1598. A most pleasant Comedie of Mucedorus, the Kings sonne of Valentia
and Amadine the Kings daughter of Arragon, with the merie conceites of
Mouse. Newly set foorth, as it hath bin sundrie times plaide in the
honorable Cittie of London. Very delectable and full of mirth. _For
William Jones._ [Arrangement of parts for eight actors; Induction.]
1606. _For William Jones._
1610.... Amplified with new additions, as it was acted before the Kings
Maiestie at Whitehall on Shroue-sunday night. By his Highness Seruants
vsually playing at the Globe. Very delectable, and full of conceited
Mirth. _For William Jones._ [Arrangement of parts for ten actors;
Prologue. Collier professes to follow a print of 1609 with this altered
title, otherwise unknown; cf. Greg in _Jahrbuch_, xl. 104.]
1611; 1613; 1615.
_S. R._ 1618, Sept. 17. Transfer by Sarah, widow of William Jones, to
John Wright (Arber, iii. 632).
1618; 1619; 1621; 1626; N.D. [1629] fragm.; 1631; 1634; 1639; N.D.
[1639 < > 63]; 1663; 1668.
_Editions_ by J. P. Collier (1824) and with _Shakespeare_ (1878),
N. Delius (1874), in Dodsley^4, vii (1874), Warnke-Proescholdt
(1878), J. S. Farmer (1910, _T. F. T._), and with _Sh.
Apocrypha._--_Dissertations_: R. Simpson, _On Some Plays Attributed to
Sh._ (1875, _N. S. S. Trans._ 155); W. Wagner, _Ueber und zu M._ (1876,
_Jahrbuch_, xi. 59), _Neue Conjecturen zum M._ (1879, _Jahrbuch_, xiv.
274); K. Elze, _Noten und Conjecturen_ (1878, _Jahrbuch_, xiii. 45),
_Nachträgliche Bemerkungen zu M._ (1880, _Jahrbuch_, xv. 339), _Last
Notes on M._ (1883, _E. S._ vi. 217); E. Soffé, _ IST M. ein Schauspiel
Sh.’s?_ (1887, Brünn Progr.); W. W. Greg, _On the Editions of M._
(1904, _Jahrbuch_, xl. 95).
It is difficult to date with precision the revival for which the
additions printed in the Q. of 1610 (1610/1?) were written, especially
as the genuineness of the Q. of 1609, in which Collier stated that he
found these additions, cannot be verified, since the accounts of the
Treasurer of the Chamber do not specify the exact days on which the
numerous appearances of the King’s men at court during the winters of
1608–9, 1609–10, and 1610–11 took place. The conjecture of Fleay (ii.
50; _Shakespeare_, 303) that the additions date from 1606 was
largely based on a guess that they appeared in the Q. of 1606, which
he had not seen. The added or altered passages are the prologue; i.
1, 2; iv. 1; parts of v. 2; and the final lines of the induction. The
prologue wishes James security
From blemisht Traytors, stayn’d with Periurie.
A bear is introduced in i. 2, as in _W. T._ iii. 3, and I venture to
conjecture that both episodes were inspired by the successful bear in
Jonson’s _Mask of Oberon_ on 1 Jan. 1611, to which there is also an
allusion in his _Love Restored_ of 6 Jan. 1612. If so, the revival
must have been on Shrove Sunday, 3 Feb. 1611. In I. i. 50 Anselmo says
that he was a shepherd in ‘Lord Iulios Maske’. _Oberon_, however, had
no shepherds proper, only satyrs and sylvans. The induction is altered
to compliment James instead of Elizabeth, and the following dialogue
between Comedie and Envie is introduced:
_Envie._ Comedie, thou art a shallow Goose;
Ile ouerthrow thee in thine owne intent,
And make thy fall my Comick merriment.
_Comedie._ Thy pollicie wants grauitie; thou art
Too weake. Speake, Fiend, as how?
_Env._ Why, thus:
From my foule Studie will I hoyst a Wretch,
A leane and hungry Meager Canniball,
Whose iawes swell to his eyes with chawing Malice:
And him Ile make a Poet.
_Com._ What’s that to th’ purpose?
_Env._ This scrambling Rauen, with his needie Beard,
Will I whet on to write a Comedie,
Wherein shall be compos’d darke sentences,
Pleasing to factious braines:
And euery other where place me a Iest,
Whose high abuse shall more torment then blowes:
Then I my selfe (quicker then Lightning)
Will flie me to a puisant Magistrate,
And waighting with a Trencher at his backe,
In midst of iollitie, rehearse those gaules,
(With some additions)
So lately vented in your Theator.
