of being struck down by a foe he cannot battle (very "War of the Worlds" and a nice ironic touch by Marlowe) but there is no dramatic integrity whatsoever. All other characters and plots are basically forgotten in favour of some final speeches. Even the sons return only to praise. As a play, this would certainly be a trying affair (although, I'm sure, energising at points) but even as literature it is too much for an epic poem and doesn't have the smoothness of most of Shakespeare's plays, which I maintain can be as enjoyably read as watched. All in all, then, this is of course an important moment in drama, and a vital play in Marlowe's small canon. There's considerable development here from "Dido Queen of Carthage", and I'm sure I'm not alone in suggesting that Marlowe's investigation into Tamburlaine and Zenocrate's relationship compelled him to make the more fascinating characters of Barabas and Faustus. Marlowe certainly helped the popular theatre "break free of the pan and do its own thing" as Elaine Benes would say, and he'd reach new heights in his remaining four plays, but he was always a poet first, and that's evident here.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Moira Russell

    Marlowe, if there is an afterlife, and we both wind up in the same place, I'm going to put the hurt on you for having written this. Because I had to read it FOUR HUNDRED YEARS LATER.

  5. 4 out of 5

    David Sarkies

    The Rise and Fall of a Conqueror 16 January 2014 I was going to have a look at both of these plays as a whole, but it appears that both of these plays are in fact a ten act play divided into two parts. This seemed to also be something of a debate with some of Shakespeare's plays, however the ones that are in two, or three, parts (actually, there is only Henry IV in two parts, and Henry VI in three parts, and it could be argued that all of these plays form one continuous play from Richard II to Ri The Rise and Fall of a Conqueror 16 January 2014 I was going to have a look at both of these plays as a whole, but it appears that both of these plays are in fact a ten act play divided into two parts. This seemed to also be something of a debate with some of Shakespeare's plays, however the ones that are in two, or three, parts (actually, there is only Henry IV in two parts, and Henry VI in three parts, and it could be argued that all of these plays form one continuous play from Richard II to Richard III) seem to have their own internal consistency, of which this play seems to lack. In some cases it could be argued that some of the acts are superfluous as it appears that they are simply a bunch of kings making a stand against Tamburlaine, claiming that their army is bigger than his army, and then getting resoundingly defeated by Tamburlaine, and thus starting all over again. However, it could be argued that both of these plays do have an internal consistency, with the first play looking at the rise of Tamburlaine's power, which concludes with him standing on top of his conquests claiming to be prepared to move out and conquer the rest of the world, and part two dealing with his demise, as he becomes more and more caught up in his own sense of pride and self worth that he steps over the line by burning a copy of the Alcoran, and making mockery of the Muslim god by claiming that if he existed, why did he allow Tamburlaine so many victories. The play was based on a real person named Timur, and you can read about him here (on Wikipedia). Timur is probably not one of the best known of the conquers (unlike figures such as Napoleon, Hitler, and Genghis Khan) and that is probably because he did not pose mush of a threat to Europe. In fact his war against Bayezid the Turk, who was attacking the Balkans and other parts of Eastern Europe (though Constantinople was still in the hands of the Byzantines at the time), is probably why Timur is considered a popular figure in European History. The other thing about Timur (or Tamurlaine) was that he was from central Asia and was only attempting to follow in the footsteps of Genghis Kahn (of which he failed, when you consider the extent of Genghis Kahn's territory and Timur's territory). He was also seen as being responsible for basically returning Persia, and much of the Middle East, to the stone age, as well as pretty much wiping out most, if not all, of the Nestorian Church (though you must admit that the American adventures in the Middle East in recent times have also assisted in that task). Anyway, this is a map of Timur's empire: and this is a picture of Timur himself: It is interesting though how certain characters are seen differently under a different light. Here Tamurlaine is being painted in a light that is not all that bad, though we must also remember that Marlowe's version does not necessarily have Timur portrayed in the light of a hero, but rather as a conquerer that inevitably overstepped the natural boundaries, in relation to believing he was better than god. Also note that Marlowe uses the Alcoran as the means of his downfall as opposed to the Bible, despite Islam being considered an alien, and in some cases an enemy, culture to that of the Europeans. While this is a broad generalisation, remember that for a period of around four hundred years Europe were sending troops to the Middle East in an attempt to capture Jerusalem, and while the first couple were, to an extent, successful, they began to wane in popularity and effect as time drew on (probably because most of the capable fighting men had been killed off in the first couple of invasions, and also probably because the inhabitants of the Levant had become more prepared in the face of further crusades). As for the play, and this is the case with many of the plays around this time, the story has been borrowed either from legend or history. Marlowe is doing the same thing that Shakespeare would go on to do with his great tragedies: take a little known character and little known story and turn it into a great play. Notice that it is Hamlet and the Scottish Play that are his most famous, and while they are based upon historical characters and events, they are such minor occurrences that most of us would not realise that these plays have actually been inspired by true stories (in the Hollywood sense of the phrase, of course).

