THE DESIGNATION OF GENERAL SCENE IN ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1500-1685

Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Glenn, Susan Macdonald

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 03/10/2021 14:50:58

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/298489 INFORMATION TO USERS

This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.

1.The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department.

5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy.

University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 7914*40

GLENN* SUSAN HACOONALD THE DESIGNATION OF GENERAL SCENE IN ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 15Q0-16B5.

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA, PH.D., 1979

University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 PLEASE NOTE:

In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark .

1. Glossy photographs

2. Colored illustrations

3. Photographs with dark background

4. Illustrations are poor copy

5. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page

6. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages throughout

7. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine

8. Computer printout pages with indistinct print

9. Page(s) lacking when material received, and not available from school or author

10. Page(s) seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows

11. Poor carbon copy

12. Not original copy, several pages with blurred type ______

13. Appendix pages are poor copy

14. Original copy with light type

15. Curling and wrinkled pages

16. Other

University Mkrorilms International 300 N. ZSE9 RO.. ANN ARBOR. Ml J8106 '3131 761-4700 THE DESIGNATION OF GENERAL SCENE

IN ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1500-1685

by

Susan Macdonald Glenn

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

19 7 9 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

GRADUATE COLLEGE

I hereby recommend that this dissertation prepared under my direction by Susan Leah MacDonald Glenn entitled Designation of General Scene in English Dramatic

Texts, 1500-1685 be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the degree of Ph.D.

i\ /w7? Dissertation Directo^ Date

As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read this dissertation and agree that it may be presented for final defense.

u{ *U)('7-g

"/-ic/V?

ll/l-C/lg

Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent on the candidate's adequate performance and defense thereof at the final oral examination. STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to bor­ rowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or re­ production of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the in­ terests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to many people for their help in the work of researching and writing this dissertation. I want to thank especially

Dr. Richard Hosley, the dissertation advisor, who devoted his time and considerable expertise to this undertaking and whose comments guided rr\y thinking and my writing. I am also grateful to Dr. Peter Medine and

Dr. Wilfred Jewkes, who read the text and provided valuable criticism.

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES v

ABSTRACT vi

I. THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM 1

II. ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE PRACTICE OF SCENE- DESIGNATION 15

III. THE FORM OF THE SCENE-DESIGNATION 31

IV. A RATIONALE FOR THE PRACTICE OF SCENE- DESIGNATION 58

APPENDIX A: STATEMENTS OF LOCALE AND SCENE- DESIGNATIONS IN CLASSICAL GREEK DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1498-1580 86

APPENDIX B: SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED ITALIAN DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1630-1678 91

APPENDIX C: SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED FRENCH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1566-1682 97

APPENDIX D: SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1573-1659 103

APPENDIX E: SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1660-1685 114

REFERENCES 123

iv LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Percentage of Enalish Texts with Scene-designations, 1616-1659. . . 28

v ABSTRACT

In English dramatic texts, a designation of general locale is usually provided in a brief elliptical formula, called a scene-desig­ nation, that is printed with the dramatis personae. The preferred

English formula ("The Scene, [geographical place-name]"), names the locale in as inclusive a term as is necessary, and the designation of more than one locale is generally avoided. While scene-designations are common in modern dramatic texts, they were not provided in English texts until the last three decades of the sixteenth century, and they did not become frequently used until the third decade of the seventeenth century. In this study, I examine the origins of the practice of desig­ nating locale by tracing the use of scene-designations in continental and English texts, and I explore possible rationales for the practice by analyzing the wording of the scene-designations themselves.

The formulaic scene-designation probably originated in the statements of locale that appear in some of the arguments to the classi­ cal Greek plays. These statements of locale are similar to scene-desig­ nations in that they follow a formulaic pattern, as in "ti oicnvri toO

6payaxos wnkeiTcu ev'Apyei." But unlike scene-designations, these statements of locale are found in the arguments, not set off from them.

The Latin statements of locale that appear in some comic prologues do not follow a recognizable pattern, but they do have a succinct style that may have influenced the wording of vernacular scene-designations.

vi vii

The early scene-designations that I found in both Italian and

French texts have clear parallels in the Greek statement of locale.

However, scene-designations apparently do not become frequently used in

Italian texts until around 1570, and in French texts until around 1635.

And by 1570, the preferred Italian formula ("La Scena e in [geographical place-name]") has been simplified from its earliest examples. Likewise, by 1635, the preferred French formula ("La Scene est a [geographical place-name]") is simpler than the early example.

In English drama, only 11 texts of the 292 printed before 1616 contain scene-designations, these texts ranging in date from 1573 to

1607. After 1616, the frequency with which scene-designations are pro­ vided in English texts begins to rise, until, in the decade 1636-45, 41% of 93 printed texts are so provided. The great majority of English scene- designations use the brief formula"The Scene, [geographical place-name]."

While this formula is the preferred way of designating locale, there are some enlightening examples of English scene-designations that deviate from this formula. For example, some scene-designations explicit­ ly state that the play in question has observed the dramatic unities.

Others provide the duration of the play's action, thus implying that the unities of time and place have been observed. Still others express two locales in language that suggests the locales are close enough to be considered unified. All these examples imply that one function of a scene-designation is to indicate that the play in question has observed unity of place. There is evidence, moreover, that this same rationale vi i i affects the presence of some scene-designations in Italian and French texts. While there are other rationales for the use of scene-designa­

tions, the uniformity with which scene-designations are expressed, the

general avoidance of stating more than one locale, and the preponderance of cities, islands, and forests among the locales provided, all support the claim that one possible rationale for a scene-designation is as an

indication that the play in question has observed unity of place. CHAPTER I

THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM

A designation of general scene is almost always present in mod­

ern dramatic texts. This brief statement of the geographical location

of the play's action, usually located on the same page as the dramatis

personae, should be distinguished from a place-heading, the brief

phrase below the scene-heading that provides the specific location of a

given scene. Since, as readers, we have come to expect the presence of

a scene-designation, we tend not to question the assumptions underlying

its provision. However, such general designations of scene were not

provided in English dramatic texts until the latter part of the six­

teenth century, and they were only infrequently used until the third

decade of the seventeenth century. The increase in use around that

time is marked: only 10% of the 412 extant English texts printed before

1635 contain scene-designations, whereas from 1636 through 1659, 43% of

the 256 extant texts contain scene-designations. Around 1635, then,

the use of scene-designations in English texts becomes considerably

more frequent.

One interesting characteristic of the practice of designating

general scene is the similarity of diction and syntactical structure of

most scene designations. In the English drama, the vast majority of

scenes are designated by a simple formula: the words "The Scene" (or

sometimes simply "Scene") followed by the name of a city or country

1 2

(e.g., "The Scene, London" or "The Scene, Italy") or followed by a short phrase (e.g., "The Scene, The Court of Ferrara"). In most examples the general scene is provided in as inclusive a term as necessary; thus no matter how large a geographical area is covered by the action of the play, the designation of more than one scene is avoided in all but some half dozen of the scene-designations that I have found. For example, the scene-designation for Sejanus, His Fall

(1616). which takes place in Rome, is "The Scene, Rome," whereas the scene-designation for Perkin Warbeck (1634), which takes place in both

England and Scotland, is "The Scene, The Continent of Great Britayne."

For the purposes of my study I have defined a scene-designa­ tion as the formulaic expression of "the scene" that in a printed dramatic text is set off from the prefatory material and the text prop­ er. In the great majority of examples, the scene-designation is printed on the same page as the dramatis personae, but is separate from the material in the dramatis personae. I limit my study primarily to a consideration of the formulaic scene-designation as it appears in printed dramatic texts. However, in order to investigate what I con­ sider to be the origins of this formula, I have included in my study certain references to locale that appear in the arguments and pro­ logues to classical Greek and Roman plays. These references to locale, which I hereafter call "statements of locale," in many cases follow a predictable formulaic pattern; in some cases they do not. Moreover, statements of locale are nearly always found in either the argument or the prologue for a given text. Thus they cannot be considered scene- designations according to the definition given above. 3

For the most part, the definition I have given of the term

"scene-designation" provides a clear guide by which a scene-designation can be distinguished from other forms of extra-textual material that contain references to locale. There are some cases, however, in which the distinction cannot be easily made. For example, some stage-direc­ tions that refer to changeable scenery are expressed in the same formulaic language used to express the scene. Thus there may be some question as to whether a particular example of the formula is a stage- direction or a scene-designation, especially when it appears at the head of the text proper. However, in most cases where the formula is used ambiguously, a close examination of the text reveals whether the formula is to be considered a scene-designation or a stage-direction.

I follow two main lines of inquiry in this study of the practice of designating general scene in English dramatic texts. The first, treated in Chapter II, concerns the origin and history of the practice, not only in England but also on the Continent; it leads to an historical survey of Renaissance editions of Greek and Roman plays, as well as Italian, French, and English printed dramatic texts. The second line of inquiry, treated in Chapter III, concerns the form that scene-designations take; it leads to a study of the statement itself as it appears in classical drama and in Italian, French, and English plays.

From these two lines of inquiry I derive evidence to be used in answer­ ing the question that will, presumably, be of most concern to students of drama: What is the rationale for the presence of a scene-designation in a given text? In other words, in Chapter IV I try to explain both 4 the striking similarities in the statements themselves and their rise in popularity around 1635 by hypothesizing about the reasons for their presence.

In pursuing the first line of inquiry, I make the assumption that the formula used to designate the scene probably originated in statements of locale found in the early sixteenth-century editiones principes of classical Greek and Roman plays. I believe this assump­ tion is warranted, since there are some significant similarities between some classical statements of locale and examples of scene-designations in sixteenth-century texts. These similarities will be discussed at length in Chapter III. In Chapter II, however, I am primarily concerned with providing an historical overview of the practice of designating the scene, including a discussion of the prototypical statements of locale found in classical texts, and a study of the frequency with which scene-designations appear in Italian, French, and English dramatic texts from 1500 through 1685.

Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, scene-desig­ nations appear in a fair number of Italian dramatic texts, but it is not until the last three decades of the sixteenth century that the scene- designation occurs frequently in such texts. During the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries scene-designations are only occasionally provided in English and French dramatic texts. Around 1635, however, the frequency with which scene-designations appear in both French and

English printed dramatic texts increases markedly, and the increased frequency is maintained through 1685. 5

In Chapter III I show that the form taken by most scene- designations is similar to the Greek statements of locale. The typi­ cal Greek statement is a sentence that begins with the words "n oicnuri

TOU SpdyoToa." The verb is usually "UTTOKEITCU" and is followed by a prepositional phrase naming the locale. A typical Greek statement of locale is thus as follows: "'H cncnvri TOU SpayctToa UTTOKEITCU ev Apyei."

A slightly different version of this formula is found in Italian texts

(e.g., "La Scena de la favola si pone in Allessandria"). In many Italian scene-designations, however, the phrase "de la favola" is omitted, the verb used being the simple "e_." So the typical Italian scene-designa­ tion, while maintaining the complete-sentence form found in the Greek statements of locale, is somewhat simpler than its Greek counterpart.

(This simplification may result in part from the influence of the Latin statements of locale found in the prologues to four of Plautus' come­ dies; this possibility is discussed in Chapter III.) Moreover, the

French generally use a formula for designating general scene similar to that of the Italian (e.g., "La Scene est a Paris"), while the

English simplify the formula even further, usually preferring a brief elliptical statement (e.g., "The Scene, London") to the complete-sen- tence version used by the Italians and the French. In most scene- designations the types of locales given in the formula are similar: such locales are almost always cities or small islands; occasionally a country is designated as the location of an action; very rarely two locations are provided. Also, most scene-designations are similarly located in the texts, usually being found on the same page as the dramatis personae. 6

In Chapter IV, I propose a rationale for the use of scene-des­ ignations. I argue that a given scene-designation may have been pro­ vided to inform the reader not only of the play's locale but also of the author's knowledge of classical practice and his observance of certain classical dramatic theories. Since the earliest statements of locale appear in the arguments to classical Greek plays, and since the early sixteenth-century Italian scene-designations closely resemble the Greek statements in both form and diction, it seems probable that Italian dramatists of that period who provided a scene-designation for a given text were imitating classical practice, in much the same way as they imitated classical practice by providing arguments, prologues, and dramatis personae for their plays. Through such imitation they could imply that their play, in the matter of textual appurtenances at least, conformed to ancient models. Later in the sixteenth century, as

Italian commentators on Aristotle's Poetics endeavored to define the attributes of excellence in dramatic composition, imitation of classical models alone did not insure critical approval of a dramatist's work.

The commentators formulated certain critical "rules" by which a dramatic composition might be judged. For example, most critics argued that tragedy should be an imitation of a serious action, thus leading them to espouse the requirement of high degree: tragedy should be concerned with the actions of illustrious and noble people, preferably people of actual historical importance.^ According to Spingarn, this idea

^J. E. Spingarn, A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance, 2nd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1930), pp. 66-67. 7

"of the serious action of tragedy, which makes its dignity the result of the rank of those who are its actors, . . . was not only common throughout the Renaissance, but even throughout the whole period of classicism ..." (Spingarn, pp. 62-63).

Another area of critical discussion centered on the unities of time, place, and action. From Aristotle, Italian commentators got the idea that a play's action should be unified, though they differed on just how this unity could be achieved. But Aristotle did not mention unity of place, and his only reference to time was a descriptive one: the action of tragedy is usually confined to "a single revolution of 2 the Sun." The critics took this descriptive phrase, gave it the weight of law, then differed in their interpretation of it; Robertelli (1548) interpreted it as indicating a twelve-hour day, Segri (1549) as 3 indicating a twenty-four hour day. The debate continued throughout the century, with the result that by 1623 the critic Bern" "could cite thirteen different opinions of scholars on this question" (Spingarn, p. 92).

Until Castelvetro wrote his commentary on the Poetics (around

1570), the concept of unity of place was not explicitly stated. How­ ever, the concept of unity of place is implied, Spingarn argues, in the critical discussions about unity of time. For example, Spingarn cites

2 Aristotle, Poetics, V, trans. S. H. Butcher, introd. Francis Fergusson (New York: Hill and Wang, 1961), p. 60. o Marvin T. Herrick, Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance (Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1965), p. 91. 8

Maggi, who contended in his commentary on Aristotle (1550) that trag­

edy should be limited in time since it is presented before spectators

who would find the action of a whole month performed in a few hours

unbelievable. Maggi used in his argument for unity of time the

example of a messenger sent to Egypt: if "he would return in an hour,

would not the spectator regard this as ridiculous?" (Spingarn, pp.

93-94). The principle underlying his argument is the conception that

a dramatist needs to maintain the play's credibility by restricting

the time represented; when time represented is limited, then place must

be limited also. Thus, argues Spingarn, the next logical step for

critics to take was the formulation of unity of place:

The duration of the action of the drama itself must fairly coincide with the duration of its representation of the stage. This is the principle which led to the acceptance of the unity of place, and upon which it is based. (Spingarn, p. 94)

Thus when Caste!vetro presented his conception of unity of place,

he was stating explicitly what had been implied by earlier commentators.

For Castelvetro, the unities of time and place were strictly defined:

the place should remain unchanged and be contained within the space

visible to a person who himself did not move; the time of the action should be limited to the actual time that it took for the play to be

presented.^ Other Italian critics opposed Castelvetro's strict inter­

pretation. Buonamici (1597), for example, believed that, since spectators know a play is the imitation of an action, they will

4 Bernard Weinberg, A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian Renaissance (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,~T961), I, 509. 9 tolerate a change of place within the limits of probability (Weinberg,

II, 695-96). Moreover, according to Herrick, the sixteenth-century

Italian dramatists were not themselves so strictly concerned with unity of place; while they followed the ancients in usually limiting the play's action to a general locale, such as a city, they did not usually try to limit the action to a single specific locale as Castelvetro 5 demanded. But no matter how the unities were interpreted, the idea that dramatists should observe the unities of place and time was formal­ ly stated in Italian criticism, and once stated, the idea spread to

France and to England, where it was repeated by such critics as Jean de

La Taille in 1572-73 and Philip Sidney ca. 1583 (Spingarn, p. 101).