He, vpon this, cannot but make complaint,
To your great danger, or at least restraint.
_Com._ Ha, ha, ha! I laugh to hear thy folly;
This is a trap for Boyes, not Men, nor such,
Especially desertfull in their doinges,
Whose stay’d discretion rules their purposes.
I and my faction do eschew those vices.
Fleay, with 1606 in his mind, finds here an apology for _The Fox_,
thinking Jonson the raven and _Eastward Hoe_ the ‘trap for Boyes’. In
1610 there had been no trouble about any London play, although one in
Lincolnshire had given offence. But a careful reading of the passage
will show that it is no apology at all, but a boast, and an attack upon
informers against the stage.
As the play had been in print since 1598, it must not be assumed
that, because the King’s revived it in 1610–11, it was originally a
Chamberlain’s play. It may have belonged to the Queen’s or some other
extinct company. Evidently it was a popular play, as the number of
editions shows. _K. B. P._ ind. 91 tells us that Ralph has ‘play’d ...
Musidorus before the Wardens of our Company’.
The ascription to Shakespeare is due to Archer’s list of 1656 (Greg,
_Masques_, xci) and to the inclusion of the play with _Fair Em_ and
_The Merry Devil of Edmonton_ in a volume in Charles II’s library,
lettered ‘Shakespeare, vol. i’ (_Variorum_, ii. 682). It now receives
little support, even as regards the added passages. Greene is preferred
as the original author by Malone and Hopkinson, Peele by von Friesen,
and Lodge by Fleay.
After the suppression of the theatres in 1642, _Mucedorus_ was acted
by strolling players in various parts of Oxfordshire. An accident
during a performance at Witney on 3 Feb. 1654 is recorded in John Rowe,
_Tragi-Comoedia. Being a brieff relation of the strange and wonderful
hand of God, discovered at Witney in the Comedy acted February the
third, where there were some slaine, many hurt and several other
remarkable passages_ (1653/4).
Either _Mucedorus_ or Greene’s _Alphonsus_ (q.v.) may have been the
play on a king of Arragon given at Dresden in 1626. It has also been
suggested (Herz, 95) that _Mucedorus_ influenced Pieter Hooft’s Dutch
pastoral _Granida_ (1605).
_Narcissus. 6 Jan. 1603_
[_MS._] _Bodl. MS._ 147303 (_Rawl. Poet. MS._ 212), f. 82^v. ‘A Twelfe
Night Merriment. Anno 1602.’ [Porter’s speech ‘at the end of supper’,
Wassail Song, Prologue, and Epilogue.]
_Edition_ by M. L. Lee (1893).
The porter’s name is Francis, and from some speeches and a letter
composed for him, which appear in the same manuscript, it is clear that
he was Francis Clark, who became porter of St. John’s, Oxford, on 8 May
1601, at which house therefore the play was doubtless given. It has
borrowings from _M. N. D._ and _1 Hen. IV._
_New Custom. 1558 < > 73_
1573. A new Enterlude No less wittie: then pleasant, entituled new
Custome, deuised of late, and for diuerse causes nowe set forthe, neuer
before this tyme Imprinted. _William How for Abraham Veale._
_Editions_ in Dodsley^4 (1874, iii) and by J. S. Farmer (1908, _T. F.
T._).
A moral of Protestant controversy, with typical personages, bearing
allegorical names, arranged for four actors.
The final prayer is for Elizabeth, and Avarice played in the days of
Queen Mary. Fleay, 64; ii. 294, thinks it a revised Edward VI play, on
the ground of an allusion to a ‘square caps’ controversy of 1550. But
this was still vigorous in 1565 (cf. Parker’s _Letters_, 240). Fleay
also says that the _Nugize_ of Captain Cox’s collection (Laneham, 30)
is _Mankind_ (_Med. Stage_, ii. 438) in which New Gyse is a character.
But _Mankind_ was first printed in 1897, and probably this play is the
one Laneham had in mind.
_Nobody and Somebody > 1606_
_S. R._ 1606, Jan. 8. ‘The picture of No bodye.’ _John Trundell_
(Arber, iii. 308).
1606, March 12 (Wilson). ‘A Booke called no bodie and somme bodie &c.’
_John Trundell_ (Arber, iii. 316).