  6. 5 out of 5

    zeynep

    this is straight up nasty and no one does nasty like marlowe <3

  7. 5 out of 5

    Bettie☯

    Duration: 2 hours blurb - A new production of Christopher Marlowe's 16th century play about the growth to tyrannical power of a Scythian shepherd. Tamburlaine is a classic drama said to have changed the course of British drama and to have influenced the young Shakespeare. This is the first in a series of three plays from Radio 3 which portray the ruthlessness and dilemmas of absolute rule. Cast: Tamburlaine ..... Con O'Neill Mycetes, King of Persia ..... Oliver Ford Davis Cosroe ..... Kenneth Cranham Duration: 2 hours blurb - A new production of Christopher Marlowe's 16th century play about the growth to tyrannical power of a Scythian shepherd. Tamburlaine is a classic drama said to have changed the course of British drama and to have influenced the young Shakespeare. This is the first in a series of three plays from Radio 3 which portray the ruthlessness and dilemmas of absolute rule. Cast: Tamburlaine ..... Con O'Neill Mycetes, King of Persia ..... Oliver Ford Davis Cosroe ..... Kenneth Cranham Techelles ..... Shaun Prendergast Theridamas ..... Ewan Bailey Zenocrate ..... Susie Riddell Zabina ..... Noma Dumezweni Bajazeth ..... Danny Sapani Agydas ..... Joseph Kloska Sultan ..... Edward de Souza Usumcasane ..... Don Gilet Ortygius ..... Paul Stonehouse Meander ..... Patrick Brennan Menaphon ..... Bob Blythe King Of Morocco ..... Patrice Naiambana Anippe ..... Stephanie Racine Ebea ..... Eleanor Crooks 2nd Virgin ..... Sarah Thom Bassoe ..... Will Howard Attendant ..... Adam Nagaitis Original music composed and performed by Nicolai Abrahamsen. Director......Peter Kavanagh. From wiki: Tamburlaine the Great is a play in two parts by Christopher Marlowe. It is loosely based on the life of the Central Asian emperor, Timur "the lame". Written in 1587 or 1588, the play is a milestone in Elizabethan public drama; it marks a turning away from the clumsy language and loose plotting of the earlier Tudor dramatists, and a new interest in fresh and vivid language, memorable action, and intellectual complexity. Along with Thomas Kyd's The Spanish Tragedy, it may be considered the first popular success of London's public stage. Timur the Lame (Reign: 1370–1405)envisioned the restoration of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan. Unlike his predecessors Timur was also a devout Muslim and referred to himself as the Sword of Islam. His armies were inclusively multi-ethnic and multicultural. During his lifetime Timur would emerge as the most powerful ruler in the Muslim world after defeating the formidable Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging Ottoman Empire and the declining Sultanate of Delhi; Timur had also decisively defeated the Knights Hospitaler at Smyrna and since then referred to himself as a Ghazi. By the end of his reign Timur had also gained complete suzerainty over all the remnants of the Chagatai Khanate, Ilkhanate, Golden Horde and even the Yuan Khanate. A forensic facial reconstruction of Timur by M. Gerasimov (1941). Gruesome breakfast listening which didn't do much for me, however I will happily add an extra star for the play's place in history

  8. 4 out of 5

    Keith

    It’s hard not to get swept up in the military triumphalism of this heroic epic, particularly Part One. Tamburlaine the shepherd uses his wit and audacious ambition to rise to emperor, smashing the existing order and tearing down the nobility in the process. As with all his plays, Marlowe skirts the border of revolutionary unorthodoxy. A commoner rising up to be king – that was a dangerous theme in days of the tyrannical monarchy. And this play takes glee in the destruction of the nobility and th It’s hard not to get swept up in the military triumphalism of this heroic epic, particularly Part One. Tamburlaine the shepherd uses his wit and audacious ambition to rise to emperor, smashing the existing order and tearing down the nobility in the process. As with all his plays, Marlowe skirts the border of revolutionary unorthodoxy. A commoner rising up to be king – that was a dangerous theme in days of the tyrannical monarchy. And this play takes glee in the destruction of the nobility and the recognition of one for his or her own merits (however cruel and diabolical they are). Part One is one of greatest plays and greatest pieces of literature in the English language. It’s a book I will re-read as long as I live. And the language, although bombastic in places, is beautiful. Marlowe is one of the few authors to compete with Shakespeare in the skill and beauty of his figurative language. “What is beauty, saith my sufferings, then? If all the pens that ever poets held Had fed the feeling of their masters' thoughts, And every sweetness that inspir'd their hearts, Their minds, and muses on admired themes; If all the heavenly quintessence they still From their immortal flowers of poesy, Wherein, as in a mirror, we perceive The highest reaches of a human wit; If these had made one poem's period, And all combin'd in beauty's worthiness, Yet should their hover in their restless heads One thought, one grace, one wonder, at the least, Which into words no virtue can digest.” (Part 1, Act V, Sc. 1) I highly recommend Part One to anyone who enjoys Shakespeare and rich, figurative language. It is a tour de force that is hard to put down.

