A Critical Edition of John Fletcher's Comedy: Monsieur Thomas Or

Routledge Revivals

A Critical Edition of John Fletcher’s Comedy

A Critical Edition of John Fletcher’s Comedy Monsieur Thomas or Father’s Own Son

Edited by Nanette Cleri Clinch

The Renaissance Imagination Volume 25 First published in 1987 by Garland Publishing, Inc.

This edition ﬁrst published in 2018 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Publisher’s Note The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent.

Disclaimer The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and welcomes correspondence from those they have been unable to contact. A Library of Congress record exists under ISBN:

ISBN 13: 978-0-367-19172-6 (hbk) ISBN 13: 978-0-429-20088-5 (ebk) The Renaissance Imagination Important Literary and Theatrical Texts from the Late Middle Ages through the Seventeenth Century

Stephen Orgel E ditor Volumes in the Series

1. Arte of Rhetorique by Thomas 8. Greene's Tu Quoque Or, The Cittie Wilson Gallant byj. Cooke edited by Thomas J. Derrick A critical edition 2. An Enterlude Called Lusty edited by Alan J. Berman Iuuentus 9. A Critical Edition of I Sir John by R. Wever Oldcastle An old-spelling critical edition edited, with an introduction, edited by Helen Scarborough by Jonathan Rittenhouse Thomas 10. The Tudor Interludes: Nice 3. The True Tragicomedy Formerly Wanton and Impatient Poverty Acted at Court. A Play by Francis edited by Leonard Tennenhouse Osborne Transcribed from the 11. Pageants and Entertainments of Manuscript in the British Library Anthony Munday by John Pitcher and Lois Potter A critical edition edited, with an introduction, edited by David M. Bergeron by Lois Potter 12. The Fancies, Chast and Noble by J. 4. The Comedies of John Crowne Ford A critical edition A critical edition edited, with Prolegomena, edited by Dominick J. Hart by B. J. McMullin 13. Buckingham: Public and Private 5. The Pearl Poems: An Omnibus Man. The Prose, Poems and Edition. Commonplace Book of George Vol. 1: Pearl and Cleanness Villiers, Second Duke of edited by William Vantuono Buckingham (1628-1687) 6. The Pearl Poems: An Omnibus edited by Christine Phipps Edition. Vol. 2: Patience and Sir 14. The Pastyme of People and A New Gawain and the Green Knight Boke of Purgatory by J. Rastell, edited by William Vantuono with a facsimile of The Pastyme 7. The Swisser by Arthur Wilson A critical edition edited by Linda V. Itzoe edited by Albert J. Geritz 15. The Passions of the Mind in 26. The Prose of Fulke Greville, Lord General Brooke by Thomas Wright edited by Mark Caldwell A critical edition 27. A Critical Edition of The Play of the edited by William Webster Wether by John Heywood Newbold edited by Vicki Knudsen 16. Thomas Heywoods Pageants Robinson A critical edition 28. A Critical Edition of The Isle of edited by David M. Bergeron Ladies 17. The Obstinate Lady by Aston edited by Vincent Daly Cokayne 29. A Contextual Study and Modem- edited by Catherine M. Shaw Spelling Edition of Mucedorus 18. A Critical Old Spelling of the edited by Arvin H. Jupin Works of Edward Sharpham 30. A Critical Edition of Ferdinando edited by Christopher G. Petter Parkhurst’s Ignoramus, The 19. Sicily and Naples, Or, the Fatall Academical-Lawyer Union. edited by E.EJ. Tucker A Tragoedy by S. Harding 31. A Critical Edition of Alexander edited by Joan Warthling Roberts Ross’s 1647 Mystagogus Poeticus, 20. The Aeneid of Thomas Phaer and or The Muses Interpreter Thomas Twyne edited by John R. Glenn A critical edition introducing 32. A Critical Edition of Thomas Renaissance metrical typography Salter’s The Mirrhor of Modestie edited by Steven Lally edited by Janis Butler Holm 21. A Critical Edition of Abraham 33. An Old-Spelling Critical Edition of Cowley’s Cutter of Coleman Street James Shirley’s The Example edited by Darlene Johnson edited by William E Jones Gravett 34. Stuart Academic Drama: Three 22. A Critical Edition of Abraham University Plays Cowley’s Davideis edited by David L. Russell edited by Gayle Shadduck 35. A Critical Edition of George 23. An Old-Spelling Critical Edition of Whetstone’s 1582 An Heptameron William Davenant’s The Platonic of Civill Discourses Lovers edited by Diana Shklanka edited by Wendell W. Broom, Jr. 36. An Edition of Robert Wilson’s 24. A Critical Edition of John Three Ladies of London and Three Fletcher’s The Humorous Lords and Three Ladies of London Lieutenant edited by H.S.D. Mithal edited by Philip Oxley 37. The School of Cyrus: William 25. A Critical Edition of John Barker’s 1567 Translation of Fletcher’s Comedy Monsieur Xenophon’s Cyropaedeia (The Thomas or Father's Own Son Education of Cyrus) edited by Nanette Cleri Clinch edited by James Tatum

A Critical Edition of John Fletcher’s Comedy MONSIEUR THOMAS OR FATHER’S OWN SON

edited by Nanette Cleri Clinch

The Renaissance Imagination Volume 25

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Fletcher, John, 1579-1625. A critical edition of John Fletcher’s comedy, Monsieur Thomas, or, Father’s own son.

(The Renaissance imagination ; v. 25) Bibliography: p. I. Clinch, Nanette Cleri, 1951- . II. Title. III. Title: Monsieur Thomas. IV. Series. PR2507.M6 1987 822'.3 87-7407 ISBN 0-8240-8404-7

Printed on acid-free, 250-year-life paper Manufactured in the United States of America A CRITICAL EDITION OF JOHN FLETCHER*S COMEDY MONSIEUR THOMAS, OR FATHER * S OWN SON

by Nanette Cleri Clinch

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IN THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

ABSTRACT

This edition of John Fletcher's comedy Monsieur Thomas (1614-17) has been prepared in accordance with the principles established for the Revels series of plays. The text is modernized in spelling and punctuation. Four copies of the first quarto of 1639» the copy-text for this edition, and one copy of the second quarto, a post-Restoration re-issue, have been collated, as well as the text in the second Folio of Beaumont and Fletcher's plays (1679)—the play did not appear in the first Folio of 1647—and all subsequent editions of the play. A substantial commentary is included. The introduction provides a full discussion of the nature of the copy-text; the question of authorial interference from Richard Brome, the p la y 's f i r s t e d ito r; sources; date of composition; criticism; stage-history; and some brief comments on F le tc h e r's v e r s if ic a tio n . The copy for the first quarto, fairly free from errors, was probably Fletcher's 'foul papers', or a transcription from them. The play appears in verse in all editions, and the first quarto is divided, almost consistently, into acts and scenes, with major misnumbering occuring in one section near the end of the play. The misnumbering and other aspects of the composition and printing of the quarto (discussed in detail in three appendices) give additional weight to the possibility of minor alterations introduced by Brome. The second quarto differs only in that it displays a dif- ferent title on a cancel-leaf title-page: Fathers own Son, which may simply have been Fletcher's subtitle for Monsieur Thomas. The saturnalian comedy has a double-plot that turns on the themes of friendship and regeneration. The tri- angular love-situation in the main plot is based on 'L’Histoire de Celide'e, Thamire et Calidon' in Part II of Honore/ d'Urfe/'s pastoral romance L'Astree (l6l0). But the whorl of intrigues—ranging from the joyous recovery of a lost son to the absurdities caused by mis- taken identities—owes much to morality plays, romances, fo lk lo re and so c ia l customs. In a London s e ttin g , fanciful and realistic elements are mixed, and serious incidents are counterpointed by farcical situations. Fletcher's innovative talents are discernable throughout. Francisco's bout with love-melancholy becomes a springboard for a satire on contemporary medical practices. Thomas' exposure to travel transforms him into an unusually demure prodigal son, seemingly opposed to his eccentric father's raucous behaviour. Of all the ch aracters in the comedy, Thomas is the most fa sc in a tin g . In his several roles as doctor, devilish madcap and enamoured clown, Thomas functions, on one level, as a p h allic symbol, and bears comparison with the Tommy, or Fool, of the British mummers' plays. The relationship between Monsieur Thomas and the mummers' plays is consequently discussed at length and shown to be central to our understanding of the play. This neglected comedy, which apparently fa ile d to please its first audience, inspired weak adaptations. One modern production a t the U niversity of Toronto met with modest success. The purpose of this edition is to revive an interest in a play where Fletcher's original treatment of dramatic conventions, literary devices, social trends and local traditions is displayed to full advantage.

Table of Contents

List 0 r Illustrations page v List of Tables v Preface vii List of Abbreviations Xiii Introduction XX

I. The Text and Brame's Part In It XX

a) The Choice of Copy Text XX b) The Nature and Printing of the Quarto xXiii c) Was the Play Revised, and By Whom? xxXii d) Richard Brame as Editor xl II. Sources , Analogues and Influences xlviii a) The Main Plot xlviii b) The Subplot lviii i) Themes and Situations lviii ii) The Characters lXiv c) The Mummers' Plays lxix III. The Da:te lxXix IV. The Play lxxXiv a) The Unity of the Play lxxXiv b) Monsieur Thomas as a Saturnalian Comedy XC c) Monsieur Thomas as a Morality Play c d) Monsieur Thomas as a Folk Play cv v. Stage History ex vi VI. This Edition cxxxi VII. A Note on the Verse cxxxviii Notes c x lii Monsieur Thomas or Father * s Own Son 1 C ollation 142 Commentary 177 Appendices 329 Appendix I. Identification of Skeletons 329 Appendix II. Compositorial Shares 331 Works Cited 354 Illustrations

Fig. 1 Title-page of 1639 quarto of Monsieur Thomas (Folger) page v

Tables

Table D istin ctiv e Types in the Running-Titles page 330 Table Substitutions of Italic

Uppercase I's for Roman I ’s 333

MONSIEVR THOMA: A COMEDY.

Atöed at the Private Houle in Fryers,

The Author, IOHN FLETCHER, Gent,

LONDON, Printed by Narpir, for lohn Wit »fon, and arc to be lold at his (hop in Fault Church-yard, at the figo c of the Crowne; 1639*

Fig. 1 . Title-page of the 1639 Quarto (Folger)

P reface.

This thesis presents an edition of Fletcher's play, Monsieur Thomas, with a su b sta n tia l introduction in several sections and a sizeable apparatus. The Revels plays series has served as a model, in most but not all respects. The Introduction is rather larger permitting ample room for discussing a number of aspects of the play which have never been treated fully before; for instance, the complex s itu a tio n re fle c te d in sheet K of the play's first quarto (the play's copy text) and how Brome's editing and possible revisions may account for this; also the play's interesting use of devil-lore, and how it was influenced by mummers' plays. The introduction includes a thorough reinterpretation of a play 1 whose q u ality has, in my opinion, been underestim ated. Eighteenth-century adaptations of the play are also discussed, and the usual materials one expects from a Revels introduction are included. The text has been edited from the quarto, the play's only authoritative version, but modernized in spelling and punctuation, following Revels principles. The collations are not variorum but include, besides departures from the copy- text in substance and those variants that still deserve serious consideration, most changes introduced in the v i i i second Beaumont and F letcher Folio of 16?9 (the play did not appear in the first), except for many involving elided and unelided *-ed in the past tense and past participle (see under ’This Edition’ , p-cxxxiii). The large size of the commentary is perhaps justified because of the many passages in the play that require explanation. In some of the footnotes to sections not previously discussed by critics, I have included fuller reading l i s t s since they may be welcomed by some readers. On the other hand, my supervisor permitted me to do without a Revels-type index to the annotations which would have further enlarged the size of the thesis. I welcome the opportunity to acknowledge my de- pendence upon the facilities of several libraries as well as my debt to many individuals. To anyone inad- vertently omitted, I offer my deep apologies and thanks. I am beholden to the University of Toronto and Mount Holyoke College for fellowships held during 1977- 78 which enabled me to pursue my research at the following libraries: the Folger Shakespeare Library; the Princeton Rare Book Room in Firestone Library, Prince- ton University; Beinecke Library, Yale University. I am grateful too, to the Directors and staffs of these libraries for use of the facilities and occasionally for microfilms. The staffs of the University of Toronto Library, The Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library at the University of Toronto, and the Library of Congress were ix also extremely helpful. In particular, I should like to thank Brenda Szittya, Susan M. Farnsworth and Cynthia Cocke, all of the Folger Shakespeare Library; Dr. John V. Fleming of Princeton University; Dr. Richard M. Ludwig, curator of Rare Books at Firestone Library; Dr. Louis B. Martz, Director of Beinecke Library; and Dr. F. D. Hoeniger, Director of the Centre for Renaissance and Reformation Studies at the University of Toronto. I extend my thanks to those individuals who an- swered my queries about the first and second quartos of the play: namely, Carey S. Bliss, Curator of Rare Books, The Huntington Library; Mihai H. Handrea, Librarian, The Carl H. Pforzheimer Library; B. Jenkins, Under- Librarian of Cambridge University Library; Thomas V. Lange, Assistant Curator of Printed Books, PierPont Morgan Library; James Lawton, Department of Rare Books and MSS., Boston Public Library; Sally S. Leach, Asso- ciate Librarian, Humanities Research Center, University of Texas; L. M. Montgomery, L ibrarian, The Library, Worcester College, Oxford University; Robert Volz, Custodian of the Chapin Library, Williams College. The Henry M. Huntington Library kindly sent me a microfilm of the second quarto of the play, for which I am grateful. Laetitia Yeandle, Curator of Manuscripts at the Folger Shakespeare Library and Dr. James G. McManaway of the Folger Shakespeare Library generously offered their advice on particular textual problems. X