N.D. No-Body, and Some-Body. With the true Chronicle Historie of
Elydure, who was fortunately three seuerall times crowned King of
England. The true Coppy thereof, as it hath beene acted by the Queens
Maiesties Seruants. _For John Trundle._ [Prologue and Epilogue.]
_Editions_ by A. Smith (1877), R. Simpson (1878, _S. of S._ i),
J. S. Farmer (1911, _T. F. T._), of the early German translation
by F. Bischoff, _Niemand und Jemand in Graz im Jahre 1608_ (1899,
_Mitteilungen des historischen Vereins für Steiermark_, xlvii. 127),
and of Tieck’s translation by J. Bolte (1894, _Jahrbuch_, xxix.
4).--_Dissertation_: J. Bolte, _Eine Hamburger Aufführung von N. a. S._
(1905, _Jahrbuch_, xli. 188).
The play is probably Jacobean. There is a reference to the unwilling
recipients of knighthood (l. 325), and the use of Essex’s nickname
for Cobham, Sycophant, as the name of a courtier, must be later than
Cobham’s disgrace in 1603. Simpson thought that an allusion to the
misuse of the collections for rebuilding Paul’s steeple (l. 754)
pointed to an original date _c._ 1592, when the matter caused a
scandal, but the steeple was still unbuilt in James’s reign. Greg,
_Henslowe_, ii. 230, revising a conjecture of Fleay, i. 293, suggests
that _Albere Galles_, written by Heywood and Smith for Worcester’s
in Sept. 1602, may be this play, and Henslowe’s title a mistake for
_Archigallo_, one of the characters. The play seems to have reached
Germany by 1608. A performance at Graz in that year was probably
the occasion of the dedication by ‘Joannes Grün Nob. Anglus’ to the
archduke Maximilian of a manuscript German translation, now in the
Rein library. To it is attached a coloured drawing of a bearded man in
a doublet which hides his breeches, and with a book and chain in his
hands. Above is written ‘Nemo’ and ‘Neminis Virtus ubique Laudabilis.’
A version is also in the Anglo-German collection of 1620 (Herz, 66,
112).
_Parnassus. 1598–1602_ (?)
[_MSS._] _Bodl. Rawlinson MS._ D. 398. ‘The Pilgrimage to Parnassus’,
‘The Returne from Parnassus’. [1 _Parnassus_ with Prologue; 2
_Parnassus_ with Stagekeeper’s speech for Prologue. The cover bears the
name of ‘Edmunde Rishton, Lancastrensis’, who took his M.A. from St.
John’s, Cambridge, in 1602.]
_Halliwell-Phillipps MS._ ‘The Returne from Pernassus: or The Scourge
of Simony.’ [3 _Parnassus_, with induction for Prologue, which says,
‘The Pilgrimage to Pernassus, and the returne from Pernassus have stood
the honest Stagekeepers in many a Crownes expence for linckes and
vizards: ... this last is the last part of the returne from Pernassus’.]
_S. R._ 1605, Oct. 16 (Gwyn). ‘An Enterlude called The retourne from
Pernassus or the scourge of Simony publiquely Acted by the studentes in
Sainct Johns College in Cambridg.’ _John Wright_ (Arber, iii. 304).
1606. The Returne from Pernassus: Or The Scourge of Simony. Publiquely
acted by the Students in Saint Iohns Colledge in Cambridge. _G. Eld,
for Iohn Wright._ [Two issues. 3 _Parnassus_ only.]
_Editions_ of 3 _Parnassus_ by T. Hawkins (1773, _O. E. D._ iii),
W. Scott (1810, _A. B. D._ i), in Dodsley^4 (1874, ix), by E. Arber
(1878) and O. Smeaton (1905, _T. D._), and of 1, 2, 3 _Parnassus_ by
W. D. Macray (1886) and J. S. Farmer (_S. F. T._).--_Dissertations_:
B. Corney (1866, 3 _N. Q._ ix. 387); J. W. Hales, _The Pilgrimage
to P._ (1887, _Academy_ and _Macmillan’s Magazine_; 1893, _Folia
Litteraria_, 165); W. Lühr, _Die drei Cambridger Spiele vom P. in
ihren litterarischen Beziehungen_ (1900, Kiel diss.); E. B. Reed, _The
College Element in Hamlet_ (1909, _M. P._ vi. 453); G. C. Moore Smith,
_The P. Plays_ (1915, _M. L. R._ x. 162).