  9. 5 out of 5

    Nina

    What can describe this book if not the infinite wars, murders and the protagonist's cruelty? From the first act, the figure of Tamerlan is not a good one, although he's a shepard's son, he becomes the most feared man in Europe, Asia and Africa. Given his cruelty, I couldn't believe he was serious about Zenocrate and I was pleasantly surprise to see that he actually cared for her and would even give his life for her. How can such a man love and hate at such intensities? From my point of view, Marl What can describe this book if not the infinite wars, murders and the protagonist's cruelty? From the first act, the figure of Tamerlan is not a good one, although he's a shepard's son, he becomes the most feared man in Europe, Asia and Africa. Given his cruelty, I couldn't believe he was serious about Zenocrate and I was pleasantly surprise to see that he actually cared for her and would even give his life for her. How can such a man love and hate at such intensities? From my point of view, Marlowe created an antithesis in this character and I would have liked it more if it hadn't been so obvious. I would have liked to pull it out from the story. Still, I read the play with curiosity although I was sure about the ending, even though it was strange that he died all of a sudden, exactly after burning the sacred Muslim books and defying the gods. Another odd thing is the fact that as you read the play, his character and personality are more and more contoured. I think (I'm not sure) that only in the second part he considers and describes himself as the Whip of God and although he kills continuously, he believes that he serves a God of Revenge from Heaven. That is a strange combination that puts your mind to work.. All in all, it is a pretty good play, maybe too much axed on killings and cruelty (reminds me of a Romanian short story about a tyrant in which things happen almost in the same way - "Alexandru Lapusneanu" by Costache Negruzzi).

  10. 4 out of 5

    Sasha

    Part 1 was better than part 2, I felt. There are only so many times you can reinforce how great Tamburlaine is before it becomes rather repetitive. This play is different from other war-themed works in that both Tamburlaine's thirst for blood and his violent spirit is indefatigable. In fact, I even find him admirable, the way he will not sideline his honor for Zenocrate's love when she asks him to pity her hometown. His resolve is praise-worthy. In the Iliad, at first, the graphic violence is si Part 1 was better than part 2, I felt. There are only so many times you can reinforce how great Tamburlaine is before it becomes rather repetitive. This play is different from other war-themed works in that both Tamburlaine's thirst for blood and his violent spirit is indefatigable. In fact, I even find him admirable, the way he will not sideline his honor for Zenocrate's love when she asks him to pity her hometown. His resolve is praise-worthy. In the Iliad, at first, the graphic violence is sickening. However, I think I'm becoming immune to it. Thus I wouldn't, for example, cover my eyes at the fact that two characters "brain themselves" on the same page (quite literally: to bang their heads against something until their brains come out). I'm starting to enjoy tragedies and the theme of war. The concept of honor is quite alluring. And now, the thought of romance novels, sickens me.

  11. 4 out of 5

    Hadrian

    Tamburlaine the conqueror. Not much in terms of genuine character development, but with beautiful passages and historical allusions. Violence for its own sake. Probably a piece for a famous actor to take the title role.

  12. 5 out of 5

    Laura

    From BBC Radio 3: Christopher Marlowe's 16th century play about the growth to power of a Scythian shepherd.