While most of these critics dealt with tragic theory, Aris­ totle's analysis of tragedy had been applied to comic theory by

Robertelli in 1548. According to Herrick,

He [Robertelli] firmly established in comic theory the Aristotelian terms, plot, character, .... simple and complex plot, complication and denouement, discovery and reversal of fortune, unity of action and limited time.6 [Italics added]

Thus from Robertelli came the Renaissance "rules of comedy," basically the "rules of tragedy" applied, where possible, to comic theory.

Comedy in the Renaissance came to be judged, therefore, by standards similar to those used in judging tragedy.

Thus, in the course of the second half of the sixteenth century, critical standards by which plays might be measured were defined. While

5 Herrick, Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance, p. 92.

C Marvin T. Herrick, Comic Theory in the Sixteenth Century, Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, Vol. 34, Nos. 1 and 2 (Urbana, 111.: The University of Illinois Press, 1950), p. 79. total agreement among critics about these standards did not always exist, as in the case of the unities, there was an awareness among educated people of the "rules" by which a play might be judged. It is my belief that the scene-designation, for some authors at least, became a way, by which the author could show that (1) he knew certain of these rules; and (2) he had followed them in composing his play.

For example, some Italian scene-designations that specify a city as the locale also contain a phrase modifying the name of the city (e.g.."Citta

Reale," "Citta Nobile," "detta anticamente Bizantio," "Citta dell a

Maqno"). These phrases convey information about the noble status of the locale, thus implying that the author has followed the requirement of high degree. Moreover, some Italian and English scene-designations contain references to the duration of the play's action. For example, the scene-designation for Grazzini's Strega (1582) states "La Scena e

Firenze . . . . La favola comincia di buon 'hora e fornisce alia fine del giorno." And the scene-designation for Tomkis' Lingua (1607) reads

"The Scene is Microcosmus in a_ Grove. The Time, from morning to night."

These references indicate the author's observation of a particular interpretation of the rule calling for unity of time. (In both instances the 12-hour interpretation is observed.) Furthermore, since unity of time cannot be observed unless unity of place is observed also, the presence of these references to time shows that the authors have also observed unity of place. And the location of these references to time with the scene-designation suggests that for these authors the scene-designation indicates the observance of unity of place in much the same way as the reference to time indicates the observance of unity of time.

Thus in several texts an explicit connection is made between the scene-designation and the observance of unity of place. In Chapter

IV, on the basis of the history of the practice and the formula by which the scene-designation is expressed, I argue that the connection between the practice of designating scene and the observance of unity of place occurs in more than just those texts that mention the duration of the action, that in fact such a connection is the rule rather than the ex­ ception. I do not want to suggest that every scene-designation exists to show the author observed unity of place. After the use of scene- designations became fairly common, some authors may have provided them simply to follow what they regarded as a fashionable practice. I do believe that, in a great many cases, a scene-designation was provided to let the reader know not just where the action occurs, but also that unity of place had been observed.

There is no study of the practice of designating general scene.

Thus in providing a systematic study of this practice, I am collect­ ing and analyzing material that has never before been systematically or even cursorily studied.

It seems in order to say a word about the sources and method of my study. Information about Elizabethan and Stuart dramatic texts is readily available. W. W. Greg's Bibliography of the English Printed

Drama to the Restoration (1939-59) reprints or describes the prefatory material in the text of a given play, including a direct citation of

the scene-designation, when one is given. By cross-checking Greg with

the available microform copies of English texts, I have been able to

collect the information I present in Appendix D. And by cross-checking

Greg with Harbage and Schoenbaum's Annals of English Drama (1964), I

was able to satisfy myself that I had in effect seen the substantive edition of practically every extant play printed in English between

1500 and 1642.

For English plays printed between 1642 and 1685, not all of which

are yet available in microform, I examined Greg (whose Bibliography is

complete only to 1660), the texts of English plays held by the Hunting­

ton Library in San Marino, California, and microfilm copies of texts

held by the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D. C., and by the

Houghton Library of Harvard University. I have also used critical editions available in the University of Arizona Library. The informa­

tion I have gathered on English drama to 1642 is therefore nearly

complete. But for English drama between 1642 and 1660, I have had to

rely almost entirely on Greg. And for the drama from 1660 to 1685, I

have examined only a selection (some 190 out of approximately 335) from

the extant texts listed in Harbage and Schoenbaum.

I tried to select Restoration texts at random, so as not to

bias my study toward better-known plays. However, the fact that I

included critical editions in this study may have partially weighted

the evidence toward those plays that editors feel are of general

interest to students of literature. Thus, the results of n\y study of

Restoration texts can be taken as suggestive only. 13

For Renaissance editions of classical, Italian, and French plays I examined the holdings of the Huntington Library, supplemented by critical editions available in the University of Arizona Library.

Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive bibliography for any of these three groups of continental texts. Therefore, I have been unable to learn, except in a general way, what percentage of the whole number of continental texts my selection represents, and I have had to present my conclusions about classical, Italian, and French dramatic texts in somewhat tentative terms.^

As I examined each text, I noted certain aspects of its treat­ ment that I thought might bear on the problem at hand. For example, I examined all the prefatory material of each text, to see whether the presence of such material correlates with the presence of a scene-desig- nation. I found that in almost every case texts with scene-designations also contain prefatory materials such as epistles dedicatory, dramatis personae, arguments, or letters to the reader. But I also found that the presence of such prefatory matter in no way guarantees the presence of a scene-designation, for many elaborately prefaced texts do not contain a scene-designation.

As my study proceeded, I found that some of the information I gathered did not show any significant relationship to the practice of designating scene. For instance, I noted the various titles given the dramatis personae, thinking that perhaps a certain title might correlate

^1 assume, upon consultation with statisticians, that n\y sample from each of these groups is sufficiently large to give results that are 90% accurate. 14 with the presence of a scene-designation. But while the variations in the title are very interesting, they apparently have nothing to do with the presence or absence of a scene-designation. Moreover, I listed the printer or the publisher of each book, only to find that the presence or absence of a scene-designation does not usually correlate with any particular printer or publisher. Also, I found in the course of my study that the masque, especially in regard to the use of scene- designations, is so different from the full-length conventional dramatic form that to include it in this study might lead to misleading results.

I have therefore left the masque out of consideration altogether.

In the following chapters I present the conclusions drawn from the evidence gathered. In appendices I list the titles of plays that I found to be provided with scene-designations, along with a quota­ tion of the scene-designation itself and information about its location in the text. CHAPTER II

ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE PRACTICE OF SCENE-DESIGNATION

The formulaic scene-designation as it appears in English drama­ tic texts probably originated in the statement of locale found in the arguments to classical Greek plays. An Italian version of this state­ ment appears in a few Italian dramatic texts of the early sixteenth century, this version becoming simplified as its use becomes more general later in the century. The typical French scene-designation is similar to the Italian, but apparently not until after 1635 does the practice of designating scene become widespread in France. In England the mode of designating scene is (in general) an elliptical formula which appears in only a few texts before 1626. After 1626, the fre­ quency with which the formula appears in English texts begins to rise gradually. Then, around 1635, there is a significant rise in the frequency with which scene-designations are provided in English texts.

In this chapter I discuss the origin of the formulaic scene-designa­ tion in classical drama and trace its use in Italian, French, and

English dramatic texts. A discussion of the statement itself, and the modifications it undergoes, is provided in Chapter III.

In most classical texts, explicit information about the locale is provided in only two ways. The first, found exclusively in Greek drama, is to include a statement of locale in the argument (imoeecns) to the play. The typical Greek statement of locale usually follows

a formulaic pattern that is similar in many ways to the formula used

to designate the scene in vernacular texts, and for this reason I see

the Greek statement of locale as being the main prototype of the

Renaissance scene-designation. (These similarities will be discussed

at greater length in Chapter III.) The second way of providing explicit

information about locale, found in the plays of Plautus, is to include

a statement of locale in the prologue to the play. The Latin statement

of locale differs from the Greek in that it follows no predictable

formulaic pattern, and it is included in material that is intended to

be spoken to the audience. Thus, while I will discuss below both of

these ways of providing information about geographical location, I

believe it is the first method from which scene-designations are

ultimately derived. To be sure, information about locale is indirectly

provided in some arguments and prologues. For example, the argument to

Aeschylus' Eumenides states: "'Opeaxris EV AeXcfiois TREPIEXOVEVOA 6IRO TUJV tpivuiov 3ouAn AiroAXtovos irapeyevETo eis Aorivas eis TO tepov rris 'A0r)\>as"

(Orestes, being hemmed in in Delphi by the Furies, moves to Athens at

the instigation of Apollo). This kind of reference to place is outside

the scope of this study, for it has no relationship to the deliberate

statement of locale on which I am focusing. Such a reference is pro­

vided usually as a result of statements made about the action; but the

statement of locale is provided independently of statements about the

action and for the express purpose of designating the locale of the

acti on. Thus in Renaissance printed texts of the classical drama statements of locale are usually found in arguments, as in the class­ ical Greek plays (see Appendix A), or in prologues, as in Plautus' comedies (see below, p. 21). (I found no statements of locale in the prefatory material to the plays of Terence and Seneca.) In almost every case, this material is derived from a manuscript copy of the play, the editor of the text having been responsible simply for ren- o dering in print what had been previously transmitted by hand. From the first, then, direct statements about geographical location—what were (in my hypothesis) to become scene-designations—were not connected in any way with the kinds of prefatory matter a Renaissance editor might supply—that is, epistles dedicatory, verses commendatory, letters to the reader, or short essays on various topics. While it is clear from examining these Renaissance texts of classical plays that the editors took great care to provide the reader with a book that would be both enlightening and enjoyable, it is also clear that in most examples the editors were not themselves the authors of the statements of locale that appear in those texts.

Of the 40 Greek plays I examined in their first printed edition,

19 are prefaced with arguments in which there are statements of locale

(see Appendix A). Of these 19 plays, 18 are tragedies. (Only one comedy, Aristophanes' Pacem, contains a statement of locale.) These statements of locale almost always begin with the words "n OKTIVTI" or

o Alexander Turyn, The Byzantine Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Euripides, Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, Vol7 43 (UrBana: The University of Illinois Press, 1957), p. 18. 18

"h uev aKtivri," which in turn are modified by the phrase "TOU Spdyaxos."

The verb for the sentence is usually "{nroKeiTcu" (is placed), except in those few examples where the verb is understood. And the preposi­ tion "ev" introduces the name of the location, which of course varies from play to play. So a typical Greek statement of locale might read: n

. . .yiKpov yctp CIUTOV KXEIJJCIS E< TOU Apyous o iraiSaioyos euyev KCU Sia eitcoai fexajv eiraveXSuiv e\s TO Apyos yex CIUTOU ^Seucvucnv OUT5 TO ev Apyei. cncrivfi TOU fipdycxTOS tiiroKeiTcu £v Apyei. o 6e X°POS OUVEOTHKEV eirtx^piajv irapSevuv. irpoXoyt^ei 6e o TOaSayaiyos 'OpeaTou.

. . . for the theft of this small child the tutor fled from Argos, and after twenty years he returned to Argos with him [the child] and explained to him those things in Argos. The scene of the drama is set in Argos. The chorus is comprised of peasant maidens. TEe prologue is spoken by the tutor, [italics added]

For the most part, the arguments which appear in the editiones principes of the Greek dramas are used by Renaissance editors and

q Rudolf Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age (Oxford: TheClarendon Press, 1968j7 p. 193. 19 translators as copy for their texts (Turyn, p. 18). Thus if a state­ ment of locale appeared in the argument to the first edition, then subsequently printed Greek texts as well as Latin translations are usually provided with the same (or a loose translation of the same) statement. For example, the 1538 Latin edition of Aristophanes' comedies, translated by Andrea Divo, is provided with an argument to the Pacem which contains a statement of locale that is a fairly close translation of the one in the Greek 6ir6eecns: while the Greek statement reads "n 6E atcnvri TOO 6payaxos i< yepous ysv EIT\ xns yns, EK yspous 6E eir\ xou oupavou" (The scene of the drama is by turns on the earth and in heaven); the Latin version has "Haec autem Scena huius comoedie ex parte quidem in terra, ex parte autem in Coelo" (The scene of this comedy is set partially on earth and partially in heaven). And the 1557,

1558, and 1570 Latin translations of Sophocles' plays contain statements of locale in the arguments to Ajax, Electra, Antigone, Philoctetes, and

Oedipus Col onus which, again, are based on those appearing in the Greek texts. This holds true, moreover, for the 1557 and 1580 editions of

Aeschylus' tragedies. Thus, for the most part, the Greek classical plays which in their Renaissance printed texts are provided with state­ ments of locale are the same plays for which statements of locale were provided in the arguments of the editiones principes.

There are, of course, some exceptions to this general rule. In

Camerarius' 1546 translation of Sophocles' plays, only Antigone and

Oedipus Col onus are provided with statements of locale, even though

Ajax, Electra, Oedipus Col onus, and Antigone all have statements of locale in the editio princeps. Furthermore, the Latin statement of

locale for Antigone ("Res quasi Thebis in Boeotia geritur") is only

loosely based on the Greek version (n PEV CNCNVH TOO Spayaxos

{jiroKEtxai EV 0n6ais teas EOIOOXIKCUS "). Likewise the Latin statement of

locale for Oedipus Col onus ("Ita est actio harum rerum tanque in

Attica") is only loosely based on the Greek ("n aicnvn xou Spayaxos

UTTOKEIXCU tv xfj AXXIKTI EV X(L ilTiriO} KoXOJVO) TTpOS TU VdU) XU)V CTEyVOJV" ["The scene of the drama is set in Attica, in the equestrian Col onus in front of the temple of the Semnae"]). Thus Camarerius either composed his own arguments to Sophocles' plays, or he based his translations only

very loosely on the Greek arguments.

Rarely is a statement of locale added to a printed text when one was not present in the argument provided in the editio princeps.

For example, Euripides' Hippolytus, which was first printed in 1494 without a statement of locale, was provided with a statement of locale in the 1503 A!dine edition. In this example, however, it is clear from examination of both texts that the editor of the 1494 edition printed only one of the two extant arguments, whereas Aldus chose to provide both arguments, one of which contains a statement of locale.

The only example of a statement of locale composed by a six­ teenth century editor of a classical play appears in the 1545 editio

princeps of Euripides' Electra, edited by Petrus Victorius. For some

reason, this play was omitted altogether from the 1503 Aldine edition.

And, according to Gilbert Murray, the statement of locale in the 1545

Electra was not present in the manuscripts on which Murray's edition is 21

basedJ0 Therefore, unless Victorius based his edition on a manuscript of whose existence Murray was unaware, Victorius probably composed the statement himself. This is the only example I have found of a state­ ment of locale being added to a printed text where one was absent from manuscript tradition. The almost universal practice was to provide the statement of locale only when authority for it was present in manu­ script tradition.

This discussion of statements of locale in printed texts of classical plays should include some mention of another way a play's locale was indicated in some classical texts. In the prologues to four of Plautus's plays, direct allusion is made to the city in which the action takes place. Like the statements of locale in Greek texts, these statements are intentional statements of the play's location, not

references to the play's location made obliquely in conjunction with descriptions of the action. For example, the Prologue to the

Amphitryon states: "Haec urbs est Thebae"; the Prologue to the

Menaechmi: "Haec urbs Epidamnus est." In the Rudens the Prologue states: "Primumdum huic esse nomen urbi Piphi1 us Cyrenas voluit"

(First, Diphi1 us wants the name of this city to be Cyrene). And in the

Truculentus, the Prologue announces: "Athenis tracto [sic] ita ut hoc est proscaenium" (I treat this stage as if it were in Athens). These examples differ from those in the classical Greek texts in that they do not follow a certain formula, and they are included in material

^Gilbert Murray, ed. Euripidis Fabulae, II (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1908), sig. 15* 1r. 22 intended to be spoken to the audience, not to be read only by readers of the play. Also, unlike the Greek statements of locale, they are usually followed by a reference to the houses involved in the action and by other matters pertaining to the characters in the play. For example, the statement of locale in the prologue to the Amphitryon, cited above, is flanked by information about Jupiter and Amphitryon.