There are several notes of time and authorship. At the end of 1,
which was ‘three daies studie’ (l. 3), the pilgrimage has lasted ‘4
yeares’ (712). Kinsader’s, i.e. Marston’s, _Satires_ and Bastard’s
_Epigrams_, both of 1598, are mentioned (212). The prologue to 2,
which is a ‘Christmas toy’ (18), deprecates the former courtesy of ‘our
stage’:
Surelie it made our poet a staide man,
Kept his proude necke from baser lambskins weare,
Had like to have made him senior sophister.
He was faine to take his course by Germanie
Ere he could gett a silie poore degree.
Hee never since durst name a peece of cheese,
Thoughe Chessire seems to priviledge his name.
His looke was never sanguine since that daye;
Nere since he laughte to see a mimick playe.
It is now seven years since the scholars started for Parnassus (62).
Gullio has been ‘verie latelie in Irelande’ and ‘scapt knightinge’
(878), obviously with Essex in 1599. The _Epigrams_ (1599) of ‘one
Weaver fellow’, i.e. John Weever, are alluded to (982). The prologue to
3, also a ‘Christenmas toy’ (30), calls it ‘an old musty show, that
hath laine this twelue moneth in the bottome of a coalehouse’ (25).
‘The Authors wit’ (48) has stood ‘hammering upon ... 2 schollers some
foure (1606, whole) yeare’ (37). This is the third play of a series
(76):
In Scholers fortunes twise forlorne and dead
Twise hath our weary play earst laboured.
Making them Pilgrims to Pernassus hill,
Then penning their return with ruder quill.
_Belvedere_ (1600) is published (179) and Nashe is dead (314). The
Dominical letters are C, or for the Annunciation year D and C (1105),
and the moon is in ‘the last quarter the 5 day, at 2 of the cloke and
38 minuts in the morning’ (1133). These indications fit Jan. 1602
(Lühr, 15, 105). The siege of Ostend, which extended from 1601 to
1604, has begun (1333). Jonson has ‘brought vp Horace giving the Poets
a pill’ (1811), and Kempe is back ‘from dancing the morrice over the
Alpes’ (1823). Both events took place in 1601. It is still Elizabeth’s
reign (1141).
A quite clear conclusion as to date is not possible. The calendar
references, the four years of hammering (in 3), and the probability
that the writer would try to have his allusions to literary events up
to date, suggest performances at the Christmases of 1598–9, 1599–1600,
and 1601–2. This allows for a twelve-months’ delay, followed by a good
deal of revision, in the performance of 3. On the other hand, the
difference between four (in 1) and seven (in 2) years of pilgrimage
points to 1598–9, 1601–2, and 1602–3. On the whole, I lean to the first
alternative.
So far as we know, the association of Kempe with the Chamberlain’s men
was out of date either in 1601 or 1602; conceivably he returned to the
company for a while in 1601, but he was certainly of Worcester’s in
1602.
Moore Smith thinks that the ‘ruder quill’ of the prologue to 3 implies
that the author of 2 and 3 was distinct from the author of 1. But the
same prologue speaks clearly of a single author. Hales took the account
of his troubles in getting his degree literally, and pointed out that
foreign students at German universities were called ‘Käsebettler’
and ‘Käsejäger’. Moore Smith doubts, and thinks the degree may have
been given at Cambridge by the influence of William Holland, senior
fellow of St. John’s, and his name glanced at in ‘Germanie’. The
absence alike of matriculation books and college admission registers
for the period makes identification difficult. Corney found a copy
of the print of 3 with the inscription ‘To my Lovinge Smallocke J.
D.’, which he thought in the same hand as the _Lansdowne MS._ of John
Day’s _Peregrinatio Scholastica_. Bullen was inclined to support
Day’s authorship on internal grounds, but Day was a Caius man, whose
university career closed in disgrace, and is not very likely to have
written plays for St. John’s some years later. And it is but a slight
connexion with Cheshire that ‘dey’ means ‘dairy’ in the dialect of that
county. Cheshire ought to be our clue. Charles Chester was not, so far
as I know, a writer. Hales seems to have thought that the theatrical
Beestons of London may have been connected with the Cheshire family of
that name. There was a Cheshire foundation at St. John’s, and Moore
Smith cites a suggestion that the author may have been William Dodd, a
Cheshire man, who became Scholar of St. John’s in 1597, B.A. in 1599,
and Fellow in 1602. The ‘priviledge’ reminds me of the traditional
jurisdiction of the Dutton family over minstrelsy in Cheshire
(_Mediaeval Stage_, ii. 259), but I do not know whether any Dutton can
be traced at St. John’s.