  13. 4 out of 5

    Jacqueline Wagenstein

    ТАМЕРЛАН, ИЛИ ГЛЕДНАТА ТОЧКА НА ЗЛОТО Литературата обичайно или предлага утехи срещу злото, или му служи, представяйки го като нещо друго. „Тамерлан Велики” е уникална пиеса с това, че представя злото като зло и въпреки това предлага на зрителя – или читателя – да се идентифицира с него. Тамерлан не предлага никакъв повод, никакво оправдание за своя безмилостен поход към властта; не си избира малък народец, който уж да освобождава, не тръгва да насажда по-справедлив ред (ни равенство, ни демокрац ТАМЕРЛАН, ИЛИ ГЛЕДНАТА ТОЧКА НА ЗЛОТО Литературата обичайно или предлага утехи срещу злото, или му служи, представяйки го като нещо друго. „Тамерлан Велики” е уникална пиеса с това, че представя злото като зло и въпреки това предлага на зрителя – или читателя – да се идентифицира с него. Тамерлан не предлага никакъв повод, никакво оправдание за своя безмилостен поход към властта; не си избира малък народец, който уж да освобождава, не тръгва да насажда по-справедлив ред (ни равенство, ни демокрация), дори няма зад себе си ясен бог, който да го помазва и да го прави носител на някаква, права или иначе, вяра. Иначе казано: Тамерлан е безхитростно откровен в основанията на своята агресия – на него просто му се ще да властва. „То и аз”, казва простодушно бившият пастир, когато негов военачалник коментира, че би искал да е цар. И в това е страшна и притегателна тази пиеса – в това, че показва злото като ненуждаещо се от основания, нетърсещо мимикрия, за да успее. Огромна част от съществуващата литература – криминалната, да кажем – показва злото като представящо се за добро; достатъчно е да го разобличим, сякаш, и то ще изчезне. В други сюжети пък има наказание свише – възходът на злото е предизвикателство към боговете, което задължително бива санкционирано. Не и при Тамерлан. Още в самото начало на пиесата Тамерлан заявява съвсем ясно, че не приема сделката „доброта срещу отвъдност”. Че не му трябват богове, защото е избрал земното царство пред небесното. Независимо дали самият Марлоу е атеист – а по въпроса има много спорове, - неговият Тамерлан безспорно е такъв; харесва му да го наричат „бич божи” и от време на време да цитира Зевс, но всъщност не вярва в никакви свръхестествени сили, още по-малко пък в такива, които биха казали „Не убивай”. Поразително скоро след средновековните „моралитета” на сцената излиза герой, който няма морал и не бива наказан за това. Напротив, неговата философия на личната изгода привлича другите в една пирамида на властта, която набъбва от алчността или страха на онези, които среща по пътя си. Много епоси възправят срещу злото храбростта, достойнството, човечността. Боя се, че в „Тамерлан Велики” това са епизодични герои, до един постигнати от зрелищна смърт. Императорът на Персия, Микет, в чиято уста Марлоу слага репликата „Проклет да е създалият войната”, е описван като комичен глупак (и убит). Храбрият военачалник на Вавилон, който твърди, че бил запушил сам със своето тяло пробива на крепостните стени, бива провесен с главата надолу от тях и надупчен от стрели. И така нататък. Утехите на литературата, предполагаща добродетелта да надделее, не се предлагат тук. Шокиран ли е бил елизабетинският зрител? Явно не, защото пиесата е била изключително популярна. Каквото и да говорим за „ренесансовия човек”, той очевидно е обичал кръвта и не се е гнусял от нея; нито пък я е смятал за зрелище, несъвместимо с изкуството. Всъщност, едно от условията една елизабетинска трагедия да се хареса било в нея да има повечко убийства и те да се случват пред публиката – така е у Томас Кид, да речем, но и Шекспир не пропуска да осее сцената с тела, дори в „Хамлет”. При това историческият Тамерлан е живял по-малко от два века преди Марлоу и по един парадоксален начин Западна Европа извлича полза от неговите зверства – като отвлича вниманието на султан Баязид, той възпира хода на Османската империя на запад. Тоест, той се е явил ненадеен съюзник. И това личи в пиесата; личи, че зрителят е готов да се отъждестви, ако не със самия „бич божи”, то с онези, които са се наредили зад него, за да чакат изгода. Дали това носи срам? В сравнение с масовото поставяне на Шекспир, който ни кара да се чувстваме остроумни и дълбоки, и сложни същества, Марлоу днес се поставя извънредно рядко; а при един от последните случаи е бил цензуриран (в частта с изгарянето на Корана). Жалко, би си струвало човек да отиде, за да види реакциите на зрителите, а и своите собствени. С превода на Евгения Панчева тази смущаваща пиеса на втория голям елизабетински драматург вече съществува на български. Струва ми се, че има и режисьори, които достатъчно се интересуват от магнетизма на насилието. А мисленето на Тамерлан, с цялата си несложност, е навсякъде. И в историческите въплъщения на злото от по-ново време (съществуват паралели, както очаквате, с Хитлер), и в масовата нагласа на съвременния човек, че това, към което си струва да се стреми, е собственият успех тук, на земята, а моралът е за глупавите. Че волята да властваш над другите няма нужда от основания – в произхода, в качествата, в мотивите. В Узбекистан историческият Тамерлан, избивал цели градове, издигнал 28 кули от по 1500 отсечени глави всяка, е национален герой. Негов паметник е издигнат на постамента на някогашен паметник на Маркс. Зорница Христова, Култура - Брой 34 (2652), 14 октомври 2011

  14. 4 out of 5

    Peter Heavenheld

    Nature, that fram'd us of four elements Warring within our breasts for regiment, Doth teach us all to have aspiring minds: Our souls, whose faculties can comprehend The wondrous architecture of the world, And measure every wandering planet's course, Still climbing after knowledge infinite, And always moving as the restless spheres, Will us to wear ourselves, and never rest, Act II Sc 5 Tamburlaine, a commoner, starts out by winning skirmishes against the King of Persia, then goes on to greater and greate Nature, that fram'd us of four elements Warring within our breasts for regiment, Doth teach us all to have aspiring minds: Our souls, whose faculties can comprehend The wondrous architecture of the world, And measure every wandering planet's course, Still climbing after knowledge infinite, And always moving as the restless spheres, Will us to wear ourselves, and never rest, Act II Sc 5 Tamburlaine, a commoner, starts out by winning skirmishes against the King of Persia, then goes on to greater and greater conquests in his Mongol-Middle Eastern homeland. He seems invincible and comes to imagine himself a god. Along the way, he besieges cities, destroys armies (though always off-stage) and marries an Egyptian pharaoh’s daughter. The heroic magnificence of Tamburlaine's greatness is superb. Part I is very good (though a tragic end is yet to come), but Part II disintegrates into pointless martial speeches and sieges (the father-sons relationship is nonetheless well-handled). The end is rather unheroic and undramatic. Highlights: brilliant poetry throughout, richer mythical allusions than even Shakespeare, good characterisations, but alas little character development (we must remember how young Marlowe was when he wrote this, his best was yet to come). On the less impressive side, every personage is prone to grand, bombastic outbursts, and at the end Tamburlaine is still just a killing machine, there is no essence to him, no motivation to his ambition, it just feeds on its own success.