Hanc fabulam, inquam, hie Iuppiter hodie ipse aget et ego una cum illo. Nunc animum aduortite, dum huius argumentum eloquar comoediae. Haec urbs est Thebae; in illisce habitat aedibus Amphitruo, natus Argus ex Argo patre, qui cum Alcmena est nupta, Electri filia. (11. 94-99)

Here today, I tell you, Jupiter himself will act in this play and I with him. Now give me your attention while I tell you the story of this comedy. This city is Thebes: in that house lives Amphitryon, born in Argos of an Argive father, with whom Alcmena, the daughter of Electryon, was married. [Italics added]

Moreover, while almost half of the Greek plays are provided with statements of locale, only four of Plautus1 twenty plays are so pro­ vided, and none of Terence's six. The purpose of the Latin statement of locale differs from the Greek, too, since it is intended as infor­ mation for the audience, not just for the reader of a play. Like the

Greek statements of locale, however, these Latin statements are de­ rived ultimately from manuscript sources and, once printed, remain basically unchanged in subsequently printed Latin texts of the plays.

The classical practice of providing the locale was thus fairly uniform. Once a Greek or Latin play had been printed, the presence or absence of a statement of locale had been determined. Subsequent changes usually only involved the statement's location in the text, 23

not its content. For plays in the vernacular languages, however, the

practice differed. There was no received corpus of dramatic work to

be treated with scholarly reverence. New plays were constantly being

printed, old plays reprinted or printed for the first time, some with scene-designations, many without. Thus it is in the examination of

plays in the vernacular that a measure of the frequency with which scene-designations were provided can be taken.

In studying the use of scene-designations in Italian dramatic

texts, I examined 226 Italian plays in the Huntington Library. These

plays, ranging in date from 1524 to 1673, include 67 tragedies, 124

comedies, 17 tragicomedies and pastorals, and 18 Opera Scenica [sic]

by Cicognini. Throughout the sixteenth century, these plays were

printed with much the same sort of prefatory material as provided for editions of classical plays. While extensive critical prefaces like

those in the Renaissance editions of the classical dramatists rarely

appear in the Italian texts studied, usually an epistle dedicatory, a

dramatis personae, and an argument are provided. Thus there is evidence

that most of the texts I examined were published with an eye towards an educated reader.

Of the 226 Italian texts that I examined, 65, or 29%, are pro­

vided with a scene-designation. (These 63 texts are listed, with their

scene-designations, in Appendix B.) Of these 65 texts having scene- designations, the vast majority, 53 to be exact, were published after

1570. From another perspective, 41% of the 130 texts printed after

1570 that I examined contain scene-designations, whereas only 12% of

the 96 texts printed before 1570 that I examined are so provided. Thus 24 although scene-designations were present in some Italian texts printed early in the sixteenth century, they appear to be more frequently pro­ vided for in texts published after 1570.

As mentioned above, the great majority of Greek plays provided with a statement of locale are tragedies, only one comedy being so provided. Likewise in the Italian drama a greater percentage of tragedies is provided with scene-designations than are comedies. I examined 67 tragedies, as compared to 124 comedies; 28 tragedies, or

42% of the 67 I examined, contain designations of scene, while 23 comedies, or 18% of the 124, are so provided, Of the 17 tragicomedies and pastoral dramas I examined, 7, or 41% contain scene-designations, while of Cicognini's 18 Opera Scenica that I examined, 7, or 39%, contain scene designations.

In order to study the use of scene-designations in French dramatic texts, I examined texts of 75 French plays printed between

1500 and 1685 in the Huntington collection. I supplemented these texts with critical editions of French plays available in the University of

Arizona Library. Of the 111 French texts I examined, 53 or 48%, are provided with a designation of scene. (These 53 texts are listed with their scene-designations in Appendix C.) Of these 53 texts with scene- designations, 52 were published in the period from 1635 through 1685.

This figure represents 85% of the 61 texts dated from 1635 through 1685 that I examined. So while scene-designations apparently came into fairly frequent use in Italian texts printed after 1570, apparently not until over 65 years later were they provided in a majority of 25

French texts, and then the frequency of their use was extremely high.

This is true even though most of the French texts printed before 1635 contain at least some of the same kinds of prefatory material that the

Italian texts of the period contain: epistles dedicatory, dramatis personae, arguments, prologues, verses commendatory, and epistles to the reader. Thus despite the fact that consideration was usually given to the compilation of prefatory material for the French dramatic texts, scene-designations were apparently not usually included in that prefa­ tory material until sometime after 1630, even though they had come into fairly wide use in the Italian drama as early as 1570.

The practice of scene-designation in the French drama differs from the practice in Italian drama not only by virtue of the date at which scene-designations become widely used. While a significantly greater percentage of Italian tragedies (as opposed to Italian comedies) are provided with scene-designations, in the French drama no such dis­ tinction can be made. After 1635, as stated above, the vast majority of French plays that I examined are provided with scene-designations, those plays being fairly equally distributed among comedies, tragedies, and tragicomedies. Of the 29 French tragedies printed after 1635 that

I examined, 26, or 90%, are provided with scene-designations, while 15 of the 19 comedies, or 79%, and 11 of the 12 tragicomedies, or 92%, are so provided. Thus once scene-designations begin to appear in French dramatic texts, they seem to be almost uniformly adopted, being pro­ vided in texts regardless of genre. 26

As in the French drama, the use of scene-designations becomes frequent in English drama during the mid 1630s. Of the 412 English dramatic texts printed before 1635 that Greg lists in his Bibliography, only 42 (or 10%) are provided with scene-designations, while of the

256 English dramatic texts dated from 1636 through 1659, 109 (or 43%), are so provided. Moreover, of the 42 texts with scene-designations printed during the period from 1500 through 1635, almost half (or 19) were published in the last decade of that period from 1626 through 1635.

Thus, while 1635 seems to be a significant date with respect to the practice of designating scene in both England and France, the growth of the practice in England may actually predate the growth of the practice in France by a decade or more. A closer analysis of the evidence bears out this assertion.

There are 292 English dramatic texts dated before 1616 in Greg's

Bibliography. Of these 292, only 11 (or 4%), are provided with scene- designations. These 11 texts and their scene-designations are:

Gascoigne's Supposes (1573): "The Comedie Presented in Ferrara."

Gascoigne's and Kinwelmershe's Jocasta (1573): "The Tragedie Represented in Thebes."

Gascoigne1s The Glass of Government (1575): "The Comedie to Be Presented as it Here in Antwerpe."

Daniel's Cleopatra (1594): " The Scene Supposed Alexandria."

Brandon's The Virtuous Octavia (1598): "The Stage Supposed Rome."

Anon. Trans., II Pastor Fido (1602): "The Scene is in Arcadia."

Alexander's Darius (1603): "The Scene Supposed in Babilon." 27

Alexander's Croesus (1604): "The Scene in Sardis."

Tomkis1s Lingua (1607): "The Scene is Microcosmus in a_ Grove. The Time from Morning to Night.-"-

Anon. Cupid's Whirligig (1607): "The Scene in London."

Anon. Westward Ho (1607): "Scene London."

An examination of this list reveals that most of the plays in question were probably influenced in some way by Italian and/or classi­ cal drama. Supposes is a translation of Ariosto's Suppositi (1524).

Jocasta is a translation of Dolce's Giocasta (1549), which is itself 11 an adaptation of Euripides Phoenissae; and II Pastor Fido is a translation of Guarini's play of the same name (1597). The Glass of

Government is a closet drama written by Gascoigne, who was quite familiar with Italian plays. Cleopatra, The Virtuous Octavia, Darius, and Croesus are closet dramas written by self-avowed neoclassical authors, while Tomkis's Lingua is a university play written for a learned audience. Of the 11 plays on this list, only 2, Cupid's

Whirligig and Westward Ho, are plays written for the commercial theater.

Thus it may be assumed that most of the scene-designations found in

English texts printed before 1616 were provided by men who had some awareness of the practice as used in Italian and/or classical texts.

But if there was an influence of Italian and classical drama on the presence of scene-designations in English texts, it was merely a sporadic one, affecting only 4% of the 292 English plays printed before 1616. However, in 1616 and thereafter the frequency with which

^Herrick, Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance, p. 161. 28 scene-designations appear in English printed texts begins to rise.

Below I present the total number of extant substantive English texts printed in the decades following 1616, the number of those texts with scene-designations, and the percentage of the total that number repre­ sents. (I provide information only through 1659, since I examined only part of the extant English texts printed after that date.)

Table 1

Percentage of English Texts with Scene-designations, 1616-1659

Total Number Texts with Date of Texts Scene-Designations Percentage

1616-1625 50 12 24%

1626-1635 69 19 28%

1636-1645 93 38 41%

1646-1655 126 45 36%

1655-1659 37 26 70%

The percentage figure for the years 1616-1625 (24%) is somewhat decep­ tive. Of the 12 texts with scene-designations printed during that decade, 8 appear in the folio edition of Ben Jonson's Works (1616). If that extraordinary and atypical book is not included in the figures for those years, then only 4 texts out of 41 (or 10%), contain scene-desig- nations. I consider Works atypical with respect to the practice of designating scene, since, while 8 of the 9 plays in Jonson's Works are provided with scene-designations, his book seems to have had no strong immediate effect on acceptance of the practice: only 4 other texts published during the 9 years immediately following its appearance in 29 12 1616 are provided with scene-designations. Moreover, with the adjusted figure for 1616-1625 in mind, a clearer picture emerges of the rise in the frequency with which scene-designations were provided in English texts after 1625: from the adjusted 10% of 1616-25, to 28% in 1626-35.

While this figure and the 41% for 1636-45 in no way represent the same overwhelming acceptance of the practice as is apparently found in the

French drama after 1635, it does represent a significant portion of the

English texts printed from 1626 through 1645. Moreover, increased acceptance of the practice continues into the Commonwealth Period and the Restoration; 26 out of 37, or 70% of the texts printed from 1655 through 1659 contain scene-designations, with 120 or 68% of the 176 examined texts printed from 1660 through 1685 being so provided.

There are other similarities between the French and English drama with regard to the practice of designating scene besides the fact that 1635 appears to be the date after which the practice becomes widely used in both French and English texts. One similarity is that the presence of prefatory material in a given text does not assure the presence of a scene-designation in that text. Another is that scene-designations in the English drama from 1616 through 1659 appear fairly equally distributed among tragedies (43% with scene-designa- tions), comedies(36%), and tragicomedies (48%).

To summarize, the earliest examples of statements of locale, as we have seen in this chapter, are found in the arguments to 19 of

12 Of the 9 plays in Jonson's Works, 8 had previously appeared in quarto editions but without scene-designations. the 40 classical Greek plays and in the prologues to 4 of Plautus's

plays. A formulaic scene-designation is present in some Italian texts of the early sixteenth century, although scene-designations are appar­ ently not frequently used in Italian plays until after 1570. In the

French texts I examined, scene-designations were almost uniformly absent from plays published before 1635, while after 1635 they appear

in the great majority of texts. In England, scene-designations were

infrequently used before 1616. In the decade 1626-35 the frequency with which they were provided showed a definite rise, though not until

the decade 1636-45 were they provided in a significant number of texts.

This historical information is important for the subject to be addressed

in Chapter IV: the rationale for the practice of scene-designation.

But before the subject of rationale is addressed, it is necessary to examine more closely the formula used to designate locale. CHAPTER III

THE FORM OF THE SCENE-DESIGNATION

There are two striking attributes shared by almost all scene designations: the formulaic nature of the statement and its location in the text. Below I demonstrate that almost all scene-designations follow a syntactical pattern which apparently derived ultimately from the Greek prototypical statement of locale. As the formula became more frequently used, the pattern was simplified, this simplification per­ haps resulting in part from the influence of the brief statements of locale found in the prologues to four comedies by Plautus. Moreover, almost all scene-designations are printed in conjunction with the dramatis personae. Now, as we have seen, the Greek statements of locale printed in the editones principes were usually considered part of the argument. How these statements came to be set off from other prefatory matter—in short, how they came to be scene-designations as defined for the purposes of this study—is considered in this chapter.

A typical Greek statement of locale is: "TJ (yev) aicnvn TOU

Spayaxos uiroiceiTai ev apyex" ("the scene of the play is placed in 13 Argos"). This statement is usually paired with a sentence providing

13 "VIEV" is not present in all examples; in some cases "6e" is in its place. These words are used to link the ideas in two clauses, "viev" appearing in the first clause, "Se" in the second. They can give the sense of "on the one hand ... on the other." 32 the composition of the chorus: e.g., "6 6E xopos OUVETRMICEV E£

Einxupiuiv irapQEvuv" ("the chorus consists of peasant maidens").

Occasionally this formula is simplified by omitting the phrase "rou

6p6tyctTos" and/or by allowing the verb "UTTOKEITCXI" to be understood. In only one example is the verb "la-riv" ("is") used: the statement of locale for Aeschylus' Persians reads: "icon. ECTTIV N PEV atcnvn TOU

SpaycxTos irapa tS Tcttjuii Aapeiou." ("And the scene of the drama is beside the tomb of Darius.") In its simplest form, the Greek statement of locale might read, for example, "ri UEV CTKTIVTI EV 'EAEUCTIVI" ("The scene in Eleusis"). But the majority of Greek statements of locale follow the longer pattern described above. In most examples, the statement is followed by a sentence describing the composition of the chorus and one providing the name of the character speaking the prologue. Often this information, while still within the argument, directly precedes the list of characters'in the drama.

Of the 19 Greek statements of locale that appear in the editiones principes, 10 provide only the name of a city as the location of the action (Argos, Corinth, Troy, Thebes, etc.). Of these 10 state­ ments, 8 contain no phrases modifying the name of the city, and 2 contain only very brief phrases that give geographical information about the city. For example the statement of scene for Iphigenia in

Tauris places the action in "Taupois xfia ZKueias" ("Tauris, in

Skythia"), while the statement for Antigone specifies "Onflcus TCXIS

BOIOJTXKCUS 11 ("Thebes in Boetian precincts").^

^For a citation of the entire Greek statement, see Appendix A. Besides the 10 statements naming a city as the scene, 2 Greek statements of locale give a simple one-word name for a geographical place other than a city: in one case an island (Afiyvos), in the other a holy place ('EXsucns). Thus for most Greek statements of locale, the simple name of the general geographical setting (i.e., city or island) is the only information given about the location of the action.

A few Greek statements of locale specify locations in the countryside; for these locations there are no convenient single-word labels. For example, Aeschylus' Persians takes place "ircxpa -no Ta'u)

Aapeiou" ("beside the tomb of Darius"), while Sophocles' Ajax is located "EV TS vauafaOyio upos T?I aicrivfi xou Aiavros" ("in the harbor near the tents of Ajax") and his Oedipus Colonnus "EV rn Xrri

Colonnus in front of the temple of the Semnae"). In each of these statements, the place is given as precisely as possible; the locale is even more specifically described than the locales of those plays which take place within a city. The statements of locale for Ajax and

Persians, in fact, do not mention the general geographical place-name, providing only the geographically vague, but dramatically specific, information about "a harbor near the tents of Ajax" and "beside the tomb of Darius." In 2 other examples, the location is not so precisely designated. Euripides' Hecuba takes place "EV TFI AVMREPAV -rns

0p

Aeschylus' Prometheus Vinctus is "EV Etcueia ETU TO Kauicacnov opoe" ("in

Skythia upon the Caucasus Mountains"). Even these 2 statements, as general as they are, clearly provide a single locale for the action.