In i. 2 of 3 Judicio is exercising the occupation of a ‘corrector
of the presse’, apparently in the employment of a particular
printing-house, not of the licensing authorities. The house would be
Danter’s, who is himself introduced in i. 3 bargaining with Ingenioso
to give him 40s. for a pamphlet. In iv. 3 Burbage and Kempe appear, and
here is the famous passage in which Kempe says:
‘Few of the vniuersity men pen plaies well, they smell too much
of that writer _Ouid_, and that writer _Metamorphosis_, and
talke too much of _Proserpina & Iuppiter_. Why heres our fellow
_Shakespeare_ puts them all downe, I and _Ben Ionson_ too. O
that _Ben Ionson_ is a pestilent fellow, he brought vp Horace
giuing the Poets a pill, but our fellow _Shakespeare_ hath giuen
him a purge that made him beray his credit.’
Fleay, _Shakespeare_, 221, suggests that the ‘purge’ was the
description of Ajax in _Troilus and Cressida_, I. ii. 15, and is
supported by Small, 167. If so, it was very irrelevant to its setting.
The purge ought to be _Satiromastix_, and though there is nothing to
indicate that Shakespeare had any responsibility for _Satiromastix_, it
is just conceivable that a Cambridge man, writing before the play was
assigned to Dekker in print, may have thought that he had. The allusion
is clearly to Shakespeare as a writer, or one might have thought that
he acted Horace-Jonson in _Satiromastix_.
Especially in 3, the writer is much occupied with contemporary
literature, but this does not justify the slap-dash attempt of Fleay,
ii. 347, to identify nearly all his characters with individual literary
men. They are, of course, not individuals, but types, and types
of university men. The most that can be said is that there may be
something of Marston in Furor Poeticus, and a good deal of Nashe, with
probably also a little of Greene, in Ingenioso, who ultimately takes
flight, with Furor and Phantasma, to the Isle of Dogs (v. 3, 4):
There where the blattant beast doth rule and raigne
Renting the credit of whom ere he please.
_Il Pastor Fido > 1601_
_S. R._ 1601, Sept. 16 (Pasfield). ‘A booke called the faythfull
Shepheard’. _Waterson_ (Arber, iii. 192).
1602. Il Pastor Fido: Or The faithfull Shepheard. Translated out of
Italian into English. _For Simon Waterson._ [Sonnets by S. Daniel and
the Translator to Sir Edward Dymocke; Epistle to the same, dated 31
Dec. 1601, and signed ‘Simon Waterson’.]
1633. _For John Waterson._ [Epistle by John Waterson to Charles Dymock.]
1633. _Augustine Matthewes for William Sheares._ [Another issue.]
The preliminary matter of 1602 and 1633 is shown by Greg, _Pastoral_,
242, to point to a kinsman, but not the son, of Sir Edward Dymocke as
the translator. He may be a John Dymmocke, to whom Archer’s play-list
of 1656 (Greg, _Masques_, xcvi) assigns in error _The Faithful
Shepherdess_. The translation is from G. Battista Guarini’s _Il Pastor
Fido_ (1590). For a Latin translation see App. L.
_The Pedlar’s Prophecy > 1594_
_S. R._ 1594, May 13. ‘A plea booke intituled the Pedlers Prophesie.’
_Thomas Creede_ (Arber, ii. 649).
1595. The Pedlers Prophecie. _Thomas Creede, sold by William Barley._
[Prologue.]
_Editions_ by J. S. Farmer (1911, _T. F. T._) and W. W. Greg (1914, _M.
S. R._).
The analogies of title and date of publication to _The Cobler’s
Prophecy_ have led Fleay, ii. 283, and others to ascribe the
authorship to Wilson. To me the play reads more like a belated piece of
_c._ 1560–70.
_Pericles c. 1607–8_
See Shakespeare (ch. xxiii), except in relation to whose work the play
can hardly be discussed.
_Philotus > 1603_
1603. Ane verie excellent and delectabill Treatise intitulit Philotus.
Quhairin we may persaue the greit inconveniences that fallis out in the
Mariage betwene age and zouth. _Robert Charteris, Edinburgh._ [At end
are verses beginning ‘What if a day or a month or a zeere’, possibly
Campion’s; cf. Bullen, _Campion_ (1903), 270.]