  15. 4 out of 5

    H

    This strikes me as curiously indulgent popular theater. An awful, bombastic hero who meets no just end. Presented by Marlowe with an admirable subtlety. The sympathies we feel for Tamburlaine can be compared to those we feel for Richard III. This laid the groundwork for dramatic blank verse. I enjoyed the technique of having Zenocrate & Zabina (queens of opposing sides) bickering on stage to mark a battle's passage of time. Bajazeth's and Zabina's suicides surprised me. Zabina's mad reeling f This strikes me as curiously indulgent popular theater. An awful, bombastic hero who meets no just end. Presented by Marlowe with an admirable subtlety. The sympathies we feel for Tamburlaine can be compared to those we feel for Richard III. This laid the groundwork for dramatic blank verse. I enjoyed the technique of having Zenocrate & Zabina (queens of opposing sides) bickering on stage to mark a battle's passage of time. Bajazeth's and Zabina's suicides surprised me. Zabina's mad reeling from verse into prose works to great effect. ZENOCRATE: Earth cast up fountains from thy entrails, And wet thy cheeks for their untimely deaths: Shake with their weight in sign of fear and grief...

  16. 4 out of 5

    Davide Nole

    OH! Finalmente Marlowe! Allora: le due parti di questa sorta di dramma storico/tragedia/NonSoComeSiaConsiderato fanno a pugni con quanto letto prima dell'autore. Si distaccano tanto da Didone (che ricordo ho trovato oscena) ma anche dal Faust (che trovo molto bello), sia per linguaggio che per temi trattati. Per quanto mi aspettassi una sorta di polpettone storico con lo spessore di un foglio di carta, atto solo a far emozionare gli spettatori dell'epoca, ho scoperto un dramma ricco di sfaccettatu OH! Finalmente Marlowe! Allora: le due parti di questa sorta di dramma storico/tragedia/NonSoComeSiaConsiderato fanno a pugni con quanto letto prima dell'autore. Si distaccano tanto da Didone (che ricordo ho trovato oscena) ma anche dal Faust (che trovo molto bello), sia per linguaggio che per temi trattati. Per quanto mi aspettassi una sorta di polpettone storico con lo spessore di un foglio di carta, atto solo a far emozionare gli spettatori dell'epoca, ho scoperto un dramma ricco di sfaccettature e di aperture verso i nuovi (all'epoca) orizzonti che il teatro avrebbe preso. Oltre alla profondita`, non mancano colpi di scena alla "OMIODIO" che non fanno mai male quando si parla di politica mongola...

  17. 4 out of 5

    Mike Jensen

    Do not even consider using this cheap edition of Marlowe’s great play. Marlowe experts do not need it, and Marlowe students need far more in the way of an introduction, glosses, textual apparatus, and other notes. It has the “mighty line”s, but it lacks everything that helps people understand Marlowe 400 years after he wrote. Use the Revels or New Mermaid instead. This edition is fine if you already understand Marlowe and need something for an airplane that you can discard when you reach your de Do not even consider using this cheap edition of Marlowe’s great play. Marlowe experts do not need it, and Marlowe students need far more in the way of an introduction, glosses, textual apparatus, and other notes. It has the “mighty line”s, but it lacks everything that helps people understand Marlowe 400 years after he wrote. Use the Revels or New Mermaid instead. This edition is fine if you already understand Marlowe and need something for an airplane that you can discard when you reach your destination.

  18. 4 out of 5

    David

    Really that should be 4 1/2 stars. I give it five because of the language which I love and often find exhilarating. Yet I cannot help wondering why such language has been lavished upon an egotistical schweinhund about whom I care no more at the end than at the beginning. Read it especially for the language.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Emily

    A bold (and unapologetically so) play which breaks the rules, and subverts its audience's expectations. Its been said that you can sense the confidence of Marlowe in its characters and speeches, and I definitely agree. A limit-stretching, wild play with some brilliant lines.

  20. 4 out of 5

    Erin

    And then she brains herself. Best stage direction ever.