My discussion of the Harlequin owes much to Dr. M. Ukas of the U niversity of Toronto. Father Eric McDermott of Georgetown University provided help with legal issues. Dr. John B. Blake, Chief of the History of Medicine Division in the National Library of Medicine, Washing- ton, D. C., kindly assisted me with a very baffling problem of commentary. I am grateful to Richard Knowles, a colleague, for permitting me to read his unpublished paper on the play, which has been of great assistance, and for alerting me to the 1969 production at the University of Toronto. Several individuals responded to my queries about performances of Monsieur Thomas and its adaptations. Dr. E. S. Leedham-Green, Assistant to the Keeper, Univer- sity Archives, University of Cambridge, provided sug- gestions that furthered my research. John Walsh of Jesus College, Oxford University, Robert Dierlem, Secretary-Treasurer of the American Society for Theatre Research and Sybil Rosenfeld, Joint Editor of Theatre Notebook, were also helpful. To Dr. G. K. Hunter of the University of Warwick, for suggesting that I examine William Hindle's unpublished M.A. thesis, 'Shakespeare’s Contemporaries in the The Theatre, 1890-1968' (University of Birmingham, 1969), to Dr. Stanley Wells of the Shake- speare Institute, University of Birmingham, for checking that thesis for me, and to T. H. Aston, Keeper of the Archives, University Archives, University of Oxford, for offering valuable advice, go my especial thanks. xi

Without the assistance of the following individuals, my discussion of the 1969 production of Monsieur Thomas at the University of Toronto would be regrettably frag- mentary and inconclusive. Dr. Harry Lane of the Univer- sity of Guelph supplied me with discerning recollections as well as à program and photographs. Dr. J. M. R. Margeson, David Blostein and Ann Stuart, all of the University of Toronto, and Tony Stephenson made similar efforts to assist me. I owe a special debt of gratitude to Dr. R. B. Parker of Trinity College, University of Toronto. His discussion of Monsieur Thomas in a course on Jacobean comedy offered at the University of Toronto in 1973-?4 introduced me to the play's several strengths. Later, in addition to offering critical advice, he provided me with his own remembrances of the 1969 production and helpfully suggested that I contact Jim Bradford, director of that production. Jim Bradford's assistance has been indispensable. I have benefited from his painstaking and lucid description of the student production and his knowledge of and experience in the theatre. I am personally indebted to John Lehr for a hint about the medieval location of Hell; to Dr. S. P. Zitner of the University of Toronto, whose advice on difficult items in the commentary and general encouragement helped me to cross narrow chasms at crucial times; to Salvatore Ducibella, who conferred special favors; to Ginger x ii

Bauman, a most conscientious and cheerful ty p is t; and to my family, a constant source of support. I owe my greatest debt to my supervisor, Dr. Hoeniger. I have not had an opportunity to examine Hans Walter Gabler's edition of Monsieur Thomas in The Dra- matic Works in the Beaumont and F letcher Canon, ed.

Fredson Bowers, vol. iv (Cambridge, 1979)* since it ap- peared after this thesis was completed. x i i i

A List of Abbreviations

The following abbreviations, excluding texts (for which see Intro., pp. cxxxi-cxxxii), are used in notes, colla- tio n and commentary.

(A) GENERAL Abbott E. A. Abbott, A Shakespearian Grammar, 1870. B. & F. The Works of Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, 10 vols., ed. Arnold Glover and A. R. W aller, 1912; rp t. 1969« (References are to volume and page' numbers.) Bentley G. E. Bentley, The Jacobean and Caroline Stage, 7 vols., 1941-68. Borde, Breviary Andrew Borde, The Breviary of Helthe, London, 1547 (facsim .; The English Experience, no. 362, New York, 1971). Brome, Works The Dramatic Works of Richard Brome, 3 vols., 1873» rpt. 1966. Burton, Anatomy Robert Burton, The Anatomy of Melan- choly, 3 v o ls ., 1932; r p t. 1964. Brand John Brand, Observations on Popular A n tiq u ities, 2 v o ls ., 1913. xiv

Brewer E. Cobham Brewer, Brewer * s Diction- ary of Phrase and F ab le, Centenary Edition, rev. Ivor H. Evans, 19?0. Chambers, E. S . E. K. Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage, 4 vols., 1923» Coryat's Crudities Thomas Coryat-, Coryat* s Crudities, 3 v o ls ., 1905. Cotgrave Randle Cotgrave, A Dictionarie of the French and English Tongues, London, l 6 ll. DAI Dissertation Abstracts International Deighton K. Deighton, The Old Dramatists; Conjectural Readings, 1896 (a new edn. of M arston: Beaumont & F letcher Marlowe; Peeler Conjectural Readings 189*0 . Dekker, Works The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker, ed. Fredson Bowers, ^ v o ls ., 1961. Desainliens, Dic- Claude Desainliens, A Dictionary tio n ary French and E n g lish , London, 1593 (facsim., ed. R. C. Alston, The Scolar Press, 1970). D. N.B. Dictionary of National Biography, ed. L eslie Stephen and Sidney Lee, 21 vols., I 885- 19OI. E. E.T.S. Early English Text Society.

E.S. Extra Series.. XV

Gerard, Herbal John Gerard, Gerard * s Herball, enlarged edn. by T. H. Johnson, London, 1633* Greene, Works The Life and Complete Work in Prose and Verse of Robert Greene, ed. Alex ander B. Grosart, 15 vols., 1881-6. Harward, Phle- Simon Harward, Phlebotomy; or A botomy treatise of letting of bloud . . ., London, 1601 (facsim .; The English Experience, no. 526, New York, 1971) H alliw ell J. 0. Halliwell ¿^-Phillipps_7, ed., A D ictionary of Archaic and Pro- v in c ia l Words, 7th edn., 1924. H. & S. Ben Jonson, ed. Herford and Simpson, 11 vols., 1925-50. (References are to volume and page numbers.) Heywood, Works The Dramatic Works of Thomas Heywood 6 v o ls., 1874. Hoeniger F. D. Hoeniger (privately). JAF The Journal of American Folk-Lore. JEGP The J ournal of English and Germanic Philology Kokeritz Helge Kokeritz, Shakespeare's Pro- nun ciatio n , 1953- Library The Library Lodge, Works The Complete Works of Thomas Lodge, 4 v o ls ., 1883- Lyly, Works The Complete Works of John Lyly, ed. R. Warwick Bond, 3 v o ls ., 1902. XV i

Mason J . Monck Mason, Comments on the plays of Beaumont and F le tc h e r, London, 1797* MLN Modern Language N otes. Marston, Works The Works of John Marston, ed. A. H. Bullen, 3 v o ls ., 1887. Middleton, Works The Works of Thomas M iddleton, ed. A. H. Bullen, 8 vols., 1885. Moryson, Itin - Fynes Moryson, An Itinerary, 4 vols., erary Glasgow edn., 1907-8. n. n o te . Nares R. Nares, A Glossary of English Authors, ed. J. 0. Halliwell / ”-Phillipps_7 and T. Wright * 2 v o ls ., 1888. Nashe, Works The Works of Thomas Nashe, ed. R. B. McKerrow, rev. F. P. Wilson, 5 v o ls ., 1958• N. S. New Series O. E.D. Oxford English Dictionary R . B. Parker R. B. Parker (p r iv a te ly .). Partridge, Dic- Eric Partridge, A Dictionary of tio n ary Slang and Unconventional English, 6th edn., 1967. PMLA Publications of the Modern Language Association. The abbreviation used in Weber's ed itio n of The Works of Beaumont & x v ii

Fletcher, possibly referring to either Issac Reed, editor of the 10 volume Variorum Shakespeare of 1782, or Nicholas Rowe, ed. The Works of Mr William Shakespear, 1?09, 3rd edn., 1713. RB The Roxburghe Ballads, ed. William Chappel and J. W. Ebsworth, 8 vols.,

1871-99. RES The Review of English Studies. Rowlands, Works The Complete Works of Samuel Row- la n d s, 3 vols., Hunterian Club, 1880. (The individual pieces are separately paginated in each volume.) SB Studies in Bibliography Schmidt A. Schmidt, Shakespeare-Lexicon, ed. F. Sarrazin, 2 vols., 1902; rpt.

1971. S.D. Stage-direction. Sh. Q. Shakespeare Quarterly. Sh. S. Shakespeare Survey Skeat, Dictionary Walter W. Skeat, An Etymological Dic- tionary of the English Language,

1 9 1 0 . Spenser, Faerie Edmund Spenserf Spenser: Poetical Queene. Works. Ed. J. C. Smith and E. De S elin co u rt, Oxford, 1912. SP Studies in Philology. x v iii

Stow, Annales John Stow, AnnaJes, or a General Chronicle of England, Augmented by Edmund Howes, London, 1615- Stow, Survey A Survey of London, London, 1603, ed. C. H. Kingsford, 2 v o ls ., 1927. Sugden A Topographical Dictionary to the Works of Shakespeare and His Fellow D ram atists, 1925- T ille y Morris P. Tilley, A Dictionary of the Proverbs in England in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Cen- t u r i e s , 1950* Wright, Dic- Joseph Wright, The English Dialect tio n ary Dictionary, I896-I 905. Quotations from and references to the Bible are from the King James version.

Quotations from Shakespeare*s works are from the Oxford edition, ed. W. J. Craig, unless noted to the contrary. Abbreviations for Shakespeare *s plays and poems follow those given in C. T. Onions* A Shakespeare G lossary (1919)-

The following abbreviations re fe r to modern e d itio n s of p la y s. Arden The Arden Shakespeare, gen.eds. Una Ellis-Fermor (19^6-58), Harold F. Brooks and Harold Jenkins (Methuen). Fountainwell The Fountainwell Drama Texts, gen.eds. T. A. Dunn, Andrew Gurr, John Horden, xix

A. Norman Jeffare s and R. L. C. Lorimer (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd Ltd. u n til 1969; Univ. of C alifo rn ia Press since 1970). New Mermaids The New Mermaids, gen. eds. Philip Brockbank and Brian Morris (Benn). New Penguin The New Penguin Shakespeare, gen. ed. T. J. B. Spencer (New Penguin). Regents Regents Renaissance Drama Series, gen. ed. Cyrus Hoy (Univ. of Nebraska P re s s ). Revels The Revels Plays, gen. eds. Clif- ford Leech (1958-71), F. David Hoeniger, E. A. J. Honigmann and F. R. Mulryne (Methuen u n til 1975; Manchester Univ. Press since 1976). Yale The Yale Ben Jonson, gen. eds. Alvin B. Kernan and Richard B. Young (Yale) XX

Introduction

I. The Text and Brome's Part In It a) The Choice of Copy Text.

The earliest surviving edition of Monsieur Thomas is a quarto in fours printed in 1639. The collation is:

A2, B-m\ N1; the forty-eight leaves are unnum- bered. The first three rectos in each gathering are signed. W. W. Greg, examining twenty copies of this quarto (henceforth Ql), observed that the signature on r i erroneously reads 'H^*. The title-page reads:

KiONSIEVR / THOMAS. / A / Comedy. / Acted at the P riv ate House in / Blacke F ry e rs. / The Author, / IOHN FLETCHER, / Gent. / / ”orna- ment: satyr with wings over fleur-de-lis J / LONDON, /P rin ted by Thomas Harper for Iohn Waterson, and are / to be sold at his shop in Pauls Churchyard, / at the signe of the Crowne: / 1639.

(THOMAS is followed by a raised period.) The head- title reads ’Monsieur Thomas, / A Comedy’. The running- t i t l e is ’Monsieur Thomas, A Comedy’ . The title -p a g e is on sig. (verso blank). Richard Brome's epistle to Sir Charles Cotton is on sigs. A^-A^. XX I

Brome's commendatory verses occupy A2r . The te x t begins r 2 on . As Greg suggested, the preliminary matter was probably printed on sheet N. John Waterson's copyright to Q1 was entered in the Stationers' Register on 22 January 1639;^ a later entry on 31 October 1646 shows th a t he tran sferre d his rig h ts to H. Mosely /""Humphrey Moseley J But Moseley, pub- lis h e r of the f i r s t Beaumont and F letcher fo lio (1647), was mainly concerned that the First Folio should include those plays not previously printed.-^ Monsieur Thomas was advertised from 1653 to 1660 as one of Beaumont and Fletcher's plays in three lists of plays printed for Moseley,^ yet the next surviving edition is a post- Restoration re-issue of Q1 with a cancel-leaf title- 7 page' that reads as follows:

Fathers own Son. / A / COMEDY, / formerly «Vw-vv » V V W acted at the P rivate House in Black Fryers / And now at the Theatre in Yere- / street by His Majesties Servants. / The Author / JOHN FLETCHER Gent. / / ^ornam ents J // LONDON, Printed for Robert Crofts at the Crown in Chancery lane.