1612. A verie excellent and delectable Comedie.... _Andro Hart,
Edinburgh._
_Editions_ by J. Pinkerton (1792, _Scottish Poems_, iii) and for
Bannatyne Club (1835).
This has been ascribed to Robert Sempill (1530?-95), but merely because
his play before the Regent of Scotland on 17 June 1568 (Diary of
Robert Birrel in Dalyell, _Fragments of Scottish History_, 14) is not
otherwise known. R. Brotanek (1898, _Festschrift zum viii allgemeinen
deutschen Neuphilologentage in Wien_; cf. _Jahrbuch_, xxxv. 302)
suggests Alexander Montgomery.
_The Puritan. 1606_
_S. R._ 1607, Aug. 6 (Buck). ‘A book called the comedie of “the Puritan
Widowe”.’ _George Elde_ (Arber, iii. 358).
1607. The Puritaine Or The Widdow of Watling-streete. Acted by the
Children of Paules. Written by W. S. _G. Eld._ [Running-title ‘The
Puritaine Widdow’.]
1664; 1685. [Parts of F_{3} and F_{4} of Shakespeare.]
_Editions_ in 1734 (J. Tonson), 1734 (R. Walker), by J. S. Farmer
(1911, _T. F. T._), and in _Sh. Apocrypha_.
The W. S. of the title-page was interpreted as William Shakespeare
in Archer’s play-list of 1656 (Greg, _Masques_, c). The attribution
is accepted by no modern critic, and guesses at Wentworth Smith and
William Smith rest similarly on nothing but the initials. Internal
evidence points to an author who was an Oxford man, and familiar with
the plays of Shakespeare. Middleton is preferred by Fleay, ii. 92,
Bullen (_Middleton_, i. lxxix), and others; Marston by Brooke, who
dwells on a general resemblance to _Eastward Hoe_, and seems inclined
to think that Jonson, whose _Bartholomew Fair_ the play foreshadows,
might also have contributed. The character George Pyeboard is clearly
meant for Peele, and the play uses episodes which appear in _The Merrie
Conceited Jests of George Peele Gent_. This, though the extant print is
of 1607, was entered in S. R. on 14 Dec. 1605. The Paul’s plays seem to
have terminated in 1606, and Fleay points out that an almanac allusion
in III. vi. 289 is to Tuesday, 15 July, which fits 1606. The attack on
the Puritan ministers was resented in W. Crashaw’s Paul’s Cross sermon
of 13 Feb. 1608 (cf. App. C, no. lvi).
_The Revenger’s Tragedy. 1606 < > 7_
_S. R._ 1607, Oct. 7 (Buck). ‘Twoo plaies, thone called the revengers
tragedie.’ _George Eld_ (Arber, iii. 360).
1607. The Revengers Tragœdie. As it hath beene sundry times Acted, by
the Kings Maiesties Seruants. _G. Eld._
1608. _G. Eld._
_Editions_ in Dodsley^{1–4} (1744–1876), and by W. Scott (1810, _A. B.
D._ ii) and A. H. Thorndike (1912, _M. E. D._).
The authorship is ascribed to ‘Tournour’ in Archer’s list of 1656
and to ‘Cyril Tourneur’ in Kirkman’s lists of 1661 and 1671 (Greg,
_Masques_, cii). Fleay, ii. 264, is sceptical, thinking the work too
good for the author of _The Atheist’s Tragedy_, and inclined to suggest
Webster. Oliphant (_M. P._ viii. 427) thinks Tourneur impossible,
in view of the difference of manner, and suggests, only to reject,
Middleton. E. E. Stoll, _John Webster_, 107, 212, points out that both
plays are much under the influence of Marston, and that the date may be
fixed by the borrowing of the name and character of Dandolo from _The
Fawn_ (1606).
_The True Tragedy of Richard Duke of York > 1592_
See _The Contention of York and Lancaster_.
_1 Richard the Second c. 1592 < > 5_
[_MS._] _Egerton MS._ 1994. The play forms a separate section of this
composite MS. It has no title-page and a few lines at the end are
missing. The handwriting is of the late sixteenth or early seventeenth
century.
_Editions_ by J. O. Halliwell (1870) and W. Keller (1899, _Jahrbuch_,
xxxv. 3.--_Dissertations_: F. I. Carpenter, _Notes on the Anonymous
Richard II_ (1899, _Journ. Germ. Phil._ iii. 138); F. S. Boas, _A
Seventeenth Century Theatrical Repertoire_ (_Library_ for July 1917).