  21. 5 out of 5

    Charles

    I just love this play. Like 'Doctor Faustus', Tamburlaine is essentially a 'one-man play'. However, while it lacks the subtle characterization that made Shakespeare so great, Tamb. is an exceptional 'de Casibus' Tragedy that will delight all those who give 'Marlowe's Mighty Line' the attention it deserves. Let there be no mistake about it, Tamb. is pride personified. The scourge of the gods and the terror of the world, as he terms himself, abides by a strict code of war ethics and lets nothing s I just love this play. Like 'Doctor Faustus', Tamburlaine is essentially a 'one-man play'. However, while it lacks the subtle characterization that made Shakespeare so great, Tamb. is an exceptional 'de Casibus' Tragedy that will delight all those who give 'Marlowe's Mighty Line' the attention it deserves. Let there be no mistake about it, Tamb. is pride personified. The scourge of the gods and the terror of the world, as he terms himself, abides by a strict code of war ethics and lets nothing stand in his way of his conquests. Part One concerns both his martial conquests and his 'conquest' of Zenocrate. Although in the beginning the reader is not sure whether Tamb. sees Zen. as just another prize or as his eternal love, their mutual feelings for each other are made obvious (even though their physical beauty did them a lot of merit). Tamb.'s looks make a city surrender, while Zen.'s makes the heavens envy her. Part One is also concerned with the weak monarchy of Mycetes. Cosroe betrayed his brother Mycetes but Tamb. betrayed Cosroe. All is fair in love and war, after all. No brief summary can do this play any justice though, and I'll leave it at that. What is important to note is that in the tradition of any 'de Casibus tragedy', Marlowe explores not just the historical figure and his exploits (that is Tamir, Tamburlaine in this play, who was responsible for the death of 5% of the whole world) but also his moral virtues. It is true that Tamb. did win a "fatal victory" (as Zen. terms the triumphs of war) over "the High and Highest Monarch of the World" that is Bajazeth and his obese empress wife, Zabina. However, his cruel and perverse treatment of them was a fate worse than death. It was such a humiliating experience for them that they committed a most bloody suicide. Zen. curses her "wretched eyes" when she sees them dead. Even though Bajazeth was not particularly amiable, nonetheless his love for his wife, and equally his wife's love for him, did humanize their characters. It makes the reader notice that Bajazeth's love for his wife, and both their desire to remain together even after death parts them, was much more real and much more gratifying than the love one 'experiences' with a random Turkish concubine. The same goes for Tamb.'s unmerciful and symbolical killings of the Damascus virgins. The fifth act is in fact termed as one of the most complex in Elizabethan drama, and I agree wholeheartedly. Even in such a case, where one is predisposed to loathe Tamb., Marlowe give Tamb.'s pride some tragic structure. The attentive reader will notice that it was the Governor of Damascus who really was responsible. He (the governor) knew all too well Tamb. strict adherence to the code of war (being unmerciful especially to the besieged) but he still sent them anyway. By technicality, Tamb. was faultless, he did what any respectful conqueror had to do. However, that is not what the reader thinks and this is what is important. The reader condemns Tamb., and Marlowe is aware of this this. What Marlowe does, most brilliantly in my opinion, is to make Tamb. unaware of his 'immorality' (if we disregard the war code), Tamb. is happy that he had won, and thinks that only Jove's throne remains for him to conquer. Tamb. is oblivious to the grief that Zen., and the reader, felt for the besieged, the virgins of Damascus and Bajazeth and Zabina's suicide. All of these presented to Zen. 'A thousand sorrows to her martyred soul'. Tamb. thinks of Zen. as his muse who 'adds more courage to his conquering mind'. In my opinion, Part 2 is equally as sublime as Part One. Many dimensions to Tamb.'s character are explored, including his treatment of his three sons. The death of "That effeminate brat" (Tamb.'s words not mine) Calyphas by his own father is a reminder that Tamb. abides by his war code no matter what. I do not wish to explain Part Two more than I have to, but the burning of the Alcoran by Tamb., and the illnes that quickly plagued him, is Marlowe's own way of bringing justice to the unmerciful tyrant. Even in death, Tamb. was still obsessed over what he might conquer; "And shall I die and this unconquered?". The question remains whether or not, despite his immorality, Tamb. was a bad person as he was only doing his duty as conqueror. My Opinion? Well, I think that ,like Doctor Faustus, Tamb. was overwhelmed by ambition and he tested fortune too much for comfort. He once wisely advised his son Amyras not to test fortune, but that is what exactly what Tamb. did when he burned the alcoran. Tamb. went one step too far, though it was not the burning of the alcoran that really matters (as I think Marlowe would have said). 'Tamburlaine' is a unique play that managed to entertain its sixteenth century audience without a heavy reliance on theatrical effects (indeed, even the admiring Marlowe critic Swinburne said that it is 'monotonous', saved only by its sublime poetical verse). I can proudly and admiringly say that it is still engaging more than 400 years afterwards. It is not only a scholarly delight ,for it is a very 'structured' play, but also an entertaining piece of poetry in its own right.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Tünde Ecem Kutlu

    what's better than a charismatic anti-hero? a historically accurate anti-hero.

  23. 5 out of 5

    Can Eryürek

    bir çok tarihi ve coğrafi hata barındırıyor...Ama henüz 16 yaşındayken yazdığını düşünürsek fena değildi...

  24. 4 out of 5

    Jay Shelat

    Excellent and bloody.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Nicholas Whyte

    http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2715075.html This is usually discussed as a single play in two parts, and I guess I agree with that, though it is notable that the two parts are set at least twenty years apart - the first ends with Tamburlaine marrying Zenocrate, by the start of the second they have three grown-up sons. I felt it had a tremendous energy; lots of violence and horrible death, a portrait of a monstrous leader who in the end is defeated not by battle but by illness. It's deliberately ov http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/2715075.html This is usually discussed as a single play in two parts, and I guess I agree with that, though it is notable that the two parts are set at least twenty years apart - the first ends with Tamburlaine marrying Zenocrate, by the start of the second they have three grown-up sons. I felt it had a tremendous energy; lots of violence and horrible death, a portrait of a monstrous leader who in the end is defeated not by battle but by illness. It's deliberately over the top, I think, and Shakespeare makes fun of the line "Holla ye pampered jades of Asia!" addressed by Tamburlaine to two captive kings harnessed to his chariot (in Henry IV part 2 II.iv). A lot of commentators try to read Marlowe's own views into Tamburlaine, in particular extrapolating his supposed atheism from the scene in Part Two where Tamburlaine burns the Koran. It seemed pretty clear to me that this scene is about Tamburlaine breaking faith with his own former religion, just as he has broken faith with the Christian rulers in the first act and with his insufficiently violent son Calyphas, and we should not mistake the views and actions of the character for those of the author. That's not to say that Marlowe was not an atheist, just that I don't find this scene convincing evidence that he was (whereas I do find the opening scene of Dido convincing evidence that he was very comfortable with man-boy love). I'm perfectly satisfied with Tamburlaine as a new form of entertainment rather than a political statement. This was apparently the first attempt to do an epic in blank verse; there's also vast amounts of conflict and spectacle - defeated opponents killed in various gory ways, Tamburlaine himself as a dominant character and aspirant force of nature, attempting to shape the world to his own liking and ultimately defeated not by Man but by entropy. It made Edward Alleyn's reputation when first produced. (It didn't make William Shatner's reputation, though he appeared in a Broadway production in 1956 as Tamburlaine's hanger-on Usumcasane.) I've long been fascinated by the real Timur, and hope that some day I will be able to visit his tomb in Samarkand. Needless to say, Marlowe's narrative bears only the vaguest resemblance to the real history of his subject. Unlike Dido, where I think there's a didactic point about taking the Æneid and adding to it rather than varying, the point here is invention rather than history.