Collation of this edition (henceforth Q2) against Q1 and a close examination of the type shows that leaves of Q1 were re-issued for Q2. Except for one proof- correction (see below, p. cxliii f n. 15)» only the title- page differs. Since any reference to Brome's letter to Cotton, the commendatory verses, or the text of Q1 x x ii therefore includes Q2, all such references are henceforth signified by the abbreviation Qq. Since the King's Men, who performed the play in 1661 and 1662, left the Vere-Street Theatre in May 1663, this re-issue, as Greg posited, must antedate their o departure. When Monsieur Thomas was printed in the Second Folio of Beaumont and F le tc h e r's plays (1679)> the alternate title was not used; the head-title and running-titles throughout are 'Monsieur Thomas', and this indicates that the copy for the text in the Second Folio (henceforth F) was probably not Q2 but Q1 (assuming that there are no 'lost’ editions). The text in both Qq and F is entirely in verse. In F the seventeen plays not included in the first folio of 1647 were printed from the quartos, according to the prefatory remarks in 'The Book sellers to the Reader'. Internal evidence corroborates this for Monsieur Thomas, which appears in F, a fo lio in fours, as the fourteenth play, occupying sigs. Ddd2r -Ggg1r . F basically follows Qq, introducing some correc- o tions but both repeating and adding some mistakes. The letter to Cotton is added in extra space on Ggg^; the commendatory verses are om itted. Spelling is often 'modernized' and the punctuation is heavier. F fails to emend some misassigned speeches in Qq, 10 to provide a re so lu tio n for a lacuna in Qq, 11 and to tra n s fe r a misplaced stage-direction on sig. K^r (Musick. at the x x iii

close of Act IV, Scene iv) to i t s proper place (the beginning of the following scene on K^v where the stage- direction reads Enter Saylors singing . . .). The de- pendence of F on Qq is evident even where F attempts to correct the misnumbering of acts and scenes that occurs in Qq. The third scene in Act II (on D^r) is left unmarked in Qq and F. In sheet K of Qq, Act IV, ' scena septima* (on K^v) is followed by *scena secunda* (K^v) , 1Scena Octava' (K^v), 'Actus Quintus, Scena Quarta' (L^r ) and scenes five through eleven thereafter. F alters * secunda1 and Octava* to 'octava* and * Nona1 respectively, then reorders the entire numbering of the final act by changing Act V, Scene iv into 'Actus Quintus, Scena Primat . But F neglects to emend three unmarked scenes in Qq.* Il.iii, V.ii, and V.viii. Nor does F add necessary entrances and exits not given in Qq. Finally, all substantive variants between Qq and F seem to have originated in F and therefore to be editorial, that is to say, not derived from an independent manuscript or printed version. Q1 has therefore been chosen as the copy text for this edition.

b) The Nature and Printing of the Quarto

The next problem is to determine the proximity of Qq to Fletcher's original manuscript. Richard Brome in- dicated in h is l e t t e r to Cbtton and commendatory verses that the first staging (evidently at Blackfriars, a xxiv private playhouse) was unsuccessful (see below,

P • xliii )• The King's Men, wishing to have the play revised for a new performance, may have given Brome a copy of the play in the early 1630's , when he was w riting and re v isin g plays for th a t acting company. Knowing th a t Brome, a t some point, released his copy for publication, it is reasonable to assume that the p rin te rs worked not from a prompt-book but a copy of Fletcher's 'foul papers'--his authorial draft—or at le a s t a tra n s c rip t from them. The textual evidence supports the assumption that the printers' copy was close to the 'foul papers'. A text based on a prompt-book would normally leave surviving signs of its use in the theatre, such as a list of actors' names, anticipatory entrances for characters and props, completely regularized speech-headings, and terse stage-directions. In Qq none of these elements appear, apart from some brief stage-directions that may well be Fletcher's since they are intermingled with graphic stage-directions that impress one as being authorial: 12 Enter three Physicians with an Unnall (E2r F II.iv.0.1), Enter Franck sick, Physicians, and a Pothecary (E^v, III.i.0.1), Phis. within, & Serv. (F^v, I I I . i . 258.1), Madge with a devils vizard roring, offers to kisse him, and he fals down (H^v, III.iii.91•1-2),

Enter two servants with two bags (^ 2 ' IV.ii.110.1), A bed discovered with a blackamore in it (L^r , V.ii.2.1), XXV

squeake within M^, V.viii.0.1, 9 ). These directions seem to reflect the dramatist's concern for the business of staging. As much as the reader may appre- ciate their specificity, it is doubtful that Brome wrote them with an eye to the reader's viewpoint. An editor so highly concerned with the re a d e r's impression would have just as fastidiously supplied missing exits. It is probable that Fletcher, not the compositors, is responsible for these missing directions as well as two inaccurate ones. Act IV, Scene i, opens with the direction Enter Valentine, Alice and servant. even though Valentine addresses the 'servant' as 'Sirs' (1. 3)• The compositors may have misread 'servant' for 'servants', or, for that matter, 'sirs' for 'sir'; but this is more apt to be an instance of authorial negligence, as is Sebastian's request for his 'maid servant' (sig. I2r , IV.ii. 32), which is contradicted by the later stage- direction that indicates four Maids enter (I2V, IV.ii. 104) . The irregular spelling of speech-prefixes may also be a mark of the 'fo u l p a p e rs '. More sig n ific a n t is the inconsistent use of 'Franck', 'Francis' and 'Fran- cisco' in stage-directions. Valentine calls this character Francisco; Thomas calls him Frank and Francis; and it is possible that Fletcher bore all these names in mind. Samuel is known by his nickname 'Sam' in the dialogue and stage-directions in all but two instances (at III.iii.104.1 and V.vi.8). Dorothea's nickname, xxvi

'Doll', is substituted for the speech-prefix Dor. on (11. 2, 25, 28), K^v (1. 12) and (11. 8, 16) . And Mary (nicknamed ’Mall*) is once called 'Marie' (IV.vi. 19)• Such inconsistencies may be telling signs of Fletcher's hand and alert one to the possibility of a 1 / l copy based on 'foul papers'. Brome may have possessed a transcript (perhaps his own) of Fletcher's 'foul papers'. This transcript must have been relatively neat, for the text of Q1 is fairly free from error, even though there is little evidence of proofreading.1^ But one peculiarity of the quarto text stands out: its careful division into acts and scenes, marred, however, in the final section of the play, by major misnumbering and two unmarked scenes (V.ii and V.viii). Careful act and scene division in Jacobean and Caroline drama came to be regarded as normal in manuscripts prepared for readers (such a poten- tial patron as Cotton) or the printing-house—though of course a manuscript so arranged might also reach the playhouse. Either Fletcher's 'foul papers' were already divided th is way, or the acts and scenes were introduced 1 by Brome or someone e lse . I t fu rth er seems reasonable to suppose that originally the divisions were in good order throughout the play. Compositorial spelling habits and other practices show that two, or possibly three, compositors set the 17 te x t from two cases of type, and used two skeletons for imposition (see Appendix I, Table 1). Compositor X xxvii spells 'doe'; always capitalizes 'lie* (or 'I'le')f usually centers entrances; only adds a character's name after an exit for the sake of clarification; and because he set most of the text without regular distribution, often substitutes italic uppercase I's for roman ones, or uppercase T's, M's, D's, and F's for their italic counter-parts. Compositor Y spells 'do'; sometimes sets entrances in the margin; often sets a period after an exit, adding the character's name, even though the exit may follow that character's departing speech; and occasionally resorts to substitution, using italic uppercase Y 's, A's and T 's for roman ones, or roman uppercase M's for italic M's. A new form of 'lie', spelled with a lowercase 'i', appears on G^r and occasionally thereafter on pages that one would normally as- 18 sign to Y on the basis of the above characteristics. For this reason it is unlikely that a third compositor, with habits nearly identical to those of Y (except for the preferential 'ile' spellings) replaced Y soon after Y completed his share of the work on sheet E or sheet F. But the possibility, however slight, cannot be overlooked, especially since it may explain some perplexing aspects of the division of work between the compositors. The hypothetical third compositor is thus referred to as Yz whenever the work that Y accomplished after the com- pletion of sheet E—when Yz began to assume additional . . . . . 19 responsibilities—is discussed. (Yz, of course, worked from Y's case of type.) x x v iii

Py attending to these characteristics, and by ob- serving the recurrence of distinctive types (discussed more fully in Appendix II), a tentative assignment of pages can be made:

X worked together with Y(z) on: B^v , 0^r , ^2°^ 2 » r'^~

Unassigned: D^r .

The irregular division of work, with several pages se t up by both compositors, shows th a t though the com- p o sito rs often worked sim ultaneously, an awkward method of composition was adopted. X set most of the text, re ceiving minimal assistance from Y and Yz while working on sheets T5>, E and H. Yz, responsible for s e ttin g up most of the pages in sheets I and M, assumed a greater share of the work towards the end, perhaps while X was involved with other matters connected with the copy (see below, p. xxxviii). When work on the text began, Y may have been preoccupied with the composition or xxix distribution of another work in Thomas Harper's shop. He may have also been an apprentice, or a newcomer to Harper's shop, who first observed X set up most or all of Sheet B and later set up pages under X's supervision. Y's posited replacement, Yz, may have set up pages more quickly. The compositors cast-off some sections of the copy, so m e tim e s by h a lf-sh e e ts (see Appendix III). Casting-off enabled both compositors to work simul- taneously, and gave X the particular advantage of being able to work ahead of his fellow compositor without . . . 20 w aiting for him to fin is h an assigned s t m t . The method of composition is discussed in d e ta il in Appendix III, but a few significant points must be made here about compositorial procedure. B(i) must have been imposed before B(o), for the running-title on , replaced with a new running-title for successive ii» r pages, had to be removed to make room for the head-title on B^r (see Appendix I). X, having cast-off the first section of the text, enough to fill the first sheet, began work with a partially filled case of type, relying on the intermittent substitution of italic uppercase I's for roman ones on every page in B(i). After imposing B(i), X paused to distribute some standing type from a forme belonging to another work, now completed, and thus composed the f i r s t th ree pages of B(o) w ithout s u b s titu t- ing italic I's. Substituted I's appear on B^v, where an i t a l i c uppercase T was also su b stitu ted fo r a roman one in a speech-prefix (1. 16). Y apparently finished XXX that page, setting five roman I's towards the end. Inter- m ittent d istrib u tio n of type from another work and eventually B(i) would have supplied X with additional roman I's used in C(i). While X set up his share of C(i) and imposed th a t forme on skeleton I, Y constructed skeleton II , used for the im position of C(o) and a ll succeeding outer formes with the significant exceptions of K(o) and L(o). Skeleton I henceforth was used for the imposition of all inner formes as well as the outer formes of K and L (see Appendix I, Table 1 ). The disappearance of skeleton II during the printing of sheet K deserves particular notice because the misnumbering of acts and scenes occurs in that very sheet and continues onto L^r and M^r where scenes are unmarked (as on D^, Il.iii). This is the only section of the play that apparently gave the compositors difficulty. Everything else about the text suggests that composition progressed smoothly, with sheets printed in successive order (see Appendix I, Table 1). X and Y seem to have worked well as a p a ir. They generally set thirty-eight lines to the page, making an effort to place act and scene headings at the beginning of new pages, and ra re ly crowded type onto a page (the f r e - quent consequence of inaccurate casting-off). They shared work on gatherings and individual pages. Y trie d to distribute his pages as soon as they were returned to him from the press; X, preoccupied on most gatherings with more pages than Y, distributed type more xxx i gradually; but prolonged delays arising from the need to distribute several formes of standing type were, for the most p a rt, avoided. They adopted, and nearly always followed, the procedure of completing the inner formes of gatherings before the corresponding outer formes, so that skeletons could be sent alternately to the press, expediting the process of perfecting each sheet. 22 Distinctive types sometimes appear on each forme in a single gathering (as in sheets F, H, K and M), which suggests that composition and distribution proceeded at a fairly normal rate.^ Yet the composition of sheet K must have been fraught with difficulties since both formes of this sheet were imposed on the same skeleton (see Appendix III). It is difficult to believe that such reasonably capable compositors suddenly became careless, forgetting to use skeleton II when imposing K(o) and K (i), and in - troducing the misnumbering of acts and scenes. The absence of skeleton II, moreover, cannot be ascribed to a delay in the return of I(o) on skeleton II, for the 'S' in ‘Scena' on I^v reappears on K^v and K^v showing that skeleton II had been returned from the press before the compositors finished composing K(o) and K (i). This 'S ', recognizable on four pages in the quarto, displays a slightly rounded protrusion within the top inner curve, a protrusion th at appears to be less worn on I^v and K^v than on K^V and L^v where i t s damaged t a i l accumu- la te d an excessive amount of ink. This suggests, in XXX i i turn, that K(o) preceded K(i) through the press. This too is curious, for an examination of recurrent types leads one to conclude that inner formes normally preceded outer formes through the press. c) Was the play revised, and by whom?