There is only 1 play whose statement of locale lists 2 places where the action occurs: Aristophanes' Pacem is "EK uepous UEV CTI TTIS yris, EK uepous 6e ETTI TOU oupavou" ("partly on the earth and partly in heaven").

Without doubt the fact that Aristophanes allowed the action of his comedy to move from place to place is reflected in this unusual statement of locale. Certainly the more typical Greek statement of locale gives only one place as the location, no matter how generally stated that place may be. Moreover, the typical Greek statement expresses the general locale economically, providing descriptive modifi­ cation in only a few examples. From this brief study of the Greek statements of locale, therefore, we can see how almost every type of dramatic locale--a city or a countryside—could be described in the brief formula devised for that purpose.

In the editiones principes of the classical Greek plays, most statements of locale were printed as part of the arguments to the plays.

Some sixteenth-century editors and translators of those plays, however, set these statements off from the arguments, thus treating them as an item of information separate from the argument and the dramatis per- sonae--in other words, treating them as scene-designations as they have been defined for the purposes of this study. The first editor to do so, so far as I know, was Erasmus. In his 1507 Latin translation of

Hecuba and Iphigenia in Aulide, the scene-designation for Hecuba, basically a translation of the Greek statement of locale, is printed below the argument and clearly set off from it. Moreover the 35 scene-designation is obviously intended to be seen as separate from the argument, since the word Finis, printed in large letters and centered, stands emphatically between the end of the argument and the scene-des­ ignation.

According to J. E. Sandys, Erasmus traveled to Venice in 1508 to 15 revise his translation of these two plays. But the revised version probably did not appear until 1524, when a bilingual (Greek and Latin) edition of the two plays was printed by Johannes Froebenius. (There are earlier reprints of the 1507 edition, but I have been unable to examine them and consequently do not know whether they contain the revisions.)

The printing of the 1524 scene-designation differs from the printing of the 1507 scene-designation by its being placed on the same page as the dramatis personae and immediately above it. It still follows the argument, as in the 1507 edition, but because the argument almost entirely fills the preceding page, the scene-designation is placed on the following page above the dramatis personae.

The setting off of this scene-designation seems not to have immediately influenced subsequently printed classical texts. For the most part, translators simply translated the Greek arguments, keeping the original format observable in the first editions of the Greek plays, while editors reprinted the material found in the earliest printed texts. There are, however, some sixteenth-century exceptions

15 J. E. Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, II (Cambridge: The University Press, T908), 91. to this general practice. In a Latin translation of Sophocles' plays by Naogeorgus in 1558, several statements of locale are treated as scene-designations, being centered in small type below the argument.

The scene-designation for Electra is both below the argument and above the dramatis personae, all of this information being brief enough to appear on the same page. Also, in 1570, another Latin translation of

Sophocles, this one by Ratallero, contains several statements of locale set off from the argument, the one for Electra appearing above the dramatis personae, the one for Philoctetes below the dramatis personae.

The only statement of locale that appears in a classical text printed in England is found in Watson's Latin translation of Sophocles'

Antigone (1581). In this play, above the Personae is a brief paragraph that begins "scenabuius [i.e., seena huius] fabula constituitur Thebis

Boeticis." A note in the margin attributes this statement to

Naogeorgus, and indeed it seems that Watson copied the paragraph from

Naogeorgus' translation of Sophocles' plays where, as we have seen, several of the statements of locale were set off from the argument.

Clearly, however, the statement was not original with Naogeorgus, as

Watson assumed, but was translated from the Greek (see Appendix A, 1502 and 1558). It is also clear that in setting off the statement, Watson was simply following Naogeorgus' practice.

In these examples, the scene-designations appear to be based on those statements of locale which were originally included in the argu­ ments to the plays. The translators do not add a scene-designation to plays which were not provided with a statement of locale in previous ed­ itions, and they do not omit any statements of locale that appear in earlier texts. But, like Erasmus in 1524, these translators consider the statement of locale as separate from the argument. Moreover, in

Italian, French, and English dramatic texts this attitude toward the statement—that it is to be separate from the other prefatory material--predominates. Thus in Renaissance dramatic texts the scene- designation rather than the statement of locale in the argument is the preferred way of giving information about the location of the play's acti on.

Let us now turn to the scene-designation as it appears in

Italian texts. The typical Italian scene-designation for a tragedy— scene-designations for comedies are somewhat simpler than those for tragedies and show other influences—is a formulaic statement that con­ tains many elements derived from the Greek prototype. For example, the earliest Italian scene-designation that I examined—that for Trissino's

Sophonisba (1530-9)—is clearly modeled on the Greek formula:

La Scena de La Favola si pone in Cirta, Citta di Numidia. IT Choro e~di donne cirtensi.

The word "Scena" is of course a transliteration of the word "oioivTi."

"De la favola" (of the plot) may be regarded as a loose translation of

"TOU 6payctTos" (of the play"saction); "si pone" is a translation of

"^TTOKEITCH." And, as in several of the Greek statements of locale, the name of the city is provided, followed by a brief phrase describing the location of the city. Also as in many of the Greek statements of locale, this scene-designation is followed by a description of the chorus. The author of this scene-designation was therefore almost certainly famil­ iar with the statement used in the Greek arguments to express the scene.

In fact, besides its language, the primary difference between this Italian scene-designation and those statements of locale I found in the printed texts of the Greek tragedies is its location: the scene- designation for La Sophonisba is printed not as part of the argument but in collocation with the dramatis personae, a location which is the standard one for most Renaissance scene-designations.

The remaining Italian scene-designations for tragedy also show similarities to the Greek statements of locale. While the Italian formula is refined somewhat in the course of the sixteenth century, the refinements in question have antecedents in Greek variations of the typical statement. In the Italian scene-designation, the verb e_ is more often used than the verb si pone, this use paralleling the use of the verb "ecrriv" in place of "\koKeiTcu" in one example. And "de la favola" is omitted from the majority of Italian scene-designations, as

"TOO SPAYCTTOS" is omitted from some of the Greek statements of locale.

Thus a typical scene-designation for an Italian tragedy has the form:

"La Scena e [or si pone] in [geographical place-name]." The sentence describing the chorus is in most examples part of the dramatis personae itself, not part of the scene-designation.

Also, in most cases, the types of locales specified in the Ital­ ian scene-designations for tragedies resemble the types of locales provided in Greek statements of locale. The great majority of Italian scene-designations for tragedies, 26 out of 28 to be exact, specify a city as the location of the action. Only one Italian scene-designation provides a location without mentioning the name of the city and even this one provides the name of the country. The scene-designation for

A!tea (1556) reads "La Scena e la corte di Eneo, Re di Calidonia." And one specifies a country as the location of the action (La Recinda

[1590] has "La Scene e in Alger"), a practice that has no parallel in the Greek statements of locale, unless it be the general locale given for Prometheus Vinctus ("in Skythia, upon the Caucasus Mountains").

One interesting aspect of the Italian scene-designation for tragedy is the information supplied by the phrase modifying the name of the location. In many instances this phrase is used, as in the Greek examples, to convey information about the location of the city or to make the locale more specific. But unlike the Greek modifying phrase, it is also often used to convey the idea of the locale's royal or his­ torical status. For example, the scene-designation for Giraldo

Cinthio's Orbecche (1547) is "La Scena e in Susa, citta real di Persia"; that for Bozza's Fedra (1578), "La Scena dell a favola si pone in Athene, citta reale"; and that for Groto's La Hadriana (1586), "La Scena e in

Hadria, La Antica." Of the 28 scene-designations for Italian tragedies

I examined, 16 provide some indication that the locale is of historical significance or the house or palace of a nobleman or king. Compared to the typical scene-designation in Italian tragedy, the scene-designations for Italian comedy are very simple. The usual scene-designation for comedy consists of the formula "La Scena e in [name of city]." Occasionally the phrase "de la comedia" will follow

scena, and sometimes the preposition in. is omitted. In a few examples,

the verb used is "si finge" ("is supposed"); in a few other examples

there is a phrase modifying the name of the city. But in most cases,

16 out of 23 to be exact, the scene-designation follows the simple

formula described above.

The only Greek statement of locale to appear in a comedy

(Aristophanes' Pacem), as previously noted, provides two locales:

"Heaven" on the one hand, "Earth" on the other. Thus the relative sim­

plicity and uniformity of the Italian scene-designation is probably the

result of influences other than this statement of locale. In this

regard, the statements of locale found in four Plautine prologues, as

noted in Chapter II, may have influenced Italian practice. While these

Latin statements do not follow a definite pattern, they do name the

locale as simply as possible, using a form of the verb esse to do so, and providing just the name of the city without adding descriptive

modification. Such direct reference to locale intended as information

for the audience also appears in some Italian comic prologues. For example, the prologue of Bibbiena's Calandria (1523) contains the state­ ment "Sono hoqqi in Roma"; that of Dolce's Raqazzo (1541), "Questa

[referring to the frons scenae], che voi vedete, e Roma"; and that of

Ariosto's Cassaria (1536), "Cittade Metellino hogqi si nome." These

(and there are many more examples) are all brief statements naming the

city in which the action occurs. Like the statements of locale in

Plautus' prologues, these Italian examples name the locale without 41 providing descriptive modification. And while they do not all use the verb essere, they do maintain the succinctness of the Latin statements of locale. Perhaps the scene-designations in Italian comedy owe their relative simplicity to the influence of this kind of briefly stated reference to locale.

Since I found only 7 scene-designations in Italian tragicome­ dies or pastoral dramas, I hesitate to state any firm generalizations.

However, on the admittedly slight basis of these 7 examples, it seems that scene-designations for Italian tragicomedy follow the basic formula used for designating the scene in Italian comedies. The typical scene- designation for a tragicomedy contains little, if any, modification of the place-name; the verb used is "e_," or, in a few instances, "si finqe."

Unlike the typical comic scene-designations, however, the place named is usually not a city, but an island (e.g. "Isola di Sciro"), an imaginary bucolic locale (e.g. "Arcadia"), or, in one example, a coun­ try ("Ibernia").

Thus it appears that the Italian scene-designations I examined derive ultimately from classical statement of locale, the original

Italian formula apparently being an imitation of the Greek, the simpli­ fied versions perhaps showing the influence of variations in the Greek statement and/or the statement of locale in some comic prologues. More­ over, as the practice of designating scene became more widely used in •

Italian texts, there probably occurred a natural process of simplifica­ tion which may have affected the use of the verb "e" in place of "si pone" or "si finqe," and the omission of the phrase "de la favola." 42

The scene-designations that appear in French dramatic texts are even more regular than those that appear in Italian texts. Of the 53

French scene-designations I examined, 52 follow the formula "La Scene est_ [geographical place-name]." Sometimes the preposition "en" or

"dans" is used in place of "a/1 but I found no examples where the prep­ osition is omitted. All 53 of the French scene-designations I examined are located on the same page as the dramatis personae. Moreover, 47 of the 53 specify cities or places within cities as the location of the action; 2 scene-designations give islands as the scene, while 3 describe localities in the countryside. There is 1 French scene-desig­ nation that specifies a country as the general locale; the scene designation for Pierre Corneilie's Andromede (1660) reads, "La Scene est en Ethiopie, dans la vi 11e capitale du Ro.yaume de Cephee, proche de la mer." But this scene-designation does not place the action in the entire country of Ethiopia, since the modifying phrases limit the action to the capital city.

The earliest example of a French scene-designation that I found occurs in Rivaudeau's Aman (1566). This is the only French scene-desig­ nation of those I examined to preserve the long form of the Greek and early sixteenth-century Italian versions, including a statement about the chorus:

L'action de la tragedie est establie a_ Suse, ville Capitale de 1'Empire des Perses: La Troupe doibt estre des~DamoiseTTes et filles servantes 3eHa Royne Esther.

This scene-designation begins with "L'action" instead of the usual

"La Scene," but in almost all other respects it resembles the classic

Greek statement of locale and the early Italian scene-designations for 43 tragedies. The phrase "de la tragedie" serves the same function as

"TOO Spdyatos" and "de la favol a," while being more specific with respect to genre. The verb "est establie" is a suitable translation of "OTTOiceITCII11 or "si pone." The phrase modifying the place-name

("ville Capitale de 1'Empire des Perses") has no parallel in Greek practice, although as we saw above, several Italian scene-designations do contain modifying phrases that denote the royal status of the locale.

Furthermore the sentence describing the chorus immediately follows the scene-designation as it does in the Greek statements of locale and in the early Italian scene-designations. Thus, while I have been un­ able to examine enough examples of sixteenth-century French scene- designations to explore the possibility of classical and Italian in­ fluence on French practice, I feel it is safe to say that Rivaudeau at least was aware of the practice as it existed in classical and/or

Italian texts.

Except for this one example of a sixteenth-century French scene- designation, however, all the French scene-designations that I examined follow the simplified formula "La Scene est a [or dans or enj geo­ graphical place-name]." Therefore, while the evidence suggests that

Rivaudeau may have been influenced by the practice of designating scene in classical and/or Italian texts, I do not have enough examples to warrant making such a statement about the other French scene-desig­ nations that I saw. While classical or Italian influence on the

French scene-designation cannot be demonstrated, the French formula can be shown to have elements in common with the Italian. As in Italian drama, the French scene-designation for tragedy is more likely to contain modifying prepositional phrases than the French 44 scene-designation for comedy. Half of the 26 scene-designations for

French tragedies contain modifying phrases, while only 3 of the 17 comic scene-designations do so. And the scene-designations for tragicomedies follow the tragic model in this regard, 6 of the 10 containing a modify­ ing phrase.

Moreover, as in the Italian dramatic scene-designations, these modifying phrases usually elaborate the information given in the scene- designation, either by naming the country where the location of the action can be found, or by specifying a certain house or palace in the location named, or by mentioning, often obliquely, the royal or histori­ cally significant status of the location. Often a modifying phrase will serve two or even all of the above-named functions. For example, the scene-designation for Berenice (1661) reads "La Scene est dans Apamee, capitale de Phrygia"; that for Pol.yeucte (1660), "La Scene est a

Melitene capitale d'Armenie, dans le Palais de Felix." These examples are from tragedies, but the use of modification in tragicomedies is quite similar. The few modifying phrases that appear in scene-desig­ nations in comedies primarily provide the name of the person in or before whose house the action takes place, and in so doing, of course, make the location more specific. For example, the scene-designation for La Parasite (1654) reads "La Scene est a Paris devant la Porte du loqis de Manille," while La Mere Coquette (1666) has "La Scene est dans une salle, chez Lucinde," no city being mentioned.

In fact, typical French scene-designations basically differ from their Italian counterparts in only one way: the vast majority of French 45 examples use the simple opening "La Scene est a [or dans or en]. . . ," whereas several Italian scene-designations use a formula more closely based on the Greek statement of locale: "La Scena (de la favola) si pone in_ . . . ." In the use of modifying phrases the French designations seem to follow the Italian models, the types of locations (usually cities) cited being similar to those in Italian scene-designations.

There are only 11 English plays printed before 1616 that are pro­ vided with scene-designations (see above p. 26), and, as pointed out in

Chapter II, 9 of these 11 texts were apparently influenced by Italian and/ or classical drama. Thus it is not surprising that these 11 scene-desig­ nations have several characteristics in common with the typical Italian scene-designation. Of these 11 pre-1616 English scene-designations, 9 are found, like their Italian counterparts, on the same page as the dramatis personae. (The remaining 2 are located at the head of the text proper: one, that for Cupid's Whirligig (1607), is immediately below the head-title and above the text; the other, that for Westward Ho (1607), is immediately below the head-title and above the act-scene heading,) More­ over, in some instances, the wording of a particular pre-1616 English scene-designation echoes the wording of its particular Italian model.

