Select Search
World Factbook
Roget's Int'l Thesaurus
Bartlett's Quotations
Respectfully Quoted
Fowler's King's English
Strunk's Style
Mencken's Language
Cambridge History
The King James Bible
Oxford Shakespeare
Gray's Anatomy
Farmer's Cookbook
Post's Etiquette
Brewer's Phrase & Fable
Bulfinch's Mythology
Frazer's Golden Bough
All Verse
Anthologies
Dickinson, E.
Eliot, T.S.
Frost, R.
Hopkins, G.M.
Keats, J.
Lawrence, D.H.
Masters, E.L.
Sandburg, C.
Sassoon, S.
Whitman, W.
Wordsworth, W.
Yeats, W.B.
All Nonfiction
Harvard Classics
American Essays
Einstein's Relativity
Grant, U.S.
Roosevelt, T.
Wells's History
Presidential Inaugurals
All Fiction
Shelf of Fiction
Ghost Stories
Short Stories
Shaw, G.B.
Stein, G.
Stevenson, R.L.
Wells, H.G.
Reference
>
Cambridge History
>
The Drama to 1642, Part One
>
Plays of Uncertain Authorship Attributed to Shakespeare
> Classification of extant Plays
Locrine:
points of resemblance to
The Spanish Tragedie
CONTENTS
·
VOLUME CONTENTS
·
INDEX OF ALL CHAPTERS
·
BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD
The Cambridge History of English and American Literature in 18 Volumes
(190721).
Volume V. The Drama to 1642, Part One.
X.
Plays of Uncertain Authorship Attributed to Shakespeare
.
§ 1. Classification of extant Plays.
THE foundations of the Shakespearean apocrypha were laid while the dramatist was still alive, when a number of plays, in the composition of most of which he could have had no hand, were entered upon the Stationers register as his, or were published with his name or initials on the title-page. Against the laying of these foundations Shakespeare, so far as we know, raised no protest. In any case, it is upon them that the ascriptions of publishers and others in the generation that followed his death, and the theories advanced by students of the Elizabethan drama during the last two centuries, have built up a superstructure so massive that the total of the plays of more or less uncertain authorship attributed to Shakespeare already equals in quantity that of the accepted canon.
1
Disregarding those playssix in allwhich were claimed by their publishers as Shakespeares, but which have since been lost, we may attempt the following classification. First, plays which were published during Shakespeares lifetime with his name, or initials, upon the title-page:
Locrine
(published in 1595);
The first part of the life of Sir John Oldcastle
(1600);
The whole life and death of Thomas Lord Cromwell
(1602);
The London Prodigall
(1605);
The Puritane
(1607);
A Yorkshire Tragedy
(1608);
Pericles
(1609). Two of these plays do not concern us here:
Sir John Oldcastle, part I,
has been assigned, on the evidence of an entry in Henslowes diary, to the joint authorship of Munday, Drayton, Wilson and Hathwaye; and certain parts of
Pericles
have been almost universally recognised as the work of Shakespeare.
2
A second class comprises three plays which were published after Shakespeares death with his name, as sole or joint author, upon the title-page:
The Troublesome Raigne of John, King of England
(published as Shakespeares in 1622, after having been issued anonymously in 1591);
The Two Noble Kinsmen
(published as the work of Fletcher and Shakespeare in 1634); and
The Birth of Merlin
(written by William Shakespear and William Rowley, 1662).
3
Again, three plays have been attributed to him on the very slender evidence that they were discovered bound up together in a volume in Charles IIs library, labelled Shakespeare, vol.
I.
These are
Mucedorus
(first published, anonymously, in 1598);
The Merry Devill of Edmonton
(1608); and
Faire Em
(1631).
1
None of these was included in the third folio edition of Shakespeares works, which appeared in 1664, and which added to the thirty-six plays of the first folio the seven plays first mentioned above.
4
The last class of plays of uncertain authorship attributed to Shakespeare will comprise those which have been assigned to him since the beginning of the eighteenth century on the basis of internal evidence. The number of plays which could be brought under this heading is very large, but only three of them
Edward III, Arden of Feversham
and
Sir Thomas More
can be included here. Two other plays
The First Part of the Contention
and
The True Tragedie of Richard, Duke of Yorke
also fall into this division; but these, like
The Troublesome Raigne of John, King of England
mentioned above, have been treated in a preceding chapter.
2
5
In considering the question of Shakespeares share in any of the above plays, it is unfortunate that our main evidence has to be sought in the plays themselves. The appearance of his name on the Stationers register, or on the title-page of a play, is of interest as showing the extent of his popularity with the reading public of his time, but is no evidence whatever that the play is his. On the other hand, it is uncritical to reject a play as Shakespeares solely because it does not find a place in the first folio of 1623. Valuable as that edition is as a standard of authenticity, it does not include
Pericles,
portions of which are almost unanimously claimed for Shakespeare, while it includes
The First Part of Henry VI,
portions of which are just as unanimously believed not to be his. There remains, therefore, the evidence furnished by the plays themselvesevidence which, for the most part, consists in the resemblance which these plays bear, in respect of diction and metre, characterisation and plot construction, to the accepted works of Shakespeare. Such evidence, confessedly, is unsatisfactory and leaves the whole question under the undisputed sway of that fickle jade, Opinion.
6
But the question of Shakespearean authorship is not the only point of interest presented by the doubtful plays. So varied in character are the works which go to form the Shakespearean apocrypha, that they may fairly be said to furnish us with an epitome of the Elizabethan drama during the period of its greatest achievement. Almost every class of play is here represented, and one classthat of domestic tragedyfinds, in
Arden of Feversham
and in
A Yorkshire Tragedy,
two of its most illustrious examples. The Senecan tragedy of vengeance is represented by
Locrine;
the history or chronicle play by
Edward III, The First Part of the Contention, The True Tragedie, The Troublesome Raigne of John, King of England, Sir Thomas More
and
Cromwell,
and, less precisely, by
The Birth of Merlin
and
Faire Em.
The romantic comedy of the period is illustrated by
Mucedorus, The Merry Devill
and
The Two Noble Kinsmen,
while
The London Prodigall
and
The Puritane
are types of that realistic
bourgeois
comedy which, in Stewart days, won a firm hold upon the affections of the play-going community.
7
Note 1
. There is an undated quarto edition of
Faire Em
which C. F. Tucker Brooke considers older than that of 1631 by perhaps a generation or more (
Shakespeare A pocrypha,
p. xxxviii).
[
back
]
Note 2
. Chap.
VII.
[
back
]
CONTENTS
·
VOLUME CONTENTS
·
INDEX OF ALL CHAPTERS
·
BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD
Locrine:
points of resemblance to
The Spanish Tragedie
Loading
Click
here
to shop the
Bartleby Bookstore
.
Shakespeare
·
Bible
·
Saints
·
Anatomy
·
Harvard Classics
·
Lit. History
·
Quotations
·
Poetry
©
19932013
Bartleby.com
· [
Top 150
]