These problems may have been caused, however, by revisions made by Fletcher or Brome in one section of the text. That two versions of act division are detect- able in the misnumbered section is sig n ific a n t. In one hypothetical version of the compositors' copy, 'Scena Quinta' (IV.v) and 'Scena Sexta' (IV.vi), on K^v and K^ in Qq, could have been followed by 'Actus Quintus, Scena Prima' (IV.vii), now 'Scena septima' on K^V, 'Scena Secunda' (IV.viii), now 'Scena Secunda' on K^v, 'Scena Tertia' (IV.i*), now 'Scena Octava* on K^v, 'Scena Quarta' (V.i), now 'Actus Quintus, Scena Quarta* on L^r , with the remaining scenes of the f i f t h act numbered as they are in Qq, if an allowance is made for two unmarked scenes (V .ii and V .v iii) on L^r and M^r . In the other version (adopted, for the most part, by F), Act IV continues through 'Scena Octava* and Act V begins with the scene numbered as ' Actus Q uintus, Scena Qua r ta * in Qq. Of these two versions, the former, being basically in accordance with the rest of the numbering in the play, deserves to be regarded as the original version, and the latter as a revision that would have x x x iii concealed all traces of the original scene numbering if *Scena secunda' had been clearly marked as 'Scena Octava', 1Octava' as 'Nona1, and * Actus Quintus, Scena Quarta* as * Actus Quintus, Scena Prima' , as in F. What Qq gives us is a confused sequence with 'septima' followed by * secunda* , 1Octava* and the atypical act- heading. Whether Fletcher or Brome is responsible for altering the numbering, Brome's emendations in this section of the text were inadequate. That this revised section coincides with the disappearance of skeleton II prompts another hypothesis: that skeleton II was temporarily set aside because it was bound up with standing type for a forme of K that was never used, a forme of K that was faithful to the 24 unrevised copy. What is being suggested is that three formes of K were composed: the abandoned forme of K—to be called K(A)--on skeleton II , and K(o) and K (i), imposed successively on skeleton I. During the interim between the composition of K(A) and its removal from skeleton II—which took place before L(i) was imposed on this skeleton—there must have been some debate in the printing house over the authority of the K(A) version. This hypothesis provides an answer for the absence of skeleton II and helps to explain c e rta in phenomena in sheets K, L and M. Typographical evidence, discussed more fully in Appendix III, tends to support the idea that X and Yz completed K(A) before proceeding to set xxxiv up K(o) and K (i). Even i f the inferences drawn from this evidence seem too conjectural, some explanation ought to be found for the introduction of heavy- faced, long ’s's' in the scene-headings on K^v that are clearly substitutes for the majuscule 'S's' normally used in scene-headings. One such 'S' of the proper fount was transferred from I^v to K^v and then to K^v (see above, p. xxxi ); another, sufficiently dis- • . • r tmctive to be recognizable, appears in 'Scena' on 1^ but not on K^v where it is needed. Perhaps this 'S' was tied up in a scene-heading on K(A) and therefore was 2 5 not available for use in K(i). J There are grounds then for assuming that there was a forme of K imposed on skeleton II and eventually replaced by an emended version. We can be fairly certain that this forme was not rejected merely because it con- tained act and scene headings that were altered in the version printed for the quarto. The flagrant misnumbering in the quarto testifies that neither K(i) nor K(o) is a thoroughly 'corrected' version. Furthermore, minor alterations could have been made by unlocking the forme on skeleton II, inserting the proper headings,and re- imposing the forme, thus obviating the need to compose a new forme. Since there are no baffling 'loose ends' in the action, it is doubtful that a scene was omitted, and there is nothing to indicate that the order of scenes was rearranged. But either Fletcher or Brome may have tampered with the dialogue, perhaps in merely XXXV one scene. Remembering the poor reception of the f i r s t production, either Fletcher or Brome might have felt compelled to make some alterations, not merely by re- numbering acts and scenes, but by making changes in the dialogue as well. Knowing that Brome was accustomed to revising other dramatists' plays, it is even more likely that he is responsible for such alterations. Supporting such a claim is not easy. More than one critic, taking the authorship of Monsieur Thomas for granted, has used the play as a demonstrative example of Fletcher's linguistic habits and his developing style as poet and dram atist. Their studies would s t i l l bear witness to Fletcher's hand if there were reason (and there is not) to question the authorship of the entire play. Consequently, the revision postulated must be minor, so s lig h t as to be barely n o ticeab le. In 'Scena Octava' on K^v (IV.ix) an inconsistency in the characterization of Michael emerges which, under the circumstances, may be a telling sign of Brome's handiwork. In the events leading up to this scene, Francisco, embarrassed and distressed by the trouble he has brought upon Valentine, decides to borrow a horse and to leave his host's home secretly. Boarding a ship, he is apprehended by Michael, who is determined to bring him back to V alentine, devastated by F ran c isc o 's sudden departure. To prevent Francisco from leaving, Michael twists facts, accusing him of theft. Instead of refuting xxxvi tYie charge, Francisco lies, contending that he has stolen far more than Michael realizes: a 'ring' and 'jewel' (IV.v.27). The astounded Michael states his intention to deliver Francisco to a 'justice' (IV.v.35)« In 'Scena Octava' (IV.ix) Michael reappears with Francisco, now guarded by officers. Just before Michael dismisses the officers, he admits to himself that he fe e ls sorry for Francisco, and questions h is wisdom in not permitting his charge to escape. Although Michael's sense of duty persuades him that Francisco must face the consequences of his self-confessed crime, his hope that Valentine's 'long love' (IV.ix.10) for Francisco will effect a reconciliation compels him to console the youth with the promise that the following day will 'see all this blown over' (IV.ix.24). Yet in the final scene of the play (V.x), which takes place the following day, Michael's sympathy for Francisco seems to have vanished. The brief appearance of Michael in Act V, Scene ii, moreover, gives no indication of when or why he loses his' compassion; he simply instructs a servant to bring Fran- cisco to Valentine's house in an hour and meanwhile, to 'do him a l l service and f a ir o ffic e ' (V .v.5)—an in - junction that stems from either sheer civility or solici- tous care. Michael's attitude towards Francisco is less merci- ful in the final scene than in Act IV, Scene ix. With- out appealing to Valentine's 'long love' for Francisco, Michael, revealing his desire to see Francisco exposed xxxvii as a common criminal, tries to eradicate Valentine's faith that his former guest is 'a worthy young man' (V.x.3). Arguing, 'When all's tried, I fear you'll change your faith' (V.x.^), Michael urges Valentine to 'Be ruled by me* and proceeds to prosecute Francisco for 'Divers abuses done, thefts often practised, / Monies and jewels too, and those no t r i f l e s ' (V.x.14, 28-9)• Michael's behaviour here is in keeping with his character as presented throughout the play, if an ex- ception is made for Act IV, Scene ix; that is, he is Valentine's steadfast friend and slightly nosy neigh- bour, obdurately determined to make Valentine share his less than sympathetic view of the young lovers. It is Michael who forces Valentine to face the fact that Fran- cisco loves Cellide (II. v), and Michael who later urges Valentine to make Cellide his wife, regardless of her feelings (IV.iii). Michael's behaviour in the final scene is not the lo g ical outcome of h is behaviour in Act IV, Scene ix; it is the logical outcome of his behaviour elsewhere. This flaw in characterization can be ascribed either to authorial carelessness, meaning that Fletcher forgot to make Michael more kind-hearted in the final scene, or to Brome's unsuccessful effort to revise the final scene in accordance with revisions that he made in Act IV, Scene ix. What makes the case for Brome's interference more convincing is the posited delay at the end of the L xxx v iii gathering. Brome's intention to revise the last section of the play may have forced the compositors to curtail composition at the end of the final scene in the L gathering while they waited for Brome to deliver the final revisions. Sig. L^v is the only page containing 'wasted' space; { h a lf of , which could have accolfib- dated the beginning of the next scene, 'Scena Nona* (V.vi), was left blank. The order of skeletons in this section suggests that the postulated delay was at least long enough to permit sheet K to be perfected. L(o) on skeleton I followed L(i), on skeleton II, through the press; skeleton II, therefore, must have been returned to the compositors before skeleton I. But M(i) on skeleton I was actually the next forme imposed, indicating that both skeletons had been returned from the press by the time th a t M(i) was ready for imposition. If the compositors expected to receive Brome's final revisions, they must have been disappointed, as time passed and no revisions were delivered. Just to recapitulate, a reconstruction of certain events as they may have occurred in the printing- house is in order. While sheet H was being perfected, compositor Y proceeded to compose sheet I, receiving, for the first time, minimal assistance from X, involved with problems posed by the ensuing section. What X found more disturbing than the misnumbering of acts and scenes was the inclusion of a new scene, labelled 'Scena Octava'. Certain correspondences between the dialogue xxxix and speech-prefixes in this scene and *Scena Tertia' , not yet deleted from the text, led X to conclude that 'Scena Octava' was intended to supplant "Scena Tertia' . X and others in the shop pondered the question of which scene ought to be rejected, and finally decided that adhering to the original copy would be the safest way to proceed. While X composed the fin a l pages in sheet I, Yz set up the outer forme of K(A)—the forme containing the problematic 1Scena Tertia'--receiving, as usual, some assistance from X towards the end. Out of habit, X imposed this outer forme on skeleton II, only to learn shortly thereafter that the authority of "Scena Tertia* was still in question. He received new instruc- tio n s: to compose another forme of K(o), containing "Scena Octava' , and to allow the a lte rn a tiv e forme of K(o)—K(A)—to remain standing until the difficulty was resolved. Complying with the request, X and Yz sent K(o) and K(i) to press without distributing type from skeleton II. Once sheet K had been perfected, the compositors were instructed to distribute K(A). They then used skeleton II for the imposition of L(i). A brief delay took place when the compositors prematurely ceased composition on L^v after receiving orders to await Brome's forthcoming revisions of the final section. The promised revisions never arrived, and the compositors, who now had even the preliminaries in their possession, continued to set up the text from their copy. From this stage forward, the compositors worked from a copy xl that was not thoroughly, and perhaps never had been, revised or edited, for the errors on MJ1* in Qq (see collations for V.vii.l4, V.viii.O.1.), including an unmarked scene (as on L^r ) escaped editorial emendation. As tentative as this reconstruction is, it illus- trates the fundamental case for interventions from Brome, which thus fa r has been based on problems connected with the composition and printing of the final section of the play. The next step is to consider whether Brome would have been inclined to tamper with Fletcher's text. This ushers in a new subject for in- vestigation: Richard Brome's role as editor. d) Richard Brome as E ditor

Brome's involvement in the publication of Monsieur Thomas evidently provoked a reaction that precipitated him into the limelight. In the letter to Charles Cotton prefacing the quarto te x t, Brome, assuming a defensive stance, admits that in dedicating the play to Cotton, he has invited the 'censures' (1. 3) of others. Anyone wishing to dissociate Cotton's name from Brome's (as a means of p ro tectin g C otton's rep u tatio n ) must have had reason to believe that the publication was unauthorized by the true owners of the play. Cotton himself may have been disturbed by the dedication, especially since Brome's attempt to discredit the censurers is feeble: he asserts his and Cotton's 'right' to the play, yet x li offers no explanation as to how he became the ’unworthy preserver' of Fletcher's comedy, or in what way his 'own weak labours’ have affected Fletcher's text (11. 5» 21-2). Several conjectures have been made above about the nature of Brome's labours on the text; more must be made now about his self-appointed role as the play's preserver. Brome probably came into possession of Fletcher's comedy, or a transcript of it, in the early l 630's , while he was working for the King's Men. Fletcher may have initially designed Monsieur Thomas for this acting company; the title page of the first and second quarto states that the play was acted at Blackfriars, a small private theatre where the King's Men performed many plays between 1609 and 1635; or the King's Men may have acquired the play through an intermediate source and performed it after Fletcher's death (in 1625)» If the King's Men were responsible for the unsuccessful performance that Brome alludes to in his commendatory verses, then the company would have had reason to ask Brome to revise the unapplauded play, adapting it to suit contemporary tastes. By 163^ Brome left the King's Men, presumably taking Monsieur Thomas with him, and by 1637 he had become associated with the S alisbury Court Theatre. The news that Brome was arranging to have Monsieur Thomas published might therefore have been received by the King's Men as an unpleasant surprise. On 22 January 1639 the play was entered in the Stationers' x l i i

Register; shortly thereafter Brome broke his second con- tract with Salisbury Court (delivering one of his plays to the company just before Easter) and joined the acting company of his close friend, William Beeston, at the Cockpit in Drury Lane. With interest in Monsieur Thomas revived, Beeston may have wanted to secure full performance-rights to the play, thereby preventing a rival company from staging it. Considering the overall evidence suggesting that the King’s Men had a vested in- te r e s t in Monsieur Thomas, a Lord Chamberlain's ed ict issued on 10 August 1639 is pertinent; its purpose was to prevent rival companies from acting the plays in the repertory of Beeston's Boys. Among the plays listed was Fathers Owne Sonne, id e n tifie d by E . K. Chambers and 29 G. H* Bentley as Monsieur Thomas. Richard J . Kaufmann, though believing th a t Brome's 'right' to publish Monsieur Thomas was theoretically contestable, contends that Brome found the time to revise the play completely. According to Kaufmann, F a th e r's Own Son was Brome' s adaptation, emphasizing the fa th e r- son parallels.^0 There is no way to disprove this hypothesis, but it does not explain how that title became affixed to the post-Restoration quarto of Monsieur Thomas, or why Brome, having thoroughly revised the comedy, felt an additional need to introduce minor changes into Fletcher's text before submitting it to the p rin te rs . Remembering as w ell th a t the 'double- title' was used for many plays during this period— x l i i i

P h ila s te r , or Love Lies A-Bleeding and The Woman's Prize or The Tamer Tamed come to mind—Monsieur Thomas or Father* s Own Son may simply have been popularly known by the l a tte r t i t l e . What seems fa ir ly credible is th at Brome, a minor dramatist, aspiring to win patronage and some acclaim by adding commendable adjustm ents to F le tc h e r's comedy, never finished his intended revisions. In the letter to Cotton, he refers to his 'weak labours' with admirable humility, yet he may have refrained from describing them in the hope th at he would be credited with more than his due. Perusing the commendatory verses, one wonders whether the tone is self-congratulatory, whether Brome praised the structure of the play primarily to compliment himself on the reorganization of the final act-division. That Brome places so much emphasis on the question of authorship is equally intriguing. The structural excellence of Monsieur Thomas shows that the play is 'authorized by the a u th o r's name' (1. 9)- Those who doubted the worth of the play and thus that Fletcher wrote i t did so

When Ignorance was judge, and but a few What was legitimate, what bastard knew. The world's grown wiser now: each man can say, 'If Fletcher made it, 'tis an exc'llent play'. ( 1 1 . 15- 1 8 ) A sardonic note enters these lines: the critics who originally failed to perceive the virtues of Monsieur Thomas, like those who now take its excellence for granted because Fletcher has gained renown, are x liv superficial. By implication, Brome is to be distinguished from such literary sheep; he has preserved the neglected play, and he tried to emend the small flaws he noticed. It is not difficult to imagine why Brome might have found some fault with Monsieur Thomas. As much as Brome admired Fletcher, as often as he was influenced by his s ty le , 31 Brome's true mentor was Ben Jonson, and the stylistic gap between Jonson and Fletcher is broad. Brome's conversational prose and verse, which lacks Jonson's verbal intensity, bears comparison with the rippling, carefree parlance one finds in many of Fletcher's plays. But Brome's preference for realistic rather than romantic settings and his avoidance of sen- sationalism—which Fletcher sought—coupled with his desire to inculcate moral values, align him with Jonson. In his youth Brome was Jonson's apprentice, and when he began to write plays, the master-servant relationship continued on a professional level. Through his dili- gent efforts, and his admiration for Jonson's high artistic standards and architectonic style, Brome finally gained approval from Jonson, who commended Brome for his 'observation of those Comick Lawes / Which I, your Master, first did teach the Age. / You learn'd it well; and for it, serv'd your time / A Prentise-ship. .