For example, the scene-designation for the translation of II Pastor Fido

(1602; "The Scene is in Arcady") is itself a translation of the Italian version ("La Scena e in Arcadia"). The scene-designation for Gascoigne's and Kinwelmersche's Jocasta (1573; "The tragedy represented in Thebes") closely resembles the wording of the scene-designation for Dolce's pi ay ("La^ Favola e_ rappresentata in Thebe"). Li kewi se the 46 scene-designations for Gascoigne's other two plays show the influence of the scene-designation for Giocasta. For Supposes (1573), which seems to have no Italian scene-designation, the scene-designation is "The comedy presented in Ferrara" (the edition of 1575 has, "The Comedy Presented as it were in Ferrara"); and for The Glass of Government the scene-designa- tion is "The_ Cornedie to be presented as it were in Antwerp." The scene- designation for Tomkis's Lingua (1607; "The Scene is Microcosmus in a

Grove. The time from morning to night") uses the sentence structure common to Italian scene-designations and contains a reference to the dur­ ation of the action, as do some Italian examples. The scene-designations for Cleopatra (1584; "The Scene Supposed Alexandria"), The Virtuous

Octavia (1598; "The Stage Supposed Rome"), and Darius (1603; "The Scene

Supposed in Babilon") use the word "supposed," thus echoing the verb "si finge" ("is supposed") in several Italian scene-designations.

These pre-1616 scene-designations are also similar to Italian scene-designations in the types of locales cited: 9 of these 11 English scene-designations name cities as the location of the action, whereas 2

(Lingua and II Pastor Fido) provide imaginary locales. Unlike many

Italian scene-designations, however, these English examples contain no modifying phrases that provide clarifying information about the locale.

Thus while these pre-1616 English scene-designations possess attributes which link them to scene-designations in Italian drama, they also have attributes which differentiate the typical English formula from its Italian and French counterparts and which later come to be charac­ teristic of the English formula. The general absence of descriptive phrases modifying the geographical place-name is a distinguishing char­ acteristic of the typical English scene-designation. Another is the

general avoidance of a complete sentence as the formula for conveying

the information. For example, in the scene-designation for Giocasta

given above, the verb form is changed from the present tense "e_

rappresentata" of the Italian original to the past participle "repre­ sented" in the English translation, thus changing the form of the scene-designation from a sentence to a nominative absolute clause. The scene-designations of Gascoigne's other two plays are also provided with a verbal instead of a finite verb, as are the scene-designations for Cleopatra, The Virtuous Octavia, and Darius. In fact, only 2 of these 11 English scene-designations--those for II Pastor Fido and Tomkis'

Lingua—maintain the complete-sentence form common to Italian scene- designations. The 6 cited above follow the nominative absolute construction, while the remaining 3—those for Croesus (1604; "The

Scene in Sardis"), Cupid's Whirligig (1607; "The Scene in London"), and

Westward Ho (1607; "Scene London")—omit the verb altogether, a charac­ teristic which appears in some of the Greek statements of locale but which very rarely occurs in continental scene-designations.

Another characteristic of the typical Italian scene-designation that is not widely imitated in English scene-designations after 1616 is the use of a prepositional phrase to name the locale. While most of these pre-1616 English scene-designations provide the locale in a prep­ ositional phrase, the scene-designations for Cleopatra, The Virtuous

Octavia, and Westward Ho use a simple geographical place-name without 48 the preposition, thus anticipating what comes to be the preferred formula for indicating the locale in English scene-designations.

There is evidence, then, that from the very beginning the English scene-designation differed from the Italian in ways that may have influ­ enced the continuing simplification of the English formula. In fact, of the 3 pre-1616 scene-designations that omit the verb altogether, two approach the elliptical brevity of the later typical English scene- designation, and one achieves it. The scene-designations for Croesus,

(1604; "The Scene in Sardis"), and Cupid's Whirligig, (1607; "The Scene in London"), eliminate the verb but keep the prepositional phrase for naming the locale, while the scene-designation for Westward Ho, (1607;

"Scene, London"), has only the absolutely necessary components; even the definite article is omitted, as in many later English scene-designa­ tions. This last example is the only scene-designation in a text printed before 1616 that is expressed in what comes to be the dominant

English mode. Exhibited in this scene-designation is the predilection for brevity and compactness which is almost invariably present in later

English scene-designations and which distinguishes the typical English scene-designation from its continental counterpart.

This short elliptical scene-designation of the type used in

Westward Ho becomes the preferred formula for designating scene in

Renaissance English texts of the period from 1616 through 1659. Of the

140 texts with scene-designations printed in this period, 130 use the formula "The Scene" (or simply "Scene"), followed by the unmodified name of the locale. Moreover, the name of the locale is given in as inclu­ sive a term as necessary: in only 1 example are 2 locales provided in a single scene-designation: the scene-designation for The Country Girl

(1647) is "The Scene London and Edmonton." (The joint scene-designa­ tion for parts I and II of The Passionate Lover is "The Scenes Burqony,

Neustrea"; this scene-designation clearly gives 2 separate "scenes," 1 for each of the 2 plays.) Also, in 134 of the 140 scene-designations of this period, no descriptive modification is provided for the given geo­ graphical place-name.

As we saw in Chapter II, in Ben Jonson's Works (1616), 8 of the

9 plays were provided with scene-designations. With respect to its use of scene-designations this book may have been an atypical example of

English practice when compared to other texts printed around that date

(only 4 other texts of the decade 1616-25 are provided with scene-desig­ nations). But with respect to the statement used to express the scene, the scene-designations in this book are typical examples of the pre­ ferred English formula. The plays in Works and their scene-designa- tions are:

Every Man in His Humour: "The Scene London"

Cynthia's Revels: "The Scene Gargaphie."

Poetaster: "The Scene Rome."

Sejanus His Fall: "The Scene Rome."

Vol pone: "The Scene Venice."

Epicoene: "The Scene London."

The Alchemist: "The Scene London."

Catiline: "The Scene Rome."

(Only Every Man Out of His Humour is not provided with a scene-designa­

tion, perhaps because the action of that play shifts back and forth between the city and the countryside, and thus could not be expressed in the preferred English formula.) Each of the scene-designations in this list, except for including the definite article, follows the brief elliptical form of the scene-designation for Westward Ho (1607): there is no verb, no preposition before the place name, no modifying phrase.

Only the words "The Scene" and the geographical place-name are given.

The scene-designation formula used in Ben Jonson's Works, in fact, epitomizes the typical English scene-designation of the period 1616-59.

Two other major folios appeared in the years 1616-59, the

Shakespeare Folio of 1623 and the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio of 1649.

Two plays in the Shakespeare Folio contain scene-designations. The

Tempest has a dramatis personae printed at the end of the text proper; at the head of the dramatis personae is the scene-designation, "The

Scene, an uninhabited Island." Measure for Measure is also provided with a dramatis personae which is printed at the end of the text proper and which is headed by the scene-designation, "The Scene, Vienna." As for the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio of 1649, none of the 34 plays in that book is provided with a scene designation.

The use of the simplest possible formula and the general absence of descriptive modification in the English scene-designation from 1616 through 1659 limits the distinctions that can be made among scene-desig­ nations for the various genres. Thus the only distinctions that can be made are in the nature of the locales named.

Like the Italian and French scene-designations for tragedy, the typical English scene-designation for tragedy printed in the period 51

1616-59 specifies a city or a place within a city as the location of the

action. 24 of the 36 English scene-designations for tragedies follow

this model. 2 tragedies are said to take place on the island of Sicily, while the remaining 10 specify a country as the locale.

As we saw above, only rarely do the Italian and French scene- designations specify a country as the location of the action, except occasionally in giving the location of the city named as the "scene."

But of the 36 English scene-designations for tragedies printed between

1616 and 1659 over one-fourth designate a country as the locale. For example, the scene-designation for Davenant's The Cruel Brother (1630) is

"The Scene Italy," that for May's Cleopatra (1639), "The Scene Aegypt"; that for Lower's The Phoenix in Her Flames (1639), "The Scene Arabia."

Other countries specified as locales for tragedies include "Persia,"

"Poland," and "Norway." Furthermore, of the 2 history plays printed in this period and provided with scene-designations, 1 names a country as the location of the action. Ford's Perkin Warbeck (1634) has the scene- designation "The Scene, the Continent of Great Britayne."

The naming of an entire country as the setting of a play is also practiced in some scene-designations for comedies and for tragicomedies in this period,though not as frequently as in the case of tragedies.

The scene-designations for 3 (out of the 44) tragicomedies specify a country as the locale: that for Carlell's Arviraqus and Philicia (1639) has "Scene, Britaine"; that for Mayne's Amorous War (1648) reads "The

Scoene, Bithynia"; and that for Rider's Twins (1655) has "The Scene

Italy." And only 2 (out of 55) comedies have scene-designations that

name a country as the locale; both J. S.'s Prince of Prigs Revels (1651) and Brome's Queen's Exchange (1657) are said to take place in "England."

Thus the practice of designating an entire country as "the scene" is

more prevalent in the scene-designations for tragedies than in the

scene-designations for comedies and tragicomedies. Moreover, this ten­

dency to name an entire country as the locale, while not absolutely

peculiar to the English drama, is more prevalent in the English

than the continental scene-designation.

Like most continental scene-designations, the majority of

English scene-designations for comedies in the period 1616-59 (44 out

of 55) name cities as the locale of the play's action, or parts of

cities such as "The Strand" or "Savoy." Other locales specified in

scene-designations for English comedies include regions of Greece, such

as Thessaly and Epire, and islands, such as Sicily and the imaginary

"Insula Fortunata." While a fair number of English tragicomedies (21

out of 44) have cities provided as the locale, the majority of English

tragicomedies with scene-designations take place on islands like Sicily

or Cyprus, in pastoral regions such as Arcadia, or in rural settings

such as Sherwood or "The Forest of Argier."

For the most part, then, the types of locales specified in

English scene-designations parallel the types of locales specified in

Italian and French scene-designations. The main difference between the

English and Continental choice of locales lies in the greater use—in

the English scene-designation—of countries as the location of the

action.

Most English scene-designations in the period from 1616 through

1659 thus possess a uniformity of both form and type of locale. Because of this uniformity, one particular scene-designation which does not fit the formula stands out through its reference to time. The scene-designation for Randolph's Amyntas (1638) reads, "The Scene,

Sicilie; in the holy Vale. The Time an Astrological day from Noon to

Noon." It will be remembered that one scene-designation of the period before 1616 also mentions time: in Tomkis' Lingua (1607) the scene-des- ignation reads, "The Scene is Microcosmus in a. Grove, the time from morning to night." Both of these examples provide the duration of the play's action.^ In this way, they anticipate an aspect of the English practice of designating scene that appears in several Restoration scene- designations: the statement of the scene or of the duration of the play' action in terms that directly indicate the play's unity of place and/or unity of time.

For the most part, the scene-designations found in the printed drama of the early Restoration (1660-1685) follow the same brief formula for designating scene used in the period 1616-59. Of the 114 scene- designations that appear in the texts of the early Restoration, 73 or

65% use the simple formula, "The Scene [geographical place-name]." As in the period 1616-59, cities are still by far the most prevalent type of locale designated, 76 of the designations specifying a single city as the location of the action. The actions of 12 other plays take place within cities in such locales as "Covent Garden," "the Court of Florence and "a coffee-house." And as in the preceding period several texts, 7

^As we saw in Chapter I, there are also some Italian scene- designations printed with a statement indicating the duration of the action. I did not find any French examples of this practice. 54 to be exact, provide a country as the location of the action. Moreover, there are some examples of the infrequent practice of listing two locales in the scene-designation: 5 texts of this period provide two clearly distinct locales as "the scene."

The primary feature that distinguishes some early Restoration scene-designations from those of the preceding period is a relatively greater use of modification. 32 of the 114 scene-designations that I examined from this period include some additional information beyond the simple place-name of the locale. This modification is in some cases similar to the modifying phrases found in Italian and French scene-desig­ nations. In fact, several of these kinds of scene-designations are found in translations of French plays. For example, the scene-designa- tion to the English translation of Racine's Andromache (1675), reads

"The Scene, Buthrotes, Capital City of Epirus." This scene-designation parallels the typical continental scene-designation, providing in its modifying phrase information about the location of the city and its significant status in the country where it is found. Another example is found in the scene-designation for the English translation of

Corneille's Horace (1671): "The Scene Rome, in the Parlour of Horatio's

House." This scene-designation, like several of the continental examples, contains modification that restricts the setting to a single room within a single house within the city mentioned. (It is interesting to note that, despite their general similarity to continental scene-designations, these examples are characteristically English in using neither the verb nor the preposition before the general locale, these two features being 55

common to most continental scene-designations and present in the origi­ nal scene-designations of the French versions.)

It is not only in translations that modifying phrases restrict­

ing or clarifying the setting are found. For example, the scene-designa­

tion to John Crowne's Juliana (1671), is "The scene, Warsaw in Poland,

at the Meeting of the Ban and Arreer Ban, armed in the field for the

Election of a King." Here the modifying phrases clarify the location

of the setting, and limit it to a certain place within the city speci­

fied. And the scene-designation to Flecknoe's Erminia (1661; "The

scene, Missena in Greece") follows the continental custom of providing

geographical information about the city named as the setting.

Several early Restoration scene-designations depart from the

practice of using modification to restrict or to clarify the locale

specified, and use modifying phrases that seem to be intended as critical

information for the reader. In other words, some early Restoration

scene-designations indicate—either directly by reference to critical

phrases or indirectly by reference to the duration of the play's action—

that the dramatist has observed the unities of place and/or time. An

enlightening example of this aspect of Restoration practice of designat­

ing scene is found in the anonymous Emi1ia (1672): "The Scene Micena.

The Unity of Place (besides that of Time and Persons) so exactly

observed, as there is never any breach or breaking of the scenes, until

the end of the Act." Here there can be no doubt about what the author

of the scene-designation intended to convey: that the play in question has observed two of the three critical "rules" for drama. This same clarity of intention is found in the scene-designation to Flecknoe's

Love's Kingdom (1664): "The scene, Cyprus, with all the rules of Time and Place so exactly observed, as whilst for Time 'tis all comprizid in as few hours as there are Acts, for Place, it never goes out of the view or prospect of Love's Temple." In both cases the unities are "so exactly observed" that the author wishes to advertise the fact in the scene-designation.

In addition to these two scene-designations, there are other

Restoration scene-designations which state the duration of the play's action in terms that indicate the author was aware of the critical rules.

For example, the scene-designation for Shadwell's The Humorists (1671) reads, "Scene London, in the year 1670. Duration of the scene 24 hours."

The scene-designation to Dryden's An Evening Love (1671), while less explicit than the preceding example, is no less clear in its intention:

"The Scene Madrid, in the year 1665. The time the last Evening of the

CarnivalIn both examples the duration of the play's action is given, thus indicating to the reader that the play conforms to the unity of time. In this connection, these 2 examples are similar to the 2 earlier scene-designations discussed above (in Tomkis' Lingua and Randolph's

Amyntas), both of which contain information about the duration of the play's action and thus emphasize that unity of time is observed. Also, in both examples the historical date is provided, thus anticipating the usual practice of modern dramatic texts. 57

The typical English scene-designation, therefore, though appar­ ently derived from the Italian scene-designation, displays characteristics of form which set it apart from the typical continental scene-designation. These unique characteristics—the elliptical phras­ ing and the general absence of modification—become less predominant in the early Restoration, when some scene-designations appear with elaborate explanatory phrasing. Noteworthy as they are, however, even these scene-designations do not comprise a majority. The preferred

English formula is, for the most part, the simple opening "Scene,"

(or "The Scene"), followed by the geographical place-name. CHAPTER IV

A RATIONALE FOR THE PRACTICE OF SCENE-DESIGNATION

The wide historical scope of the practice of designating scene and the variety of phrases included within the basic formula of desig­ nation suggest that throughout its history the practice of scene- designation has served a variety of functions. In this chapter I make some suggestions about the probable rationale for the presence of scene-designations in particular historical periods. For example, I believe Erasmus and other early Renaissance translators and editors of classical dramatic texts viewed the scene-designation as serving its obvious purpose: to inform the reader of the geographical loca­ tion of the play's action. On the other hand, the types of modifying phrases found in the scene-designations of some early Italian tragedies seem to indicate that an additional purpose of the scene- designation was to emphasize the author's use of subject matter appropriate to tragedy. Moreover, there is evidence that some Italian,

French> and English scene-designations were in part designed to indicate that the author had conformed to the critical rule calling for unity of place. Of course, these rationales are not mutually exclusive, and there may be two or more reasons for the presence of a scene-designation in a given text, including the possibility that an author was simply conforming to a current fashion.