  26. 4 out of 5

    Мартин Касабов

    Как е възможно чак сега да разбирам за това издание на Марлоу? Кажете ми, къде съм гледал, че съм го пропускал цели две години. След като прочетох "Едуард II" и дори ви разказах за него, е време да продължим с тази по-ранна и по-екзотична творба на големия английски драматург, творил по времето на Шекспир. "Тамерлан Велики" разказва историята на легендарния Тимур-Ленк, който от скитски пастир се възкача до императорския трон на Изтока. Чрез множество предателства, съюзи и друг вид дипломация, цар Как е възможно чак сега да разбирам за това издание на Марлоу? Кажете ми, къде съм гледал, че съм го пропускал цели две години. След като прочетох "Едуард II" и дори ви разказах за него, е време да продължим с тази по-ранна и по-екзотична творба на големия английски драматург, творил по времето на Шекспир. "Тамерлан Велики" разказва историята на легендарния Тимур-Ленк, който от скитски пастир се възкача до императорския трон на Изтока. Чрез множество предателства, съюзи и друг вид дипломация, царете в пиесата се опитват да се докопат до властта или се борят за оцеляването си, бягащи пред изпепеляващия поглед на Тамерлан. Главният персонаж е тласкан от жаждата си за власт и пренебрегвайки каквито и да са молби, е описан като безразличен към човешкото страдание. Истината е, че колкото повече чета Марлоу, толкова повече осъзнавам колко по-добър е Шекспир. А тези, които говорят, че са били една и съща личност вече знам със сигурност, че не знаят какво говорят. Героите на Марлоу не са толкова човечни, не са разкъсвани от трудни дилеми и драматичните обстоятелства просто ги тласкат напред. Всеки следва пътя си, продиктуван от перото на автора, като мотивацията им е доста повърхностна и няма с какво толкова да ви трогне. Тамерлан просто по едно време решава, че трябва да е глупак да не посегне към трона на Персия. След това той просто продължава да завзема чужди земи, а враговете му се обединяват. Единственият по-интересен персонаж е жана му, която в един момент е поставена в трудната позиция да избира между нови си мъж и баща си и предишния си годеник, които влизат в битка с Тамерлан. Не случайно едни от най-добрите стихове в пиесата са написани за нея: "И тъй горят ненавистните кули и пламъкът им стига небесата и пали издихания безброй, горящи метеори, що предричат смърт и разруха на града проклет! А над зените ми блести звезда, по-трайна и от свършека небесен, подхранвана от земните останки, и крах и глад на този град вещае! О, дракони, светкавици и гръм, полята опърлете, да чернеят, тъй като оня остров, обграден от Лета, Стикс и Флегетон, където са притаени злобните фурии, защото си отиде Зенократа." Цялата рецензия: http://izumen.blogspot.com/2014/01/bl...

  27. 5 out of 5

    Libby

    How could someone NOT love a play called “Tamburlaine the Great, Who, from a Scythian Shephearde by his rare and woonderfull Conquestf, became a most puiffant and mightye Monarque, And (for his tyranny, and terrour in Warre) waf tearmed, The Scourge of God?” Well, I suppose it is possible. I certainly enjoyed "Dr. Faustus" more. I would blame the editors for some of the oddness, given that a great deal of the play's "lesser" comedic scene have been cut. In spite of this, "Tamburlaine" has much t How could someone NOT love a play called “Tamburlaine the Great, Who, from a Scythian Shephearde by his rare and woonderfull Conquestf, became a most puiffant and mightye Monarque, And (for his tyranny, and terrour in Warre) waf tearmed, The Scourge of God?” Well, I suppose it is possible. I certainly enjoyed "Dr. Faustus" more. I would blame the editors for some of the oddness, given that a great deal of the play's "lesser" comedic scene have been cut. In spite of this, "Tamburlaine" has much to recommend it. By the time Shakespeare was writing his greatest plays, Christopher Marlowe, who penned “Tamburlaine” circa 1587, was very much out of style. However, the influence of Marlowe’s Middle Eastern-flavored historical drama is undeniable on Elizabethan playwrights, from his use of blank verse to powerful and dramatic effect, to his characters’ bold passions and ambitions. Tamburlaine’s triumph in the first half of the play and his hubris and his fall in the latter half are clear precursors to Shakespeare’s histories and tragedies, for all that "Tamburlaine" has more in common with Kyd's "Spanish Tragedy" and Shakespeare's "Titus Andronicus," given the huge body count, including two characters that brain themselves against a giant cage. While “Tamburlaine” is, in my opinion, not as much fun to read as, say “Henry IV,” its language is beautiful, Marlowe's exploration of virtue and barbarism is fascinating, and it’s well worth reading for those who are interested in the origin of tropes used by so many Elizabethan playwrights. For the leisurely summer reader, not so much.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Слави Ганев