Having written his own share of city comedies, Brome must have appreciated Monsieur Thomas; but perhaps his desire to gain attention by improving the play, xlv mixed with his esteem for meticulous structural division, prompted him to revise the final act-division, and not without reason. If the original act-division is applied (see above, p. xxxii), Act IV ends (at IV.vi) and Act V begins (at IV.vii) with scenes from the subplot. Such a division is defensible, for the subplot dominates the latter half of the play and its intrigues cannot be overlooked if the full meaning of the play is to be grasped (see below, p. lxxxv). Yet Brome, who never permitted the subplot to upstage the main plot in his best works, may have found such a division lamentably weak. The alternative act-division, in which a scene from the main plot (IV.ix) closes the fourth act, brings the main plot into the forefront of the play just before the conclu- sion. A division at Act IV, Scene v, would presumably have been unthinkable; that morose scene would not end the fourth act on an upbeat, signalling the happy turn of events in the final reconciliation; and it would have the further drawback of leaving too many scenes—fifteen in all—in the final act. So perhaps Brome touched up the second scene focusing on Francisco's capture, altering Michael's attitude towards his captive so that the fourth act would end on a distinctly optimistic note. That the characterization of Michael falls apart in a section that apparently gave the compositors trouble weighs the balance in favor of intervention. Fletcher's ability to use characterization as a source of dramaturgical strength is neatly exemplified in x lv i

Monsieur Thomas, however casual his a ttitu d e towards characterization may be in other works. ^ No linguistic or metrical evidence bears witness to Brome's presence in 'Scena Octava'; yet this is not necessarily a sign that he did not rewrite the scene. Imitating Fletcher's sty le in such a b rie f scene ce rta in ly would not have been beyond Brome*s a b ility . Lacking fu rth e r evidence, the case for Brome's interference is incapable of final proof. In the la s t an aly sis, Brome deserves more commenda- tion for his efforts than criticism. His failure to polish the text completely was fortuitous in that it spared some vestiges of Fletcher's 'foul papers'. If his 'weak labours' consisted of little more than delivering a partially edited text to the publisher or printers, then he is to be praised a t le a s t for preserving and publishing one of Fletcher's most delightful pieces, perhaps even for perceiving the futility of trying to revise a comedy not demanding extensive alterations. To the extent that his labours may have changed Fletcher's work to some degree, his intentions, one assumes, were good ones: to improve the play without ostensibly rework ing the piece or departing from Fletcher's style, and to reorganize the final act-division so that the lines of 3 Zl action would run to 'crown the end'. Crediting Brome with astute critical perception—with seeing virtues in Monsieur Thomas that many modern critics have overlooked gives the first 'editor* of this comedy the very least x lv ii of what he deserves from its readers and future spectators. Works Cited

This list only includes texts cited in the Introduction and commentary. For a sp ec ific work in a c o lle c tio n of works in several volumes the volume number is given, though page numbers have been excluded. General edi- to rs of modern se rie s of play ed itio n s th at are f r e - quently cited are named under 'A List of Abbreviations', pp. xviii-xix.

A.D.S.D. Compte V III. In Les Comptes du Monde Aven- tureux Contenant liiij discours. Pans, 15B2 , sig s. dgr -e4r . Abbot, George. A Briefe Description of the Whole Worlde (1599). The English Experience, No. 213- Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm Ltd.; New York: Da Capo P ress, 1970. Abbott, E. A. A Shakespearian Grammar. 3rd edn. London, I 87O. Adams, Percy G. Travellers and Travel Liars, 1660-1800. Berkeley, Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press, 1956. Alford, V iolet. Sword Dance and Drama. 1962; r p t . Philadelphia: Dufour Editions, 1965» Andrews, Clarence Edward. R i chard Brome : A Study of His Life and Works. Yale Studies m English, No.- 56. Ed. Albert S. Cook. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1913. /""Anglicus, Bartholomaeus_7. Batman Vppon Bartholome, his Booke, De Proprietatibus Rerum. Trans. Ste- phen Batman. London, 1582. Appleton, William W. Beaumont and F le tc h e r: A C ritic a l Study. London: George Allen & Unwin L t d 1956.~ 355

Arber, Edward., ad. A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London;" l55*i~l640. Vol. IV, London^ l8?7. Avery, Emmett L., and A. H. Scouten. 'A Tentative Calen- dar of Daily T heatrical Performances in London, 1700-1701 to 1704- 1705.' PMLA, 63 (1948), 114-80. A ydelotte, Frank. Elizabethan Rogues and Vagabonds. Oxford Historical and Literary Studies, Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon, 1913. Babb, Lawrence. The Elizabethan Malady: A Study of Melancholia in English Literature from 1580 to 1642. Studies in Language and L ite ra tu re . East Lansing: Michigan State College Press, 1951. Baker, David Erskine. Biographia Dramatica, or, A Com- panion to the Playhouse. Ed. Issac Reed. 2 vols. /E ng. ,_7_ 17S2. Bandello, Matteo. The Novels of Matteo Bandello, Bishop of Agen. Trans. John Payne. London"! 1890. Vol. V. Barber, Richard and Riches, Anne. A D ictionary of Fabulous Beasts. 1971» rpt. Ipswich, Eng.: The Boydell Press, 1975* Baskervill, Charles Read. The Elizabethan Jig. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press, 1929. 'English Songs on the Night V isit.' PMLA, 36 ( 1921), 565-614. Beaumont, Francis and John F letch er. Comedies and T ragedies. London, 1647. The Dramatick Works of Beaumont and F le tc h e r. Ed. George Colman et a l . London"! 1778. Vol. IV. F ifty Comedies and T ragedies. London, 1679* Philaster, or Love Lies A-Bleeding. Ed. Andrew Gurr. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 1969. The Works of Beaumont and F le tc h e r. Ed. Alexander Dyce. Vol. IV. London, l844. The Works of Beaumont and F le tc h e r. Ed. Henry Weber. l4 vols" Edinburgh, 1812. The Work^ of Beaumont and F le tc h e r. Ed. L. Theobald, T. Seward, and J . Sympson. 10 vols. London, 1750. 356

The Works of Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher. Variorum Edition. Ed. A. H. Bullen et a l . 4 vols. London: G. Bell & Sons Ltd. & A. H. Bullen, 190/1-12. The Works of Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher. Ed. Arnold Glover and A. R. Waller. Cambridge English C lassics. 10 vols. 1905-12; r p t . New York: Octagon Press, 1969. Bentley, G. E. r ,.¡ , The Jacobean and Caroline Stage. 7 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 19^1-68. Beresford, John, introd. Poems of Sir Charles Cotton, I63O-I647« New York: Boni and L iv e rig h t, n.d. Bertram, Paul. Shakespeare and The Two Noble Kinsmen. New Brunswick, N. J .: Rutgers Univ. Press"! 1965^ Bevington, David. From Mankind to Marlowe: Growth of Structure in the Popular Drama of Tudor England. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1962. Bhattacherje, Mohinimohan. Platonic Ideas in Spenser. 1935» r p t. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1970. Bishop Percy's Folio Manuscript: Ballads and Romances. Ed. John W. Hales and Frederick E. J . F u rn iv a ll. k vols. London, 1867-68. Blake, John. B. Letter to Author. Ik May 1978. Bloodgood, Lida Fleitmann. The Saddle of Queens: The Story of the Side-Saddle. London: J . A. Allen & Co., 1959. Boccaccio, Giovanni. The Decameron. Intro. Edward Hutton, k vols. London: David Nutt, 1909» Bonham, Thomas. The Chyrurgeons C lo se t. London, 1630. The English Experience, No. 31- Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm Ltd.; New York: Da Capo Press, 1968. Borde, Andrew. The Breuiary of H elthe. London, 15^7« The English Experience, No. 362. Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm Ltd.; New York: Da Capo Press, 1971. The Pryncyples of AstronQjnye. London 15^2?_/. The English Experience, No. 570. Am- sterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm L td.; New York: Da Capo Press, 1973« Bowden, William R. The English Dramatic Lyric, 1603-^2: 35?

A Study in S tuart Dramatic Technique. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 195T! Bowers, Fredson. 'Notes on Running-Titles as Biblio- graphical Evidence.' The Library, 4th ser., 9 (1938), 313-38. Bradfield, Nancy. Historical Costumes of England: From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century. 3rd. edn. rev. 1971; rp t. New York, N. Y.: Barnes & Noble, In c ., 1972. Bradford, Jim. Letter to author. 24 September 1976. Brand, John. Observations on Popular Antiquities: Chiefly Illustrating the Origin of our Vulgar Cus- toms, Ceremonies, and Superstitions. 2 vols. Lon- don, lBlT- Brandel, Fernand. The Mediterranean: and the Mediter- ranean World in the Age of P h ilip I I . Trans. Sian Reynolds. "London: Collins St. James's Place, 1973* Brewer, E. Cobham. Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, Centenary Edition. Rev. Ivor H. Evans. New York: Harper & Rowe - C assell & Co., L td ., 1970. Brewer, E. Cobham. A Dictionary of Miracles, Imitative, Realistic, and Dogmatic. 1854; rpt. Detroit: Gale Research Co., i9 6 0 . Bridenbaugh, Carl. Vexed and Troubled Englishmen, 1590- 1642. New York: Oxford Univ. P re ss, 1968. Bridge, Sir Frederick. The Old Cryes of London: With Numerous Illustrations and Musical Examples. Lon- don: Novello and Company L td ., 1921. Brody, Alan. The English Mummers and Their Plays: traces of Ancient Mystery. University of Pennsylvania Publications m Folklore and Folklife. Ed. Kenneth S. G oldstein. 1969; rp t. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania P ress, 1970. Brome, Richard. The A ntipodes. Ed. Ann Haaker. Regents Renaissance Drama Series. Lincoln: Univ. of Ne- braska Press, 1966. The Dramatic Works of Richard Brome Con- taining Fifteen Comedies Now First Collected in Three Volumes. ^Ed. R. H. Shepherd._J ^373* rp t New York: AMS P ress, In c ., 1966. A Jovial Crew. Ed. Ann A. Haaker. Regents 358

Renaissance Drama Series. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska P re s s , 1968.

B/"~ullockar_7. I* An English Expositor: Teaching the In te rp re ta tio n of the Hardest Words Vsed In Our Language. London, I6i5~. Bullough, Geoffrey. Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare: Vol. I. Early Comedies, Poems, Romeo and J u l i e t . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 19^?. Burton, Robert. The Anatomy of Melancholy. In tro . Holbrook Jackson. 1932; rp t. London: Dent-Everyman's L ibrary, 1964. Cassidy, Vincent H. The Sea Around the A tla n tic Ocean. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Univ. Press, 1968~ Castiglione, Baldassare. The Book of The Courtier by Count Baldassare Castiglione Done into English by S ir Thomas Hoby Anno 155TI In tro . W. H. D. Rouse. Ed. Drayton Henderson. New York: E. P. Dutton- Everyman's Library, n.d. The Castle of Perseverance. In English Morality Plays and Moral Interludes. Ed. Edgar T. Schell and J. D. Shuchter. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, In c ., 1969. Cawdrey, Robert. A Treasurie or Store-House of Similies: Both pleasant, delightfull, and profitable. London, IS 0 9 . Cawte, E. C., Alex Helm and N. Peacock. English Ritual Drama: a Geographical Index. Publications of the F olk-lore Society, No. 12?. London: n .p ., 196?. Cecil Sharp's Collection of English Folk Songs. Ed. Maud Karpeles. 2 vols. /Oxford:_/ Oxford Univ. Press, 1974. The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia: With a New Atlas of the World. 12 v o ls. 1889; rev. New York: The Century Co., 1911. Vol. IX. Chambers, E. K. The Elizabethan Stage. 4 vols. Oxford: Oxford Univ. P ress, 1923. ------. The English Folk P la y . 1933; r p t. New York: Haskell House, 1966. The Mediaeval Stage. 2 vols. 1903» rpt. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1925» Chambers' Biographical Dictionary: A New Edition. Ed. J . 0. Thorne. 1897; r p t. New York: S t. M artin's P ress, 1961. 359