58 59

Before turning to the problem of rationale, I wish to consider

briefly the question of authorship of a given scene-designation. It would be helpful and enlightening for the reader to know whether scene-

designations were usually supplied by the authors of the plays, or by the publishers of the printed texts, or by other persons involved in seeing the plays through the press. However, having examined this question at some length, I must conclude that no general statement about authorship of a given scene-designation can be made, since there were so many circumstances affecting the printed text of a given

play, and these circumstances could vary from one country to another and one period to another. For example, some English printed texts are based on prompt copies, while others are derived from the authors' own manuscripts. Some printed texts contain letters to the

reader, arguments, verses commendatory, epistles dedicatory, and/or dramatis personae, appurtenances which show that someone took special care in publishing the book. Other printed texts contain no prefatory materials at all. Some authors, like Ben Jonson, were involved in the process of publishing their own work; others, like Shakespeare, were not.

Under these circumstances, the author of a particular scene- designation could be any one of several people involved, at some stage, in the publishing process: the author of the play in question, its publisher, or a third person who, while not an editor in the modern sense of the word, has played some role in seeing the play into print.

Heminges and Condell, who collected the manuscripts for the Shakespeare First Folio, are examples of men who were involved in the publishing process in this quasi-editorial sense: they believed, according to

Hinman, that they were responsible for providing the printers with

"trustworthy" texts of Shakespeare's plays, although they cannot be i o considered editors by today's standards. And Ben Jonson is an example of an author who, in the 1616 folio, served as an "editor" of his own plays. It is difficult to know just how often such "quasi- editors" were involved in the printing of a text, although I should think most of them would provide some evidence of their presence (as

Heminges and Condell did) by signing a letter to the reader or an epistle dedicatory. However, since the possibility always exists that a given scene-designation was provided by such a "quasi-editor," if not by the author or publisher of the text, the question of authorship will have to remain, in general, unanswered.

Whoever the author of a given scene-designation is, in many cases the presence of a scene-designation in a given Renaissance text suggests that the play in question has observed unity of place. The discussion of how this rationale for the presence of a scene-designa- tion became a significant one begins with the Greek drama.

Most scholars agree that the practice of appending arguments to

Greek plays originated with Aristophanes the Grammarian, a second- century B.C. scholar who compiled editions of the works of Aeschylus,

Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes. His arguments usually consist

18 Charlton Hinman, ed., The First Folio of Shakespeare: The Norton Facsimile (New York: Norton, 1968), p. xi. of brief statements about the plot, the location of the action (i.e.,

the statement of locale), the composition of the chorus, the identity

of the prologuist, and the results of the competition in which the

play was entered (Pfeiffer, p. 193). Other scholars imitated these

arguments so that a given argument that contains this kind of informa­

tion (including the statement of locale) cannot be automatically

attributed to Aristophanes the Grammarian. For example, the state­

ment of locale for Hecuba was probably the work of Thomas Magistros, a

twelfth-century Byzantine scholar (Turyn, p. 18). But the majority of

arguments in which statement of locale appear are attributed to

Aristophanes. And, according to Pfeiffer, the purpose of Aristophanes

arguments was "to be a necessary help for the scholarly reader"

(Pfeiffer, p. 194).

That Renaissance editors of classical texts probably viewed

the Greek statements of locale as serving the simple function of pro­

viding information about the geographical location of the action can

be inferred from changes that Erasmus made in his translation of the

statement of scene for Hecuba between the printing of the 1507 and the

1524 texts. His translation in the 1507 text is as follows:

Actio Fabulae constituitur in Cherrhoneso, £ regione Thraciae.

This translation follows the Greek fairly closely. But the 1524 trans

lation adds some clarifying phrases not present in the original Greek:

Actio fabulae constituitur in Cheroneso, quae Phryqiam, in qua est Ilium, habet ad Orientem, Thraciam reliquam ad Septentrionem, . . .

Here there is precise geographical description. The setting is still located on the Chersonese Peninsula, but information about the relation­ ship of other, perhaps better known, places is also provided: "The action of the play is set in the Chersonese Peninsula, which has

Phrygia, where Troy is, to the East, the rest of Thrace to the north."

Erasmus's additions to the statement clarify the location of the play's action.

The Latin statements of locale, which are found in the prologues to four of Plautus' comedies, were probably composed by Plautus him­ self to inform the audience of the play's geographical location. Thus these statements serve the same function as the Greek statements of locale, but are aimed at the audience, not the reader, of the play.

This simple function, to provide information about the play's location, may be supposed to motivate the presence of scene-designa­ tions in every text in which they appear. However, the informative function cannot adequately explain the absence of scene-designations in some texts where the locale could be briefly stated (for example the plays of Ariosto, Garnier, and Hardy), or the variations in the formula used to designate the general scene. Other reasons, besides simply the desire to inform the reader of the locale, must have influ­ enced the presence and the wording of the scene-designation.

In the Italian and French drama where the presence of "perspec- 19 tives" or "painted scenes" had been in use during the 16th century, one possible rationale for the presence of a scene-designation is as an

19 Allardyce Nicoll, The Development of the Theatre, 3rd. ed. (New York: Harcourt, Brace and "Co., 1948), p. 86, p. 116. indication of the presence of a painted scene. Since the words

"scena" and "scene" can refer to a painted scene as well as to the

general setting of the play's action, there is naturally some question

as to whether a connection can be made between the presence of a

scene-designation and the staging of the play. I believe that the

wording of most Italian and French scene-designations--the geographical

place-name being usually preceded by a preposition ("La Scena e in

Firenze" or "La Scene est a Paris")—indicates that no such connection

can be made. With the use of the preposition before the place-name,

the ambiguity of "scena" ("scene") is avoided, the word clearly meaning

"locale," not "scenery."

This is not to say that no continental scene-designations are

worded ambiguously, or that there are no continental scene-designa­

tions which seem to be intended as information about the actual staging

of the play. For example, the scene-designation to Leoni's Antiloco,

1594, states "Per scena si rappresenta il Cortile del Palaggio

d1Antiloco," the word "scena" here probably referring to a painted

scene. And the scene-designation to Donzellini's Gli Ottraggi D'Amore

e di Fortuna, 1586, reads "La Scena e Roma, e la principale Prospettiva

e il pallazzo [sic] del Duca Ottavio Farnese." In this example, even

though there is no "in" before Roma, the word "scena" evidently means

"locality," as presumably in most scene-designations, for the informa­

tion about the painted scene ("prospettiva") is provided in the second

half of the compound statement. Both of these statements, therefore,

give information about a painted scene, and for that reason may be seen 64

as either stage-directions or descriptions of actual performances.

This type of ambiguous statement is apparently rare in continental

texts, appearing in only four of the Italian and two of the French

texts I examined. Thus I believe that in the great majority of cases,

the continental scene-designation had no relation to the staging of the

play.

The typical English scene-designation in texts printed after

1616, however, does not provide the locale in a prepositional phrase.

Thus the word "scene" in the brief English formula can be interpreted

ambiguously, to mean either "locale" or "painted scene." Moreover,

according to Richard Southern, there is evidence that changeable

scenery was in use in England as early as 1574, although its early use 20 was limited primarily to masques and plays performed at court. Also,

in the prefatory material for some English plays written around 1635

there are references to the use of changeable scenery in the staging of the plays. Since some of these plays, notably Nabbes's Hannibal and

Scipio (1637) and Suckling's Aqlaura (1638), were connected with the

private playhouses, some scholars have interpreted these references to mean that changeable scenery was occasionally employed in the private

playhouses around 1635. Kenneth Richards argues persuasively, however,

that references to changeable scenery in the prefatory material for these plays refer to court production and not to production in private

20 Richard Southern, Changeable Scenery; Its Origin and Develop­ ment in the British Theatre (London: Faber ana Faber, Ltd., 195171 p. 25. playhouses, for the reason that the physical dimensions of the private 21 playhouses were too small to permit the use of changeable scenery.

Thus it was probably not until 1661 that changeable scenery was employed in the commercial theatres,well after the date that the formula became frequently used in English texts. Therefore, in most cases the formula that is printed with the dramatis personae (or other prefatory material) in English dramatic texts is probably not a stage-direction, but a scene-designation provided for the reader of the play.

This is not to say, again, that there are no cases where the formula is used ambiguously. For example, printed at the head of the text proper in Massinger's Reneqado (1630) is the formula "The Scene,

Tunis." Since this is an unusual location for a scene-designation, and since the formula might refer to a painted scene, it is not immediately obvious how the formula is to function in the text. However, a closer examination of the play reveals no other evidence of stage-directions referring to painted scenery, and there is no external evidence that the play was staged using changeable scenery. Therefore, the formula is probably a scene-designation that has been printed in an unusual place in the text. Moreover, most cases where the formula is used ambiguously can be as easily clarified as this example from Massinger's Reneqado.

The main purpose of the scene-designation in some Italian texts seems to be, besides informing the reader about the geographical loca­ tion, to demonstrate the author's knowledge of and conformance to the

21 Kenneth R. Richards, "Changeable Scenery for Plays on the Caroline Stage," Theatre Notebook, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Autumn, 1968), 18. rule of persons, i.e., the requirement that tragedy concern the lives of illustrious and noble characters. This rationale is most evident,

I believe, in those scene-designations for tragedy that describe the locale in terms of its "royal" or "noble" status. Sometimes Italian dramatists found it necessary to defend their products against the purely academic criticisms of theoreticians. Weinberg gives the example of a spectator who, after a reading of Giraldi Cinthio's

Orbecche, cited Aristotle as his authority in criticizing the play for, among other things, failing to follow the form of Oedipus Tyrannus. In his reply, Giraldi Cinthio stated that in some cases the example of

Seneca may be preferable to that of the Greeks and that a working dram­ atist can mold his products to fit the tastes of his audience (Wein­ berg, II, 913). Cinthio also had to defend some of his later plays against critics when he promoted the concept of Tragedia di lieto fin.

He justified the happy endings for tragedy on the grounds that a trage­ dy with a happy ending would be more likely to have a "complex" plot, which Aristotle had believed superior to a "simple" plot, and that modern audiences enjoyed his plays. (According to Herrick, "the audi- 22 ence" was the final arbiter for Cinthio. ) Moreover, some dramatists departed from the rule that tragedy was to concern events and persons in ancient history. For example, Groto's romantic tragedy La Hadriana, set in his home city of Adria, is based not on an historical event,

22 Herrick, Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance, p. 87. but on the Romeo and Juliet story, which Groto probably knew from the 24 novel!e of da Porto and Bandello.

It is significant, then, that the scene-designations for those

plays which depart in some way from the tragic norm emphasize that the choice of locale, at least, should be seen as a proper one for tragedy.

Of the 6 tragedies di lieto fin by Cinthio, 5 contain scene-designa- tions that mention the locale's royal or noble status. The scene-desig­ nation for Attile (1583) has "La Scena e in Damsco citta real di Siria"; that for Gli Antivalomeni (1583), "La Scena £ in_ Londra, citta Reale d'Inghilterra"; that for Arrenopia (1583), "La Scena e in Limirico citta nobile d'Hibernia"; that for Epitia (1583), "La Scena e in Ispruche citta dell a Magna"; and that for Selene (1583), "La Scena e in

Alessandria, citta Reale d'Eqitto." And the scene-designation for

Groto's La Hadriana specifies "La Scena e in Hadria, La antica." This emphasis in the scene-designation is not an isolated phenomenon: of the

28 Italian scene-designations for tragedy that I examined, some 16 explain through modifying phrases that the setting is a royal or ancient one, and so indicate the fact that the rule of persons has been observed.

It seems, then, that some dramatists from very early in the

Renaissance sought to demonstrate their knowledge of classical practice not only by providing the same kind of appurtenances, including scene- designations, found in classical texts, but also by using the

24 Herrick, Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance, p. 213. 68 scene-designation to express their knowledge of, and conformance to, the rule of persons. They did so, moreover, even when they deviated from a strict interpretation of the classical models.

In Italian drama this use of the scene-designation as a vehicle for expressing the author's knowledge of and conformance to a particular critical precept (in this case the rule of persons) is in the latter part of the sixteenth century focused briefly on yet another aspect of dramatic theory, the concept of unity of scene. The formula­ tion of this concept was first stated explicitly by Castelvetro in

Poetica d'Aristotele Vulgarizzata et Sposta (1570); but, as we saw in the introduction, the idea of scenic,unity had been implied in critical discussions about the meaning of Aristotle's phrase "within a single circuit of the sun."

Interestingly enough, however, the rise in the frequency with which scene-designations were provided in Italian texts, coming as it does in the late 1570's, followed by only a few years the critical discussions precipitated by Castelvetro's formal articulation of his strict conception of unity of place: that the place should remain un­ changed and be contained within the space visible to a person who himself did not move (Weinberg, I, 508). Other Italian critics opposed Castelvetro's strict interpretation, believing that, since the audience knows the play is imitation, they will tolerate a change of place within the limits of probability (Weinberg, II, 695). But what is interesting here is not so much the critical argument, but the fact that the critical discussions about unity of place apparently preceded 69 by only a few years the rise in the frequency with which scene-desig- nations were provided in Italian texts.

Evidence does exist that, for at least some Italian dramatists, the presence of a scene-designation was meant to suggest that unity of place had been preserved. For example, printed with the scene-desig­ nations to four of Grazzini's comedies are references to the duration of the action: I Parentadi, 1572, contains "La Scena e Firenze. . . .

La Favola comincia la mattina per tempo, e. fornisce la sera ai tarda"; La Sibilla, 1582, has "La Scena e Firenze. . . . La Favola comincia a^ di_ alto, e^ fornisce alia fine del giorno"; La. Strega, 1582 provides "La. Scena e. Firenze. ... La Favola comincia di buon 'hora e. fornisce alia fine del giorno"; and La_ Pinzochera, 1582 has, "La Scena

£ Firenze. . . . La^ Favola comincia la mattina all' Alba, e. fornisce la sera." In each case, the play's action is limited to a twelve-hour day, so that by placing these references to time with the designations of scene, Grazzini shows that the rules of both time and place have been observed.

Thus while, as Herrick believes, most Italian dramatists may have paid little attention to unity of scene beyond observing it in a loose way, there is historical and textual evidence that some dramatists viewed the presence of a scene-designation in a given text as an indication that unity of scene had been observed.

But it is in the French and English drama that this rationale— to inform the reader that unity of scene has been observed—seems to be a major one, affecting both the form of the scene-designation and the 70 frequency with which it appears in French and English texts printed after 1635. This rationale, I believe, best explains the rise in the scene-designation's popularity after 1635, as well as the sometimes unusual expressions of "the scene" in texts where unity of scene has not been technically followed.

There is a great deal of evidence to support this claim. The historical evidence which I present below is derived from the events known to have influenced the popularity of the "rules" in French drama.

The textual evidence is based on the scene-designations themselves: the kinds of locales expressed as well as the mode of expression, particularly where that mode departs from the usual practice, or varies from one printing of a text to the next.