    Тамерлан Велики на Кристофър Марлоу не беше лошо четиво... добре, де, беше труден за четене. Не, не беше изпълнен с философски разсъждения, които да те хвърлят в меланхолични чувства, мъка или неразбираемо написана. Просто беше прекалено накъсана в действие. Книгата съдържа две драми на вече познатия от друг мой постинг творец - двете части на Тамерлан Вилики, които разказват за живота и смъртта на големия завоевател от монголски произход. Бягам от истинския проблем. Той е преводът. Не знам дали Тамерлан Велики на Кристофър Марлоу не беше лошо четиво... добре, де, беше труден за четене. Не, не беше изпълнен с философски разсъждения, които да те хвърлят в меланхолични чувства, мъка или неразбираемо написана. Просто беше прекалено накъсана в действие. Книгата съдържа две драми на вече познатия от друг мой постинг творец - двете части на Тамерлан Вилики, които разказват за живота и смъртта на големия завоевател от монголски произход. Бягам от истинския проблем. Той е преводът. Не знам дали е правен на бързо. Но е някакво кабинетно творение, в което лириката почти изцяло отсъства. Някъде са подбрани възможно най-чепатите думи. Дори да мислите не виждам как ще успеете да ги докарате такива. Вярно е и, че в английската версия има такива, но... Не ми се влиза в детайли, но ако четете паралелно на английски и на български, както направих аз, ще видите, че някъде преводът е твърде буквален, а другаде - прекалено откъснат от истинските слова на героите. Не е пресъздадено най-важното качество на Марлоувите творби - белият стих е скован и монотонен, а не звучи естествено, макар че трябва да е така. Прочетете "Доктор Фауст" в превод на проф. Александър Шурбанов в "Театър на английския ренесанс", Народна култура, С., 1975 г. и ще видите огромната разлика. Бях подготвил и избрани цитати, но нека не прекалявам. Към такива творби трябва да се подходи с внимание и търпение. Ще напиша един ден нещо за "богоборчеството" в творчеството на барда.

  29. 4 out of 5

    Carol Arce

    Christopher Marlowe must have been the Quentin Tarantino of the Elizabethan stage. His Tamburlaine the Great, loosely based on the Central Asian Emperor Timur d. 1405, sets out to conquer the world and brutalizes his opponents with such cruel, unusual and inhumane tortures that one of them bashes his own brains out rather than continue to be tortured and humiliated by Tamburlaine. Tamburlaine murders his own son for refusing to fight alongside his bloody father. No king or army can stop Tamburla Christopher Marlowe must have been the Quentin Tarantino of the Elizabethan stage. His Tamburlaine the Great, loosely based on the Central Asian Emperor Timur d. 1405, sets out to conquer the world and brutalizes his opponents with such cruel, unusual and inhumane tortures that one of them bashes his own brains out rather than continue to be tortured and humiliated by Tamburlaine. Tamburlaine murders his own son for refusing to fight alongside his bloody father. No king or army can stop Tamburlaine who mocks their gods and burns the Koran because he believes he is a god. Then suddenly Tamburlaine discovers that he is mortal as he falls sick and dies. His great lament is that so much of the world is left unconquered. Though I found little to enjoy in this play, it is of historical significance. It is considered to be the first popular success of London's public stage and subsequent plays would imitate it stylistically with tightly constructed plots, vivid language and memorable action.

  30. 5 out of 5

    V

    A few people on this site have mentioned they thought the first play was superior. I disagree. I thought the second play not only saw an improvement on language, but had a very interesting religious conflicts. In the beginning of the play, a nation of Christians and a nation of Muslims form a peace agreement, the Christians swearing by Christ and God, and the Muslims by the Prophet and the Koran. But soon, the Christians agree that the Muslims are untrustworthy pagans and violent heathens and la A few people on this site have mentioned they thought the first play was superior. I disagree. I thought the second play not only saw an improvement on language, but had a very interesting religious conflicts. In the beginning of the play, a nation of Christians and a nation of Muslims form a peace agreement, the Christians swearing by Christ and God, and the Muslims by the Prophet and the Koran. But soon, the Christians agree that the Muslims are untrustworthy pagans and violent heathens and launch a preemptive attack. The Muslims take this as evidence that Christ cannot be divine, as the Christians say, if his followers so easily go back on their word. It all seems like it could be ripped from today’s headlines! Marlowe was clearly no fan of religion, but the most amoral characters in the story are those who make gods of men. This play also has the most realistic ending of any tragedy I ever read. (view spoiler)[Instead of being defeated and/or succeeded by a more moral man, thus restoring the social order as in Shakespeare's plays, Tamburlaine dies of a natural disease and is succeeded by his sons who are as bloodthirsty as he. (hide spoiler)] I'd give it three stars for part one, and five stars for part two, so I'll average out to a four.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.