Chapman, George. The Widow’s T ears. Ed. E thel M. Smeak. Regents Renaissance Drama Series. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1966. Chappell, William. Old English Popular Music. Rev. H. Ellis Wooldridge (2 vols. in one.) 1893» rp t. New York: Jack B russel, 1961. Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. 2nd edn. Ed. F. N. Robinson. Boston: Houghton M ifflin Co., 1957- Cheshire Folk Drama, Ed. Alex Helm. Ibstock, L e ic e ste r- sh ire: The Guizer Press, 1968. The Chester Plays. Re-ed. Hermann Deimling. Early Eng- lish Text Society. Extra Series No. 62. 1892; rp t. London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1926. Chettle, Henry, Thomas Dekker and William Haughton. The Pleasant Comodie of Patient G rissill. Ed. Gottlieb Hiibsch. Eflangen, Ger., 1893- Child, Francis James, ed. The English and Scottish Popu- lar Ballads. 5 vols. I883-I 89S; rp t. New York: Pageant Book Co.-The Folklore Press, 1957« Clarke, Carlton. The Court of Orphans. /"Leicester, Eng.J7: Leicester Univ. Press, 197^- Clarkson, Paul S. and Clyde T. Warren. The Law of Property in Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Drama. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 19^2. Cogan, Thomas. The Haven of H ealth, Chiefly made for the Comfort of Students, and consequently for all those that have a care of their health, amplified upon five words of Hippocrates, written Epid. 6 Labour, Meat, Dnnke, Sleepe, Venus: Hereunto is added a Preservative from the P e stile n c e : with a short censure of the late sicknesse at Oxford. London~i l6l27 Cohen, Nathan. 'No Fun, No Frolic.' /"TRev. of Monsieur Thomas. Dir. Jim Bradford. 7 Toronto Star, 22 May 1969, p. 30, cols. 1-2. Cone, Mary. 'F letch er Without Beaumont: A Study of the Independent Plays of John Fletcher.' DAI, 31 (1970)» 476OA (Univ. of Mississippi). Cony-Catchers and Bawdy Baskets: An Anthology of Eliza- bethan Low Life. Ed. Gammi Salgado. Harmonds- worth, Eng.: Penguin Books, 1972. 360

Coryat, Thomas. C oryat's C ru d itie s. Glasgow; J . Maclehose and Sons, 1905. Coulet, Henri. 'Le Roman de L'Age Baroque.' In His- to ire Du Roman En France. Vol. II of Le Roman Jusqu'aNla Revolution. Lettres Françaises. Ed. Robert Mauzi. Pans: Librairie Armand Colin, 1967, pp. 143-5^. Cowell, John. The Interpreter, or Booke Containing the S ig n ific a tio n of Words. Cambridge, 1607. Creighton, Charles. A History of Epidemics in Britain with Additional Material by IK EK CK Eversley, E. Ashworth Underwood, Lynda O v e rall. 2 vols. 1895; r p t. New York: Barnes &,Noble, In c ., 1965. Crow, John. 'Some Jacobean Catch-Phrases and Some Light on Thomas Bretnor.' In Elizabethan and Jacobean Studies Presented to Frank Percy Wilson. Oxford: Clarendon, 1959» pp. 25O-7 8 . Cunnington, C. W illett and P h illis . Handbook of English Costume in the Seventeenth Century. London: Faber and Faber, L td ., 1950. Cunnington, Phillis and Catherine Lucas, with Chapters by Alan Mansfield. Occupational Costume in England : From the Eleventh Century to 1915. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1967. Curry, Walter Clyde. Chaucer and the Mediaeval Sciences. 2nd edn. 1926; rp t. New York: Barnes & Noble, In c ., I960. Danby, John F. Poets on F ortune' s H i l l : Studies in S id- ney, Shakespeare, and Beaumont & F le tc h e r. London: Faber and Faber, L td ., 1952. Davenant, William. Salmacida Spolia, A Masque. London, 1639 (fo r 1638). Debus, Allen G. The English Paracelsians. Oldbourne history of science library, No. 4 5 . London: Old- bourne, 1965. Deighton, K. The Old Dramatists: Conjectural Readings. Westminster: Archibald Constable and Co., 1896. Dekker, Thomas. The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker. Ed. Fredson Bowers. 4 vols. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1953-61. The Gull's Hornbook. In The Non-Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker. London, 1885. Vol. II . 361

D/~ennys 7» J/~ohn 7« The Secrets of Angling, 1613» rptT London,~~1883~ ' Desainleins, Claude. A Dictionary French and English, London, 1593« A Scolar Press Facsim ile. English Linguistics 1500-1800 (A Collection of Facsimile Reprints). Ed. R. C. Alston* No. 231. Menston, Eng.: The Scolar P ress, L td ., 1970. Dictionary of National Biography. Ed. Leslie Stephen and Sidney Lee. 22 vols. 1885-1901; rpt. 7~0xford:_7 Oxford Univ. Press, 195°. The Doctors of Dull-Head C ollege: Being a D roll Formed out of The Lost Play of The Father’s Own Son. Ed. J. 0. Halliwell, London, i860. Doebler, Bettie Anne. ’Othello*s Angles: Ars Moriendi.’ Appendix to John Doebler’s Shakespeare’s Speaking Pictures: Studies in Iconic Imagery. Albuquerque: Univ. of New Mexico P ress, 197^7 PP* 172-85. Donne, John. ’The Undertaking or Platonic Love.’ In The Songs and Sonnets of J ohn Donne. Ed. Theodore Redpath. 1956; rp t. London: M ethuen-University Paperback, 1967. Duchartre, Pierre Louis. The Italian Comedy, The Im- provisation, Scenaries, Lives, Attributes, Por- traits and Masks of the Illustrious Characters of the Commedia d e l l ’ A rte . Trans. Randolph T. Weaver New York: Dover, 1966. Durfey, Thomas. Trick fo r Trick; or The Debauch’d Hypo- c r ite , A Comedy. London, 167BT Earle, John. Micro-cosmographie, or A Piece of the World Discovered in essayes and Characters. 5th ed Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1903- Ed. Philip Bless.. 1811; rpt. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1903. E arly Plays From the I t a l i a n . Ed. R. Warwick Bond. Oxford: Clarendon, 1911. Eight Mummers* Plays . Ed. Alex Helm. Great Britain: Ginn, 1971. 1811 Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue: A Dictionary of Buckish Slang, University Wit, and Pickpocket Elo- quence . Fore. Robert Crome. Northfield, 111.: Digest Books, In c ., 1971- The Elizabethan Underworld. Ed. A. V. Judges. 193°i rp t. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965- 362

Elwin, Malcolm. The Playgoer* s Handbook. London: Jonathan Cape, 1928. E lyot, S ir Thomas. The Book named the Governor. Ed. S. E. Lehmberg. London: Dent-Everyman*s L ibrary, 1962. ------. The C astel of H elthe. London, 1539• Evans, H. Meurig and W. 0. Thomas, comps, and eds. Y Geiriadur Mawr, The Complete Welsh-English English- Welsh Dictionary. 2nd edn. Llandysul, Wales: J. D. Lewis and Sons Ltd.-Gomerian Press, i9 6 0 . Everyman. In English Morality Plays and Moral Inter- ludes . Ed. Edgar T. Schell and J . D. Shuchter. New York: Holt, R inehart and Winston, In c . -R inehart E ditions, 1969, pp. 111-39« /~Eyre, G. E. B., ed._7. A Transcript of the Registers of the Worshipful Company of Stationers; from 1640- 170%~A.D.. Vol. I . London: n .p ., 1913« Farmer, John S. and W. E. Henley, comps, and eds. Slang and I ts Analogues, Past and P resent. London, 1890- 1904.

'The Fishwife of Richmond's T a le ,' In Westward fo r Smelts . . . by Kinde Kit of Kingston. London, 1620, sig s. D1r -D4r . Fletcher, John. 'A Critical Edition of John Fletcher's Comedy "The Wild Goose Chase".' Ed. Rotraud L is te r. DAI, 33 (1972), 727A-28A (Toronto). Fathers Own Son. London, n.d. £"A re -issu e of Monsieur Thomas with a cancel-leaf title page. Microfilm of copy in Henry E. Huntington Library, San Marino, California .J Monsieur Thomas, A Comedy. London, 1639« A list of collated quartos is given under 'This Edition', pp. cxxxi-cxxxii._7 The Woman' s P riz e , or The Tamer Tamed: A C ritic a l E d itio n . Ed. George B. Ferguson. London: Mouton & Co., The Hague, 1966. F lorio, John. A Worlde of Wordes or Most copious, and Exact D ictio n an e in I ta lia n and English. London, I 59BT Forsythe, Robert Stanley. A Study of the Plays of Thomas D'Urfey, with a Reprint of A Fopl's Preferment, Part I. Western Reserve Univ. Bulletin, vol. 19, 363

N.S. No. 5 . Cleveland, Oh.: Western Reserve Univ. Press, 1916. Frazer, Sir James Gordon. The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and R eligion. 3rd edn. 13 v o ls . 1911-1936; r p t . New York: S t. M artin's P ress, 1961. Gabler, Hans W alter. ' Cupid' s Revenge (Ql) and i t s Compositors, Part I: Composition and Printing.' Studies in Bibliography, 24 (1971), 69-90. Genest, John. Some Account of the English Stage, from the Restoration- in 1660 to 1830. 10 vols. Bath, 1532“------Gerard, John. The Herball or Historie of Plantes . . . Enlarged and Amended by Thomas Johnson. London, 1633- G erritsen,' Johan. 'The P rin tin g of the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio of 1647.* The Library, 5th serr. 3 (1949), 233-64. Greene, Robert. Orlando Furioso. In The Life and Com- plete Work in Prose and Verse of Robert Greene. Ed. Alexander B. Grosart. Vol. XIII. London, 1883. Greg, W. W. A Bibliography of the English Printed Drama To The R esto ratio n . 4 vols. London: Printed for the Bibliographical Society at the University Press, Oxford, 1951. The Editorial Problem in Shakespeare: A Survey of the Foundations of the Text. 3rd edn. 1954; r p t . Oxford: Clarendon, 1962. The Shakespeare First Folio: Its Bibli- ographical and Textual History. Oxford: Clarendon, 1955. Grendon, Fleix. 'The Anglo-Saxon Charms.' The Journal of American Folk-Lore, 22 (1909)» 105-237. Guskar, H. 'Fletcher's Monsieur Thomas Und Seine Quellen.' Anglia, 28 (1905),397-420; 29 (1906), 1-54. Hall, Marie Boas. 'Scientific Thought.' Shakespeare Survey, 17 (1964), 138-51. Halliwell /~-Phillips_7, James Orchard. A Dictionary of Archaic and Provincial Words. 7th edn. 2 vols. London: George Routledge and Sons, 1924. ------, ed. The Doctors of Dull-Head College. London, i860. 364

------, ed. Westward for Sm elts; An Early C ollection of Stories. Percy Society of English Poetry, Vol. 21. London, 1848. Harbage, Alfred. Annals of English Drama, 975-1700• Rev. S. Schoenbaum. London: Methuen, 1964. Harris, John and Jill Lever. Illustrated Glossary of Architecture, 1850-1830. New York: Clarkson Potter, In c ., 1966. ¿Oiarsnett, Samuel.J A Declaration of Egregious Popish Impostures. London,l603; re-issued, London, I0 O 5 T Hart, James. The Anatomie of Urines, Containing the Conviction and Condemnation of Them. London, 1625* Harward, Simon. Phlebotomy; o r , A T reatise of L etting of Bloud. London, 1601. The English Experience, No.~526 . Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm L td.; New York: Da Capo P ress, 1973- Hasleton, Richard. Strange and Wonderfull Things Hap- pened to Richard Hasleton, Borne at Braintree in His Ten Years Travailes ih Many Forraine Countries. London, 1595- Hatcher, Orie Latham. 'The Sources of Fletcher's "Mon- sieur Thomas".' Anglia, 30 (1907), 89-102. Heywood, Thomas. I f You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, P art I I . In The Dramatic Works of Thomas Heywood. London, 1874. Vol. I. Hill, Christopher. Society and Puritanism in Pre- Revolutionary England. London: Seeker & Warburg, 1964. Hinman, Charlton. The P rin tin g and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963. The Holy Bible; Containing the Old and New Testaments. Philadelphia: A. J . Holman Co., 19567 Hosley, Richard. 'A Reconstruction of the Second Black- friars.' In The Elizabethan Theatre. Ed. David Galloway. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1969, pp. 7^-85. Hoy, Cyrus Henry. 'The Shares of F letcher and His Col- laborators in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon (I-VII)-' Studies in Bibliography, 8 (1956), 129- 46; 9 (1957), 143-62; 11 (1958), 85- 106; 12 (1959), 91- 116; 13 ( i 960), 77- 108; 14- ( 1961), 45-67; 15 (1962), 71-90. 365

Jackson, John. The History of the Scottish Stage. /"Great B ritain,// 1793* Jamieson, Catherine. The History of the Royal Hospital of St. Katherines By The Tower of London. /Eng._/: Oxford Univ. Press-G eoffrey Cumberlege, 1952. Jewkes, Wilfred T. Act Division in Elizabethan and Jacobean P lay s, 1583- l 6 l 6 . New York: The Shoe S tring P ress, 195§. Johnson, Norman Gardner. 'Explosives.' Encyclopaedia Britannica: Macropaedia. 1976 edn. Jones-Davies, M. T. Un Peintre De La Vie Londonienne : Thomas Dekker. 2 vols. Collection des Etudes Anglaises. Paris: Librairie Marcel Didier, 1958. Jonson, Ben. Ben J onson. Ed. C. H. Herford, Percy and Eveylyn Simpson. 11 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1925-52. Every Man in His Humour. Ed. M artin Seymour- Smith. The New Mermaids. London: Benn, 1966. Volpone. Ed. Alvin B. Kernan. The Yale Ben Jonson. 1962; r p t. New Haven: Yale Univ. P ress, 1968. ------, George Chapman and John Marston. Eastward Hoe! Ed. C. G. Petter . The New Mermaids. Lon- don: Benn, 1973» Kaufman, R. J . Richard Brome: Caroline P layw right. New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1961. Kennedy, Douglas. English Folk Dancing: Today and Yes- terd a y . London: G. Bell and Sons, L td ., 1964. Kittredge, George Lyman . Witchcraft in Old and New England. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1929. Knappen, M. M. Tudor Puritanism: A Chapter in The His- tory of Idealism. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1939. Knowles, Richard. Monsieur Thomas. Unpublished paper (1976). Koeppel, Emil. Quellen-Studien &u den Dramen Ben Jon- sons , J ohn Marstons und Beaumo n t und F letch ers. Münchener B eitrage zur Romanishe und Englische Philologie, Vol. 11. Erlangen and Leipzig, 1895* 366