The historical evidence concerning the adoption of the "rules" in French drama is particularly significant to this study. According to H. C. Lancaster, the first French drama to be written with the con­ scious intention of following the unities was Jean Mairet's S.yl van ire 25 (1631). At that time, according to Lancaster, Mai ret lived at the home of the Duke of Montmorency, whose wife was the Italian Marie

Felice des Ursins. His host and hostess persuaded him "to write a pas­ toral in accordance with the unities, as he understood them. . ."

(Lancaster, p. 374). The result was S.yl van ire; and having written a pastoral according to the rules, he followed with a tragedy, La^

25H. C. Lancaster, The Preclassical Period, 1610-1634, Vol. I of A History of French Dramatic Literature in the Seventeenth Century (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1929), p. 379. 71

Sophonisbe, in 1635. The latter is based on Trissino's Sophonisba

(1530-9), which is considered the first regular tragedy of the

Renaissance. According to Lancaster, the success of La Sophonisbe

"seems to have been the chief element in the definite establishment of the rules, though . . . the technique ultimately adopted by French classical dramatists [had] not been altogether worked out" (Lancaster, p. 382). Moreover, the publication of La Sophonisbe seems also to mark the beginning of the French fashion of providing scene-designa­ tions, since after 1635 the majority of French texts I examined contain a designation of scene. Thus the historical evidence, in my opinion, suggestively links the "establishment of the rules" with the fashion of providing scene-designations, at least in French dramatic texts.

An historical basis for such a link in English dramatic texts is more difficult to find. That the English were usually aware of popular French plays is evident; but determining French influence on

English drama with any precision is not easy, though some scholars have tried. According to Harbage, "the courtly usurpation of the stage" began around 1633, after the Queen was attacked for acting in

Montague's The Sheperd's Paradise. Following this incident a number of courtiers began writing plays to show their affection for and approval of the Queen, Henrietta Maria of Bourbon, whose French tastes and literary preferences Harbage believes influenced Cavalier drama

(Harbage, p. 11). Thus if Harbage is right, the trends that

^Alfred Harbage, Cavalier Drama (New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1936), p. 2. 72

influenced French drama after this time, including the adoption of "the

rules," were likely to have had at least some influence on English

drama, if only a very superficial one.

As we saw in Chapter II, however, there was a rise in the popu­

larity of the scene-designation in English texts after 1626—before the

date that Harbage sees as significant in beginning the courtly influence

on English drama, and before the printing of Mai ret's Sophonisbe in

1635. During this period at least some of the plays by such dramatists

as Davenant, Shirley, Jonson, Massinger, and Ford were provided with scene-designations. While the plays of these men were sometimes pro­

duced at court, none of them became known as members of the group

Harbage cites as Cavalier dramatists (Harbage, p. 21). It is only after

1636, when the popularity of the scene-designation in English texts

rises again (from 27% in the period 1626-35 to 41% in the period 1636-

45) that Cavalier dramatists like Cowley, Suckling, Glapthorne, Lower,

Cartwright, Ki Hi grew, and Denham began publishing plays with scene-

designations. Thus, although the French practice of designating scene

may have influenced the popularity of the scene-designation in English

texts printed after 1636, the popularity of the English practice in

the decade after 1626 seems to have been affected by factors other

than French influence.

Historically, then, the link between the concept of unity of

place and the provision of a scene-designation for a given text is

strong only in French drama. In English drama, the evidence 73

connecting the provision of a scene-designation with a concern for

unity of place will have to be found in internal evidence, i.e., the

formula itself.

The regularity of the formula with which the scene is desig­

nated in both France and England seems to express a basic agreement about the purpose of the scene-designation. The French scene-designa-

tion, as we saw in Chapter III, almost invariable follows the formula

"La Scene est a [or dans or en; geographical place-name]," the majority of locales named being cities. The English scene-designation uses a

briefer formula, "The Scene, [geographical place-name]," cities being

named as the locale in a majority of cases but several examples provid­

ing an entire country as "the scene." A city is, of course, a choice of locale suitable to the loose interpretation of the rule calling for

unity of place, so that in the examples where a city is provided as "the scene," the author has ostensibly observed unity of place.

On the other hand, a country is not a suitable locale for an author wanting to follow the "rules," and it would seem at first glance that in providing a country as the scene, the author was admitting that

he had not observed unity of place. It is possible that, once the

provision of a scene-designation had become fashionable, that authors of

plays not observing scenic unity wanted to provide scene-designations, even if the "scene" they designated were not in conformance with the

rules. There are other ways, however, to designate a scene that does not observe unity of place, the most obvious being to list the various 74 places in which the action occurs, as is usually done in modern texts, or as was done in Aristophanes' Pacem.

In fact, there are some English scene-designations that do list two places as locations of the play's action. For example, the scene- designation for Brewer's Country Girl (1647) has "The Scene London and

Edmonton," while the scene-designation for Tate's Ingratitude of a

Commonwealth (1682) states "Scene, the citties of Rome and Corioles."

Each of these examples serves the obvious purpose of informing the reader of the geographical locations of the play's action, and makes no attempt to describe these locations as contained within a certain limited area. Of the English plays I examined, only 6 contain scene- designations that provide more than one distinctly separate geographi­ cal location for the play's action (5 of these plays being printed in the period 1660-85). In the other cases where more than one locale is mentioned for the scene, the author indicates in the scene-designation that the various places involved in the locale are actually close to one another.

This kind of scene-designation—one that provides more than one locale, but does so in such a way that the locales are understood to be fairly close to one another—is, in the English drama, found only in

Restoration texts. And it was in the Restoration that John Dryden formulated his conception of unity of place, a conception that allows the dramatist some latitude in his observation of that unity. A passage from Dryden's "Defence of an Essay of Dramatique Poesie," which 75 was prefaced to his Indian Emperour (1667), contains Dryden's discus­ sion of the matter:

For what else concerns the Unity of Place, I have already given my opinion of it in my Essay, that there is latitude to be allowed to it, as several places in the same Town or City, or places adjacent to each other in the same Country, which may all be comprehended under the larger denomination of one place; yet with this restriction, that the nearer and fewer those imaginary places are, the greater resemblance they will have to Truth. . . .27

For Dryden, places need only be "adjacent" (i.e., "near") to one another to fulfill the requirements of scenic unity. Dryden himself took ad­ vantage of the broad definition of unity of place in his Indian

Emperour, for the scene-designation printed with this play indicates

"The Scene, Mexico and two Leagues about it." Here the scene- designation provides a geographically recognizable place, and then limits the action to a definite area in that place. The author of the scene-designation would seem to be trying to balance two functions of the scene-designation: to give a certain concrete geographical location for Dryden's play while at the same time limiting that loca­ tion to an area small enough to be regarded as unified according to

Dryden's own definition as cited above.

There are other examples of scene-designations that seem to have been influenced by Dryden's definition. The scene-designa­ tion for Stapylton's Hero and Leander (1669) reads "The Scene. The

27 John Dryden, "Defence of an Essay of Dramatique Poesie," The Works of John Dryden: Plays, ed. John Loftis and Vinton Dearinq (Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press, 1966) pp. 18-19. Towers and Towns of Sestos and Abydos, The Hellespont flowing between

them," while the scene-designation for Settle's Cambyses, King of

Persia (1671) provides "The Scene Susa and Cambyses Camp near the walls of Susa," and the scene-designation for Pordage's Siege of

Babylon (1678) indicates "The Scene Babylon and the Fields adjacent."

In each of these examples, the play's action occurs both in a city

(or in two nearby cities as in the case of Hero and Leander) and in

the countryside directly outside the city. The use of the words

"near," "adjacent," and "between" in these scene-designations suggests

that in each case the author is trying to describe a somewhat diffuse scene in a manner that conveys the author's belief in its critically acceptable unity.

This kind of scene-designation also occurs in some French

texts. For example, the scene-designation to Corneille's Andromede

(1660) reads "La Scene est en Ethiopie, dans la ville Capitale du

Royaume de Cephee, proche de la mer." As mentioned in Chapter III, this scene-designation first provides the country in which the action

takes place, then places the "scene" in the capital city, near the sea.

The action of this play actually takes place both inside the city and on the cliffs outside the city overlooking the sea. This movement from the city to the sea was considered permissible, and the locale was

considered unified, since according to Lancaster, "the town was near 28 the sea." Thus the information given in the scene-designation for

2®H. C. Lancaster, The Period of Corneil.le, 1635-1651 , Vol. II of A History of French Dramatic Literature in the Seventeenth Century (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1932), p. 681. 77

Andromede advertises a key attribute of the locale: the city is

"proche de la mer"; therefore, when the locale changes, it does so within the confines of a unified place.

The scene-designations just described, with their concern for the physical proximity of the places listed, lend support to the ar­ gument that one possible reason for the presence of a scene-designa­ tion in a given text is to indicate that the author has observed unity of place. This reason, moreover, seems clearly to be the motivation for the examples of scene-designations, described in

Chapter III, that provide modifying phrases giving the duration of the action or assuring the reader, in a more direct way, that unity of time and place have been observed. For example, the scene-desig­ nation for Flecknoe's Love's Kingdom (1664), which reads, "The Scene,

Cyprus, with all the Rules of Time and Place so exactly observed, as whilst for Time 'tis all compriz'd in as few hours as there are Acts; for Place, it never goes out of the view or prospect of Love's

Temple," is clearly intended as information about the play's exact conformance to the unities of time and place as they were strictly interpreted by the author. The scene-designation to Flecknoe's

Damoiselle a la Mode (1667) which reads, "The Scaene Paris. The

Unity of Persons, Time, and Place, exactly observed," is less detailed than its predecessor; the author does not state how the unities have been observed, only that they are "exactly" observed.

Moreover, the scene-designation to the anonymous Emi1ia (1672) which has, "The Scene Micena. The unity of Place (besides that 78 of Time and Persons) so exactly observed, as there is never any breach or breaking of the scenes, until the end of the Act," takes a slightly different tack, emphasizing the "exact" observance of the unities by the fact that the action stays in the same place throughout each act.

The authors of these examples, therefore, use the scene-designation to convey, not just geographical information, but critical information to the reader.

The scene-designations that provide the duration of the play's action also supply critical information to the reader, although they do so less explicitly than the examples just cited. The scene-designa­ tion for Tomkis' Lingua (1607), which reads, "The Scene is Microcosmus in a^ Grove. The Time from Morning to Night," 1imits the time of the play to the 12 hours allowed by one interpretation of Aristotle's phrase "within the circuit of the Sun." On the other hand, the scene- designation for Randolph's Amyntas (1638), which has, "The Scene,

Sicilie in the Holy Vale, the Time an Astrological day from Noon to

Noon," and that for Shadwell's Humorists (1671), which reads, "Scene

London, in the year 1670. Duration of the Scene 24 hours," both con­ vey that the play in question has observed the 24-hour interpretation of Aristotle's phrase. And the scene-designation for Dryden's

Evenings Love (1671), which reads, "The Scene Madrid, in the year

1665. The time the last evening of Carnival," limits the time to less than the day allowed by the "rules." In each example, the play's conformance to the unity of time is implied by the phrase that conveys 79 information about the duration of the action, but unity of time itself is never mentioned. Furthermore, since unity of time cannot be observed unless unity of place is observed also, and since the phrase that provides the time of the play immediately follows the scene- designation, it seems likely that in each case the author of the scene-designation provided it as evidence that the play conformed to the unity of place as well as the unity of time.

All of the scene-designations discussed above—those providing evidence that the locales involved are physically close to one another, those directly stating that the unities have been observed, and those mentioning the time of the action—all deviate from the pre­ ferred English formula by adding modifying and/or explanatory phrasing to the brief elliptical statement used in the majority of

English scene-designations. Most English scene-designations avoid explanatory phrases and simply name the locale in a single word or short phrase. While most locales named are cities or islands, in some cases countries are provided as the locale. For example the scene-designation to Ford's Perkin Warbeck (1634), which takes place in both England and Scotland, is given as "The Scene, The

Continent of Great Britayne." In this example, the use of the word

"continent" emphasizes that the entire insular land mass of Great

Britain is the scene; thus the scene-designation can encompass both

England and Scotland without having to name more than one locale.

Other scene-designations name countries such as Persia, Egypt,

Scythia, Bithynia, Bohemia, and England as locales for plays. In all, 16 of the 140 English dramatic texts printed with scene-designations in-the period 1616-59, and 6 of the 120 English dramatic texts printed with scene-designations in the period 1660-85 specify a country as the "scene."

Most of the plays with scene-designations that provide a country as the locale do not observe unity of scene. For example, the action of Suckling's Aglaura (1638) ranges from such rural locales as hunting camps and caves to the Persian court; the scene- designation for this play is "The Scene, Persia." The action of

Carlell's Arviragus and Philicia (1639), which has the scene-designa- tion "Scene Britaine," takes place in various parts of northern

England, as does the action for Brome's Queen's Exchange (1657), which has the formula "Scene, England." In all of these examples, as in the example of Perkin Warbeck, the scene-designation specifies only one locale and that locale is as large as is necessary to include the action. This general avoidance of stating more than one scene, in those cases where unity of scene is not observed, suggests that the author of the scene-designation may have been trying to give the impression that unity of place had been observed in the play when in fact it had not.

There is another group of scene-designations that imply a given play's conformance to unity of place when, in fact, the play in question does not observe that unity. These scene-designations are those that do not completely and accurately name the locales in which the action of the play occurs. For example, the scene-designation 81

for John Crowne's translation of Seneca's Thyestes (1681) states

"Scene Atreus his Court." This scene-designation is located in the

usual place below the dramatis personae. But according to stage directions located above individual scenes, the action ranges from the palace to a cave in a grove to a cave in a desert and back to the court. Only the first and last acts of Crowne's translation take

place in the Court, the locale stated in the scene-designation. Clear­ ly the scene-designation is not an accurate statement of the locale.

In two other examples, scene-designations added to Restoration print­ ings of Shakespeare's Othello and Julius Caesar provide misleading

information about the settings of those plays. The scene-designa- tion to the 1684 Quarto of Julius Caesar reads "Scene Rome," while the 29 scene-designation to the 1681 Quarto of Othello reads "Scene Cyprus."

In both cases, the stated scene-designations only cover part of the action.

All of these examples are from texts printed during the

Restoration. It may be that by the 1680's the practice of designat­ ing scene was so much in vogue that the author (or editor or publish­ er) tried to devise a scene-designation for his text despite the obvious problem of economically stating the scene according to the

preferred formula. Significantly, however, in each case the scene- designation implies that unity of place has been observed; instead of naming two or more "scenes," and thus being accurate and

29 Neither Othello nor Julius Caesar is provided with a scene- designation in the First Folio, although Othello does have a dramatis personae. 82 completely informative, the scene-designation has been limited to one locale and thus is incomplete and misleading. The scene-designations in these examples apparently were provided, then, to imply that unity of place had been observed when it in fact had not been.

While the scene-designations themselves are the best source of evidence for the study of possible rationales for their presence, it is also helpful to compare the kinds of plays that are provided with scene-designations with the kinds of plays that are not, it being remembered of course that peculiar or special textual consid­ erations may be responsible for the absence of a scene-designation from a given text. We have already seen, in our discussion of the first edition of Ben Jonson's Works (1616), how every play but one—

Every Man Out of His Humour--is provided with a scene-designation.

In this case, a likely explanation for the absence of a scene-desig­ nation is the lack of unity in the locale of the play, which shifts back and forth between the country and the city. The plays of other

English dramatists whose works are not uniformly provided with scene- designations may also have been affected by this consideration. For example, of Massinger's 9 plays without a scene-designation, 7 have locales that do not conform to the concept of unity of place. And, of ShadwelVs 9 plays that I examined, 5 are provided with scene- designations. Of the 4 plays without scene-designations, 2—

Timon of Athens (1678), and The Libertine (1676)~do not observe unity of scene. Of the others, there is no readily ascertainable 83

literary or textual explanation for the lack of a scene-designation.