K okeritz, Helge. "’The Beast-Eating Clown”, The Two Noble Kinsmen, I I I . 5.131 •' Modern Language Notes, 6TTI9^6), 532-35- Shakespeare' s Pronunciation. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1953* Kuhl, Lawrence W. 'A Calendar of Beaumont and F letch er on the English Stage, 1711-1800.* DAI, 32 (1971), ^759A-60A (Case Western Reserve). Kyd, Thomas. The Spanish Tragedy. Ed. P h ilip Edwards. The Revels Plays. 1959; r p t. London: Methuen, 1969* Lambley, Kathleen. The Teaching and Cultivation of the French Language in England During Tudor and Stuart TimesV Publications of the Univ. of Manchester, No. 129, French S eries No. 3, The French Language in England. London: Manchester Univ. Press; New York: Longmans Green & Co., 1920. Lee, A. C. The Decameron: Its Sources and Analogues. London: David N utt, 1909« Leech, Clifford. The John Fletcher Plays. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. P ress, 1962. The Life of Saint Meriask, Bishop and Confessor: A Cornish Drama. Ed. Whitley Stokes. London, 1872. Lindsey, Edwin S. ’The Music of the Songs in Fletcher*s Plays.' Studies in Philology. 21 (1924), 339-41. Lodge, Thomas. The Complete Works of Thomas Lodge. London: The Hunterian Club, I8H3 . Vol. IV. The London S tage, 1660- 1800: A Calendar of P lay s, E n ter- tainments & Afterpieces. Ed. William Van Lennep, Emmet L. Avery, Arthur H. Scouten, George Winchester Stone, J r . and Charles Beecher Hogan. 5 P t s . 11 vols. Carbondale, 111.: Southern Illinois Univ. Press, 1960-68. Lower, S ir William. The Phaenix in Her Flames. London, 1639. Ludus Coventriae, or the Plaie Called Corpus Christi. Ed. K. S. Block. Early English Text Society. Extra S eries No. 120. 1917; rp t. /"O xford:_7 Ox- ford Univ. P ress, 1922. Lyly, John. The Complete Works of John Lyly. Ed. R. Warwick Bond. 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1902. 36?

Lyrics from English Airs 1596- 1622. Ed. Edward Doughtie. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1970. The Macmillan Book of Proverbs, Maxims, and Favorite Phrases. /Formerly The Home Book of Proverbs ~ i . .J Comp. Burton Stevenson. 1948; r p t . New York: Macmillan, 1968. Magendie, Maurice. Du Nouveau Sur L'Astre^. Paris: L ib ra irie Ancienne Honoré' Champion. 1927. Mann, Jill. Chaucer and Medieval Estates Satire: The Literature of Social Classes and the General Pro- logue to the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1973-

M/”arkham,_7 G/~~ervase._7 Countrey Contentments. £ Con- tain in g The English Huswife /• London, 1B1 5 . The English Experience, No. £ 13. Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm L td.; New York: Da Capo Press, 1973* The Gentlemans Academie, or The Booke of S. Albans. London, 1595* Marlowe, C hristopher. Dr. F austus. Ed. John J. Jump. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 1962. 'Hero and Leander.' In The Poems: C hristopher Marlowe. Ed. Millar MacLure. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 1968. Marlowe's Doctor Faustus, l604-l6l6: Parallel e x ts . Ed. W. W. Greg. 1950; rp t. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968. Marston, John. The Dutch Courtesan. Ed. Peter Davison. The Fountainwell Drama Texts. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univ. of C alif. Press, 1968. The Malcontent. Ed. Bernard Harris. The New Mermaids. London: Benn, 1967* 'Satire V'. In The Works of John Marston. Ed. A. H. Bullen. London, lB8?. Vol. III. Mason, J . Monck. Comments on the Plays of Beaumont and Fletcher: With an Appendix, Containing Some Further Observations on Shakespeare. London, 1797* Massinger, Philip. A New Way to Pay Old Debts. In Eng- lis h Drama 1580- 1642. Ed. C. F. Tucker Brooke and Nathaniel Burton Paradise. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1933, PP. 875-910. 368

May, Thomas. The Tragedie of C leopatra. London, 1639• McKeithan, Daniel Morley. The Debt to Shakespeare in the Beaumont-and-Fletcher Plays. Austin, Tx.: n .p .; printed by The W. A. Whatley Printing Co., 1938. McKerrow, Ronald B. Prolegomena for the Oxford Shakes- peare: A Study in Editorial Method. Oxford: Clar- endon, 1939- 'A Suggestion Regarding Shakespeare' s Manu- sc rip ts.* Review of English Studies, 11 (1935)» ^59- 65. Middleton, Thomas. A Chaste Maid in Cheapside. Ed. R. B. Parker. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 1969. The Works of Thomas M iddleton. Ed. A. H. Bullen. 8 v o ls . London, 1885-86. Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Ed. Merritt Y. Hughes. New York: The Odyssey P ress, In c ., 1935« Mincoff, Marco. 'Fletcher's Early Tragedies.' Rennai- sance Drama, 7 (1964), 70-94. Misogonus. In Early Plays from the Italian. Ed. R. Warwick Bond. Oxford: Clarendon, 1911» PP- 159-258. Mitford, John. Cursory Notes on Various Passages in the Text of Beaumont and F le tc h e r, as Edited by the Rev. Alexander Dyce. London: John R ussell Smith, 1556.------Monson-Fitzjohn, G. J. Drinking Vessels of Bygone Days: from the Neolithic Age to the Georgian period. London: Herbert Jenkins L td ., 1927* Moryson, Fynes. An Itinerary. 4 vols. Glasgow: James MacLehose and Sons, L td ., 1907-8. Mucedorvs The Kings Sonne of V a le n tia . In The Shakespeare Apocrypha: Being a Collection of Fourteen Plays Which Have Been Ascribed to Shakespeare. Ed. C. F. Tucker Brooke. 1908; r p t . Oxford: Clarendon, 19671 PP* 104-26. Muir, Kenneth. Shakespeare' s Sources I/. Comedies and T ragedies. London: Methuen, 1957- Mumming and the Mummers' Play of S t . George: Three v e r- sions including that of Thomas Hardy. Monographs on the L ife, Times and Works of Thomas Hardy, No. 6 7 . B ritain : Toucan P ress, 1970. 369

Nares, Robert. A Glossary or Collection of Words, Phrases, Names and Allusions To Customs, Proverbs, Etc. Ed. James 0. Halliv/ell PhiUips_/ and Thomas Wright. 2 v ols. London, 1888. Nashe, Thomas. The Works of Thomas Nashe. 5 v ols. Ed. Ronald B. McKerrow. Rev. F. P. Wilson. Oxford: B asil Blackwood, 1958. Newton, A lfred. A D ictionary of B ird s. London, 1893-96. Nichols, John. The Progresses, Processions, and Mag- nificent Festivities of King James The F irst. His Royal Consort, Family and C ourt. London, 1828. Nichols, Rose Standish. English Pleasure Gardens. New York: Macmillan, 1902. Nicoll, Allardyce. Early Eighteenth Century Drama. 3rd edn.- Vol. II of A History of English Drama l660- 1900• 1955; rpt. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. P ress, 1961. Masks, Mimes and Miracles: Studies in the Popular T heatre. 1931» rp t. New York: Cooper Square Publishers Inc., 1963. ’Passing Over the Stage.’ Shakespeare Survey, 12 (1959), ^7-55. The World of Harlequin: A Critical Study of the Commedia dell’Arte. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press’^ 1963. Old Ballads: Historical and Narrative, With Some of Modern D ate, Collected from Rare Copies and MSS. Comp. Thomas Evans. Rev. R. H. Evans. London, 1810. Vol. I I . O liphant, E. H. C. The Plays of Beaumont and F le tc h e r: An Attempt to Determine Their Respective Shares and the Shares of O thers. New Haven: Yale Univ. P ress, 1927. Onions, C. T. A Shakespeare Glossary. 2nd edn. Ox- ford: Oxford Univ. P re s s , 1919. Oras, Ants. ’Extra Monosyllables in ’’Henry VIII" and the Problem of Authorship.* The Journal of English and Germanic Phi lology a 52 (1953)» 19^-213. Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama: An Experiment in Prosody. Univ. of Florida Monographs: Humanities , No. 3* Gainesville: Univ. of Florida Press, i 9 6 0 . 370

O reglia, Giacomo. The Commedia d e ll'A r te . Trans. Lovett F. Edwards from the 1964 rev^ edn. in Swedish. London: Methuen, 1968. Osborn, James M. Young Philip Sidney 1572-1577» The Elizabethan Club S eries 5* New Haven: Yale Univ. Press-The Elizabethan Club, 1972. Overbury, Sir Thomas. The Overburian Characters to which is added A Wife (1615). Ed. W. J . Paylor. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 193§. Ovid. Heroides and Amores. Ed. T. E. Page. The Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putman’s Sons, 1931» Metamorphoses. Trans. Frank Justus Miller. 2nd edn. The Loeb C lassical Library. 2 vols. 1921; rp t. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. P ress, 1950. Shakespeare * s Ovid Being Arthur Golding* s Translation of the Metamorphoses. Ed. W. H. D. Rouse. Carbondale, 111.: Southern Illinois Univ. Press, 1961. The Oxford Book of Ballads. Ed. James Kinsley. Oxford: Clarendon, 1969. Oxford Companion to French L ite ra tu r e . Comp. S ir Paul Harvey and J. E. Heseltine. Oxford: Clarendon, 1959. The Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs. Comp. William George Smith. 3rd edn. Kev. F. P. Wilson. Oxford: Clarendon, 1970. Oxford English Dictionary JTa corrected reissue of_7 A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles. Ed. James A. H. Murray et al. 13 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1888-1933• Painter, William. The Palace of Pleasure. 4 vols. London: The C resset Press, 1929* The Paradise of Dainty D evises. Ed. Hyder Edward Rol- lins. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1927« Partridge, Eric. A Dictionary of Slang and Unconven- tional English. 6th edn. ~]ji vols. in oneNew York: The Macmillan Co., 1967. Shakespeare * s Bawdy: A Literary and Psycho- logical Essay, and a Comprehensive Glossary. 2nd edn. London: Routledge and Kegan P au l, 1935« 371

/"Partridge, John._7 The Treasurie of Hidden Secrets, commonly called, The Good-huswives Closet of pro- vision for the health of her Houshold . . . newly enlarged. London, 1633» Pearse, Nancy Cotton. John Fletcher* s Chastity Plays : Mirrors of Modesty. Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell Univ. Press, 1973« Peasant Customs and Savage Myths: Selections From British Folklorists. Ed. Richard M. Dorson. Lon- don: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968. Pepys, Samuel. The Diary of Samuel Pepys: a New and Complete T ra n sc rip t. Ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews. Vol. II. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univ. of C alifo rn ia Press, 1970. A Pepysian Garland: Black-Letter Broadside Ballads of the Years 1595-T539> Chiefly from the Collection of Samuel Pepys. Ed. Hyder E. R o llin s. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; Toronto: The Macmillan Co. of Canada, L td ., 1922. Percy, Thomas. Reliques of Ancient English Poetry Con- sisting of old Heroic Ballads, Songs, and Other Pieces of Our Earlier Poets. Ed. Henry B. Wheatley. London, 18757 Vol. I I . P e trie , S ir C harles. Don J ohn of A u stria . London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1967. Plato. Phaedrus. Trans. R. Hackforth. In The Collected Dialogues of Plato Including the Letters. Ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Bollingen Series, 71* Princeton, N. J.: Princeton Univ. P ress, 1961, pp. 475-525. Plutarch. Plutarch's Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans Englished by S ir Thomas N orth. Vol. V. London, 1896. Pollock, Sir Frederick, and William Maitland. The His- tory of English Law. 2nd edn. 2 vols. I8 9 8 ; r p t . Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1968. Potter, Robert. The English Morality Play: Origins, History and Influence of a Dramatic Tradition. London and Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975* Povey, K. 'Working to Rule, 1600-1800: A Study of the Pressmen's Practice.' The Library 5th ser.. 20 ( 1965), 13- 5^. 372

Poynter, F. N. L. ’Medicine and Public Health.' Shake- speare Survey, 17 (1964), 152-66. Preston, Thomas. The Life of Cambises, King of Percia. In Chief Pre-Shakespearean Dramas; A Selection of Plays Illustrating the History of the English Drama From Its Origin Down to Shakespeare. Ed. Joseph Quincy Adams. 1924; rp t. n .p \: Houghton M ifflin Co.-The Riverside Press Cambridge, 1952, pp. 638- 6 5 * R. F. The Schoole of Slovenrie, or Cato turned Wrong Side Outward. London, 1605* Reynolds, Barbara. The Cambridge Italian Dictionary. Vol. I. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1962. Rollins, Hyder E.,comp. An Analytical Index to the Ballad-Entries in the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London. Chapel Hill: The Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1924. 'The Black-Letter Broadside Ballad.* PMLA, N.S. 34 (1919), 258-339* 'A Recovered Elizabethan Ballad.' Review of English S tu d ie s, 3 (1927), 335-37* Rotunda, D. P. Motif-Index of the Italian Novella in Prose. Indiana Univ.Publications, Folklore Series. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1942. Rowlands, Samuel. 'A Crew of Kind Gossips.' The Works of Samuel Rowlands. London, 1876. Vol. I. The Roxburghe Ballads. Ed. William Chappell and J. W. Ebsworth. 8 v o ls . London, 1871-99* R ulfs, Donald J. 'Beaumont and F letch er on the London Stage 1776-1833.' PMLA,.63 (1948), 1245-64. Salesbury, William. A Dictionary in Englyshe and Welshe. London, 1547* Ann Arbor, Mich.: U niversity Micro- films, n.d. Scala, Flaminio. Scenarios of the Commedia dell'Arte: Flaminio Scala's II Teatro delle favole representa- tive . Trans. Henry F. Salerno. New York: New York Univ. Press, 1969* Schmidt, Alexander. Shakespeare Lexicon and Quotation Dictionary. 3rd edn. 2 vols. 1902; r p t. New York: Dover, 1971# 373

Schwartz, I. A. The Commedia Dell'Arte: and its In- fluence on French Comedy in the Seventeenth Century. Publications of the Institute of French Studies, Inc. New York: L ib rairre H. Samuel, 1933« Scot, Reginald. Discoverie of Witchcraft. London, 1584. The English Experience, No. 299* Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm L td .; New York: Da Capo Press, 1971. Scott, George Ryley. The History of Cockfighting. London: Charles S kilton L td ., n.d. The Scottish National Dictionary. Ed. William Grant. Vol. III. Edinburgh: The Scottish National Dic- tionary A ssociation, 1944. The Second Maiden1s Tragedy. Ed. Ann Lancashire. The Revels Plays. Manchester, Eng.: Manchester Univ. Press, 1978. The Sexes Mismatch’d, or A New Way to Get a Husband. In The Strolers Pacquet Open’d: Containing Seven Jovial Drolls or Farces Calculated for the Meridian of Bartholomew and Southwark Fairs. London^ 1742, no . 6 . Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shakespeare. Ed. W. J . Craig. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, n.d. The F ir s t Part of King Henry IV. Ed. A. R. Humphreys. The Arden Shakespeare. 197)0; rp t. New York: Random House-Vintage Books, 1966, King Henry V i l i . Ed. R. A. Foakes. The Arden Shakespeare. 1957» r p t. London: Methuen, 1966. King John. Ed. E. A. J . Honigmann. The Arden Shakespeare. 1954; rp t. London: Methuen, 1959. King L ear. Ed. Kenneth Muir. The Arden Shakespeare. 1952; rp t. London: Methuen, 1972. Love * s Labour * s L o st. Ed. Richard David. 2nd edn. The Arden Shakespeare. 1956; rp t. London: Methuen, 1966. Macbeth. Ed. Kenneth Muir. 3rd edn. The Arden Shakespeare. 1962; rp t. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. P ress, 1964. The Merchant of Venice. Ed. John Russell Brown. The Arden Shakespeare. 1955» rp t. London: Methuen, 1961. 374

The Merry Wives of Windsor. Ed. H. J . O liver. The Arden Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 1971. Much Ado About Nothing. Vol. XII of A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare. Ed. Horace Howard Furness. 3rd end. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1904. ------. O th ello . Ed. M. R. R idley. The Arden Shakespeare. 1958; r p t. London: Methuen, 1962. — ----. Pericles. Ed. F. D. Hoeniger. The Arden Shakespeare. 1963; r p t. London: Methuen, 1969- The Second P art of King Henry IV. Ed. A. R. Humphreys. The Arden Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 1966. ------. The Taming of the Shrew. Ed. G. R. Hib- bard. The New Penguin Shakespeare. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin Books. 1968. Timon of Athens. Ed. H. J. Oliver. The Arden Shakespeare” 1959; rp t. London: Methuen, 1963------. The Two Gentlemen of Verona. Ed. Clifford Leech. The Arden Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 1969. The Two Noble Kinsmen. Ed. Clifford Leech. Signet C lassics Shakespeare. New York: New American Library, 1966. The Two Noble Kinsmen. Ed. G. R. Proud- foot. Regents Renaissance Drama Series. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska P ress, 1970. 'Venus and Adonis.* In The Poems. Ed. F. T. Prince. The Arden Shakespeare. London: Methuen, I960, pp. 3-62. The Shakespeare Apocrypha: Being a Collection of Four- teen Plays Which Have Been Ascribed to Shakespeare. Ed. C. F. Tucker Brooke. 1908; r p t. Oxford: Clarendon, 1967. Shakespeare * s England: An Account of the Life & Manners of his Age. Ed. Walter Raleigh, Sidney Lee, and C. T. Onions. 2 vo ls. 1916; r p t. Oxford: Claren- don, 1932. Sidgwick, F. ’Recovery of a Lost Ballad and Tune.* Gentleman's Magazine, N.S. 30 1 (1906), 179-81. 375

Sidney, Sir Philip. The Countesse of Pembrokes Arcadia. Vol. I of The Complete Works of Sir Philip Sidney. Ed. A lbert F e u ille ra t. 1912; rp t. Cambridge# Eng.i Cambridge Univ. Press, 1965. Silvette, Herbert. The Doctor on the Stage: Medicine and Medical Men in Seventeenth Century England. Ed. Francelia Butter. Knoxville; The Univ. of Tennessee Press, 1967. Simpson, Claude M. The British Broadside Ballad and Its Music. New Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers Univ. Press, 19657 Six Mummers * A cts. Ed. Alex Helm and E. C. Cawte. Ibstock, Leicesterchire: The Guizer Press, 1967* Skeat, Walter W. An Etymological Dictionary of the English Language. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910. Vol. VI. ------., ed. The Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford: Clarendon^ lo9^. Vol. V. Skelton, John. John Skelton: Poems. Ed. Robert S. Kinsman. Clarendon Medieval and Tudor Series. Ed. J. A. W. Bennett. Oxford: Clarendon, 1969. Smith, Irwin. Shakespeare's Blackfriars Playhouse: Its History and Its Design. Foreword: James G. McMana- way. /_ New York_ /: New York Univ. Press, 1964. Smith, Sir Hubert Llewellyn. The History of East London from the E a rlie s t Times t_o the End of the Eighteenth C entury. London: Macmillan and Co., L td., 1939* Smith, Sir William. Smaller Classical Dictionary. Rev. E. H. Blakeney and John Warrington. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc.-A Dutton Paperback, 1958. Smith, W inifred. The Commedia Dell * A rte. New York: Benjamin Blom, 1964. Southerne, Thomas. Oroonoko. Ed. M aximillian E. Novak and David Stuart Rodes. Regents Restoration Drama Series. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1976. Spenser, Edmund. The Faerie Queene. Vol. Ill of The Works of Edmund Spenser: A Variorum Edition. Ed. Edwin Greenlaw, Charles Grosvenor Osgood, Frederick Morgan Padelford. Baltim ore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 193^« Spenser: Poetical Works. Ed. J. C. Smith and E. De Selmcourt. Oxford Standard Authors. London: Oxford Univ. P ress, 1912. 376

Sprague, Arthur Colby. Beaumont and F letcher on the Restoration Stage. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. P ress, 1926. S tie fe l, Arthur Ludwig. ’Zur Quellenfrage von John Fletchers Monsieur Thomas.' Englische Studien, 36 ( 1906), 23Ö-4 3 . Rev. of Quellen-Studien zu den Dramen Ben Jonsons , John Marstons und Beaumont und F letchers , by Emil Koeppel. Zeitschrift für vergleichende literaturgeschichteT 22 (1898), 241-53* Stone, Lawrence. The Crisis of the Aristocracy 1558-1641. Oxford: Clarendon^ 1965. Stow, John. Annales, or, a General Chronicle of England, Augmented by Edmund Howes. London, 1615. A Survey of London Reprinted From the Text of 1603• Ed. Charles Lethbridge Kingsford. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1927* Strutt, Joseph. The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England. Ed. William Hone. London, 187^ Stubbes, Philip. Philip Stubbes's Anatomy of the Abuses in England in Shakespeare's Youth, A.D. 15&3 * P art I. Ed. Frederick J . F u rn iv all. London, 1877* Sugden, Edward H. A Topographical D ictionary To the Works of Shakespeare and His Fellow Dramatists. Manchester, Eng.: Manchester Univ. Press; New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1925. Swinburne, Henry. A Treatise of Spousals, or Matrimonial C o n tracts. London, l686. Taylor, John. The C arriers Cosmographie. London, 1637- In Mr. Ashbee's Occasional Fac-simile Reprints, No. 11. London, 1869. Drinke and Welcome: or The Famous H isto rie of the most part of D rinks. London, 1637« In Mr. Ashbee's Occasional Facsimile Reprints, No. 17. London, 1871. The Term C atalogues, 1668-1709 A.D. With a Number fo r the E aster Term, 1711 A.D. Ed. Edward Arber. Vol. I . London: p riv a te ly p rin ted , 1903• Thomas, K eith. R eligion and the Decline of Magic: Studies in Popular Beliefs in Sixteenth and Seven- teenth Century England. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971. 377

Thompson, S tith . The F o lk ta le . New York: Holt, Rine- h art and Winston, 19^6. Motif Index of Folk-literature: A Classifi- cation £f Narrative Elements m Folk Tales, Ballads, Myths, Fables, Medieval Romances, Exempla, Fabliaux, J e s t Books, and Local Legends. Rev. edn. Indiana Univ.“Studies, Vol. 19^ 6 vols. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1955-58. Tiddy, R. J . E. The Mummers* Plays by the Late R. J . E, Tiddy. Oxford: Clarendon, 1923- Tilley, Morris Palmer. A Dictionary of The Proverbs In England In the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries: A Collection of the Proverbs Found in English Literature and the Dictionaries of the Period. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press, 1950* Turner, Robert K., Jr. 'The Printing of "Philaster" Q1 and Q2.' The Library, 5th ser., 15 (i960), 21-32. Two Coventry Corpus Christi Plays. Re-ed. Hardin Craig. Early English Text Society, Extra Series 87. 1902; rp t. London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1931- Two Elizabethan Puritan Diaries by Richard Rogers and Samuel Ward. Ed. M.. M. Knappen. Chicago: The American Society of Church History, 1933* Ukas, M. Personal interview. 23 May 1976. Urban, Raymond A. 'Why Caliban Worships the Man in the Moon.' Shakespeare Quarterly, 27 (1976), 203-5. ✓ / z . / Urfe, Honoré d \ L 'A stree: Nouvelle E dition Publiee Sous Les Auspices de la ' Diana' . Ed. M. Hugues Vaganay. 5 vols. 1925-28; rpt. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1966. Waith, Eugene M. The Pattern of Tragicomedy in Beau- mont and F le tc h e r. 1952; rp t. New York: Archon Books, 1969• Walsh, William S. Handy-Book of L itera ry C u rio s itie s . 1892; r p t. Philadelphia: J . B. L ippincott Co.; D etroit: Gale Research Co., Book Tower, 1966. Webster, John. The Duchess of Malfi. Ed John Russell Brown. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 196^. The White D evil. Ed. John R ussell Brown. The Revels Plays. London: Methuen, 1966. 378

W eller, Jac. 'Weapons and Delivery Systems.' Encyclo- paedia Britannica: Macropaedia. 1976 edn. Wever, R. Lusty Juventus. In Robert Dodsley's A Select Collection of Old English Plays. 4th edn. Ed. W. Carew H a z litt. London, 1 8 7 4 . Vol. I I . W/”hetstone?_7, G/~eorge_7* The Cures of the Diseased In Forraine Attempts of the English Nation. London, 1598. Facsim edn. Ed. Charles Singer. Oxford: Clarendon, 1915* 'The Fourth Dayes Exercise /" F ir s t Adven- ture/7.' In An Heptameron of Ciuill Discourses. London, 1582, sig s. M^r -N2r . White, Helen C. English Devotional Literature f ~Prose J l600-l640. Univ. of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature, No. 29. Madison: Wisconsin Univ. P ress, 1931. Wickham, Glynne. Early English Stages, 1300 to 1600. Vol. II (1576 to 1660), Part I. New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1972. W illiams, George Walton. 'S e ttin g By Formes in Quarto Printing.' Studies in Bibliography, 9 (1958), 39-53. Wilson, John Harold. The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on R estoration Drama. Columbus: The Ohio S tate Univ. P re ss, 1928. The Wits, or, Sport upon Sport. Ed. John James Elson. Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell Univ. Press, 1932. Wood, Chauncey. Chaucer and the Country of the Stars: Poetic Uses of Astrological Imagery. Princeton: Princeton Univ. P ress, 1970. Woodfill, Walter L. Musicians in English Society: From Elizabeth to Charles I_. Princeton Studies in History, Vol. 9» Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1953. Wright, Joseph. The English Dialect Dictionary. 6 vols. London, 1898-1905. Wright, Louis B. Middle-Class Culture in Elizabethan England. Chapel Hill: The Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1935. Wyatt, S ir Thomas. 'My galy charged with fo rg e tfu ln e s s .' In Collected Poems of Sir Thomas Wyatt. Ed. Kenneth 379

Muir. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul L td ., 19^9, pp. P2-23. Yarrow, P. J. The Seventeenth Century. Vol. II of A Literary History of France. New York: Barnes & Noble, In c ., 1967. Yates, Frances, A. The Art of Memory. London: Rout- ledge and Kegan Paul L td .; Chicago: The Univ of Chicago Press, 1966. Yearsley, Macleod. Doctors in Elizabethan Drama. London: John Bale, Sons & Danielsson, L td., 1933.