Moreover, only one of Aphra Behn's plays that I examined, The False

Count (1682), has no scene-designation. That play takes place part­

ly on shipboard and partly on land, thus failing to observe unity of

place.

Thus for many authors, publishers, or editors, whether a play

observed unity of place seems to have been one factor in deciding

whether to provide a scene-designation. Moreover, there are some

cases in which a scene-designation was provided apparently to give

the impression that unity of place had been observed when it actually

had not. There are other cases in which unity of place has been

observed but no scene-designation has been provided, or where the

scene-designation lists more than one locale as the setting of the

play. Therefore the connection between a concern for unity of place

and the presence of a scene-designation cannot be made in all cases.

But I believe the evidence strongly suggests that for most French and

many English dramatists the provision of a scene-designation was one

way of assuring the reader that the author of the play was aware of

the critical "rules" and the proper dramatic forms.

In general, then, coming as it did from Greek drama, the

scene-designation was originally one sign, along with other appurte­ nances such as arguments and prologues, of the dramatist's observance

of classical tradition. As the formula became modified through use,

it seems to have acquired more specific connotations—connotations 84 that still informed the reader of the dramatist's classical bent but which were also geared toward conveying the author's awareness of contemporary critical discussions concerning proper dramatic subjects and forms. When Ben Jonson provided scene-designations for 8 of the 9 plays in his Works (1616), he was assuring the reader that he had written a certain kind of play, one drawn at least in part from classi­ cal and Italian models and thus meeting certain standards of form.

He seems to have done this no less certainly, though somewhat less explicitly, than Flecknoe, who fifty years later provided a scene- designation to his Damoiselle a la Mode (1667) that reads, "The

Scaene Paris. The Unity of Persons, Time, and Place, exactly ob­ served." That there were dramatists in the years after 1616 who were merely imitating a fashionable practice seems likely. What is interesting is that the practice of providing designations of general scene became fashionable at the time that it did in English drama, and that it was thereafter deemed worthy of imitation by men who may not have really understood the origins of the practice or its connotations.

From such a small relic of Renaissance dramatic practice, then, came the phrase that is almost universally found in modern dramatic texts and in theater programs, being considered a necessary aid to any reader or auditor of the play in question. Just so the information Aristophanes the Grammarian provided in his Arguments had been seen "as a necessary help to the scholarly reader." But while we take the modern scene-designation at face value, needing the 85

information it imparts, the history and the form of the scene-desig- nation should convince us that its purpose in most Renaissance texts was not only to name the locale for the reader but also to inform him that the play conformed to a particular neoclassical critical standard. In English as well as in French texts, that standard was the concept of unity of place. APPENDIX A

STATEMENTS OF LOCALE AND SCENE-DESIGNATIONS

IN CLASSICAL GREEK DRAMATIC TEXTS, 1498-1580

Listed in this Appendix are the 19 statements of locale found

in the editiones principes of 40 classical Greek plays. Also provided are examples of these statements as they appear in Greek texts printed

later in the sixteenth century, and Latin versions of these statements

found in Latin translations of the Greek plays.

The following is a list of abbreviations used in Appendix A, and in all following Appendices.

adapt.: adaptation past.: pastoral

anon.: anonymous perf.: performance

arg.: argument prol.: prologue

com.: comedy pol.: political

crit. ed.: critical edition sc.: scene

desc.: description sc.-d.: scene-designation

d.p.: dramatis personae t.c.: tragicomedy

ed.: edition, edited t.p.: title-page

hist.: history trag.: tragedy

H.T.: head-title trans.: translation

86 Statement of Locale or Date Title Printing of Author Scene Designation Comments

1498 Pacem Aristophanes H fie OKniin tou fipiiiiaxos pepouS Within arg. In Comoedla. ed. liev tvi xiis yns > iic vepoos fie by M. Masurus tou oupavoG.

1502 A.1ax Flagelllfer Sophocles H OKnvn TOU fipd|iCXTOS EV T(i) Within arg. In Tragoedlae vauoTaOpin itpos xn oKnvn tou Septem A xavTos.

1502 Electra Sophocles M OKnvn tou fipapaxos unAKeixat ev Within arg. In Tragoediae ^pyet • Septem

1502 Antigone Sophocles ti jiev OKnvn xou fipatiaxos iin^Keixat Within arg. In Tragoedlae ev 6n6ais xats Boib)xtKai9 . Septem

1502 Oedipus Col onus Sophocles ^ OKnvn xou fipaiiaxos uhokeixcm fev Within arg. In Tragoedlae xn 'ATTiKn £v T(S iimito KoXtovu irpo Septem TU vaii TOW cepvtiv.

1502 Phlloctetes Sophocles 'H fie OKnvn ev Aniivto. Within arg. In Tragoedlae Septem

1503 Hecuba Euripides H yev OKnvn tou fipapaxoa Within arg. In Tragoediae uij<5keit

1503 . Phoenlssae Euripides H yev OKnvn TOU fipapaxos undKEixai Within arg. In Tragoedlae fev 0nBa\s. Septenaeclm Graece

1503 Medea Euripides "H pev OKnvn TOU fipapaxos uitoKEixat Within arg. In Tragoedlae t\> Kop{v0u. Septenaeclm Graece

1503 Hlppolvtus Euripides ii OKnvf) tou fipapaTo; uiroKEixai ev Within arg. (n Tragoedlae AOnvais . Septendecim Graece

1503 Andromache Euripides . . . n pev OKnvn TOU fipapaxos Within arg. [n Tragoedlae iipoKEiTat fev *0ia. ieptenaecim Graece

oo Statement of Locale or I'r|nt1ng of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1503 Suppllces Euripides . . . n V'ev oKryofi e\> 'EAeucrivi. On separate page In Traaoedlae Septenoeclm Graece

1503 Iphlgenla 1n Taurls Euripides 'H pev OKnv'n TOU fipauaios Following arg. In Traqoedlae UTOKeixai l\) Taupoia Tfjs Septendeclm Etcu0{as. Graece

1503 Rhesus Euripides FA OKNVN TOU Spaparos EV Tpota. Within arg. In Traqoedlae Septenoeclm Graece

1503 Ion Euripides H cncrivn TOU 6papaT03 UTTOKEITCU Mlthln arg. In Traqoedlae EV AcXou • Septendeclm Graece .1507 Hecuba Euripides, Actio Fabulae constltultur In Separated from trans, by Cherrhoneso, e reglone Thracae. arg. by word Erasmus Finis.

1518 Prometheus Vlnctus Aeschylus 'H pev oienvn Toufipiporos u'noKeitai Within arg. In Tragoedlae Sex, EV EicuQta eni TO KOUKCIOIOV opos. ed. Dy A. Asuianus

1518 Septem Contra Thebes Aeschylus H yev cncnvn TOO fip&pcrros t\> Within arg. In Traqoedlae Sex, 0r|Bais UTOKeixai. ed. by A. Asuianus

1518 Persians Aeschylus KOI EOT IV n PEV OKnvfl TOU Within arg. In Traqoedlae Sex. fipapciTOS uapa Tus Ta^u Aapeiou. ed. by A. Asuianus

1524 . Hecuba Euripides, trans Actio Fabulae constltultur In Above d.p. by Erasmus Cherroneso. quae Phryqla, In qua est Ilium, habet ad orTihtem, Thraclam rellguam ad Septentrlo- nem.

1538 Pax Aristophanes, Haec autem scena hulus comoedle Within arg. In Comedlae trans, by ex parte quldem In terra, ex A. D1vo parte autem In Coelo.

1546 Antigone Sophocles, Res quasi Thebls In Boeotla Within arg. In Traqoedlae trans, by gerltur. J. Camerarlus Statement of Locale or Prjntjng of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

Oedipus Col onus Sophocles, Ita est actio harutn rerum tangue Within arg. In Tragoedlae trans, by In Attica. J. Camerarlus

Prometheus Vlnctus Aeschylus IL JJEV OKtivh TOU fipapaTos Within arg. In Tragoedlae uiTOKenai ev EicuBia £tri to VII Graece, ed. KaUKaoiov <5pos. by P. Vlctorlus

Septem Contra Thebes Acschylus VL^PEV OKNVH TOU 6pa|iaros £\> Within arg. In Tragoedlae VII OnBatS un^Keiiai. Graece. ed. by P. Vlctorlus

Persians Aeschylus Kai eativ n PEV AKNVN TOU Within arg. In Tragoedlae VII SpayoTos Tiapa TU T&IFAJ Aape{ou. Graece, ed. by f>. Vlctorlus

Ajax Flagel lifer Sophocles, Fabula acta est scena constltuta Within arg. trans, by In nauallbus prope alacls J. Lalamantlus tentorla.

Electra Sophocles, Fabula Argls slnqltur esse Within arg. trans, by J. hablta. Lalamantlus

Antigone Sophocles, Fabula acta est Scena Within arg. trans, by constltuta TfieE"1s Boeotle. J. Lalamantlus

Oedipus In Colono Sophocles, Tragoedla slngltur hablta In Within arg. trans, by Attica In Hippelo Colono haud J. Lalamantlus procul a Dearu graulum et ueneraniaruin Fano.

Phlloctetes Sophocles, Lemnl hablta slngltur fabula. Within arg. trans, by J. Lalamantlus

Alax Flagel!Ifer Sophocles, Scena uero fabulae constitultur Within arg. trans, by 1r> Statlone naulum, 1uxta Naogeorgus STacIs tenForlm.

Electra Sophocles, Agltur autem fabula Argls. Below arg., trans, by Above d.p. Statement of Locale or Prating of Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1558 Antlqone Sophocles, Scena huls fabulae constltultur Below arg. trans, by Thebls Boeotlcls. Naogeorgus

1558 Oedipus Coloneus Sophocles, At fabula hie terra quasi aqltur HI thin arg. trans, by 1n Attica, circa dlcatum Naogeorgus delubrlum.

1558 Phlloctetes Sophocles, Scena est In Lemno. Within arg. trans, by Naogeorgus

1570 Alax Flaqellifer Sophocles, Fabulae actio constltultur Within arg. trans, by propre tentorla Alacls In G. Ratallero nauallbus.

1570 Antlqone Sophocles, Fabulae actio Thebls Boeotla Within arg. trans, by Constltultur. G. Ratallero

1570 Electra Sophocles, Actio Fabulae Arqls Slnqltur. Above d.p. trans, by G. Ratallero

1570 Oedipus Col onus Sophocles, Actio In Attica constltultur In Within arg. trans, by Eguestrl Colono propre delubrum G. Ratallero Eumenldum.

1570 Phlloctetes Sophocles, Res gerl In Lemno slnqltur. Below d.p. trans, by G. Ratallero

1580 Prometheus Vlnctus Aeschylus k pev OKnvn TOU 6pa(jaTos Within arg. In Traqoedlae VII, (jiroKEiTcti ev EKUflia iui TO ed-by G. Canterius KaUKaoiov opos.

1580 Septem Contra Thebes Aeschylus OKnvri TOO fipaparos ev Within arg. In Traqoedlae VII, 0f|PALO UTTOKEITCU. ed. by G. Canterlus

1580 Persians Aeschylus teai EOT iv f| pev aicnvn TOO Within arg. In Traqoedlae VII, 6papaTOS napa TU TAIFU Aapei'ou. ed. by G. Canterlus APPENDIX B

SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED ITALIAN DRAMATIC TEXTS,

1530-1678

This Appendix contains 65 scene-designations taken from the

226 Italian texts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries that

I examined.

A list of the abbreviations used in this Appendix appears on page 86.

91 I'r^ntjng of Title Author Scene-designation La Sophonlsba (trag.) G. Trlsslno La scena de la fauola si pone Above d.p. in C1rta C1tta cfrNumldla. 11 Choro e dl donne Clrtensl.

Orbecche (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La scena e In Susa Cltta real Above d.p. Clnthlo dl Persia.

1549 Glocasta (traq.) L. Dolce La fauola e reppresenta In Thebe. Below d.p.

1550 G1'Incanteslml (com.) G. Cecchl La Comedla e In Flrenze. Below d.p.

1550 La Stavla (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena del la Comedla e 1n Below d.p. • Genoua.

1550 I DlsslmlH (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena e In Flrenze. Below d.p.

1552 Cleopatra (traq.) G. Cesarl La Scena si flnqe In Alessandria. Below d.p.

1552 Scllla (traq.) G. Cesarl La Scena s1 flnqe 1n Alcathoe Below d.p. cTtta dl Sparta.

1556 Pollflla (com.) Anon. La Scena e Flrenze. Below d.p.

1556 Altea (trag.) B. Gratarolo La Scena e la corte dl Eneo, Re Above d.p. cJT Calldonla.

1557 La Fiorina (com.) A Calmo Rappresentata 1n Villa. Below d.p.

1565 Marlanna (traq.) L. Dolce La scena si pone 1n Alessandrlo, Below d.p. Castello dl Gludea. 11 coro £ delle Damlqelle dl Marlanna.

1578 Fedra (traq.) F. Bozza La Scena del la fauola si pone In Below d.p. Athene, cltta reale.

1579 Irene (traq.) V. Glustl La Scena s1 flnqe In Salamlna Below d.p. Citta d1 Clpri.

1579 La Emilia (com.) L.. Groto La Scena e 1n Costantlnopoll. Below d.p.

1582 Roslmoda fieglna (traq.) A. Cavallerlno La Scena e In Verona. Below d.p.

1502 Telefonte (traq.) A. Cavallerlno La Scena e In Messene. Below d.p. Date Title Author Scene-designation ^c-d"'' Conronts

1582 La Strega (com.) A Grazzlnl La Scena e Flrenze .... On separate page Ua fauola comlncla dl buon'hora with description e flnlsce alia tine del glorno. of houses.

1582 La Slbllla (com.) A. Grazzlnl La Scena e Flrenze .... On separate Ca Fauola comlncla a dl alto, page, with e fornlsce alia fine del glorno. description of houses.

1582 La Plnzochera (com.) A. Grazzlnl La Scena e Flrenze .... On separate La Fauola comlncla la mattlna page, with aTl'Alba, e fornlsce la sera. description of the houses.

1582 1 Parentadl (com.) A. Grazzlnl La Scena e Flrenze .... On separate La fauola comlncla la mattlna page, with per tempo, e fornlsce la sera description of aT~tardl. the houses.

1583 Altlle (traq.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Damasco Cltta Above d.p. Clnthlo real dl Slrla.

1583 Dldone (traq.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Cartaqlne Cltta Above d.p. Clnthlo

1583 GlI'Antlvalomenl (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Londra cltta Above d.p. Clnthlo Reale d'Inqhllterra.

1583 Cleopatra (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Alessandria, Above d.p. Clnthlo cltta d'Eqltto.

1583 Arrenopla (traq.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Llmlrlco, Above d.p. Clnthlo cltta noblle d'HIbernla.

1583 Euphlmla (traq.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Corlntho. Above d.p. Clnthlo

1583 Epltla (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Ispruche cltta Above d.p. Clnthlo della Hagno.

1583 Selene (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Alessandria, Above d.p. Clnthlo Cltta Reale d'Eqltto. Triiiling of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

Rodopela (trag.) G. B. Glraldl La Scena e In Constantlnopoll Below d.p. Clnthlo cTtta ReaTe~Hetta antlcamente BIzantTo!

II Donzello (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena dell a Comedla e In Below d.p. FTrenze.

II Corredo (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena dell a Comedla e Below d.p. FTrenze.

Lo Splrlto (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena del la Comedla e Below d.p. FTorenze.

G11 'Incanteslmi (com.) G. Cecchl La Scena del la Comedla e Below d.p. In verse Tlrenze.

La Leonlda (com.) M. Chlrardl La Scena 1n Pisa cltta dl Below d.p. Toscana.

Gil Oltraggl D'Amore e (H A. Donzelllnl La Scena e Roma, e la prlnclpale Printed below a Fortuna (com.") arospettlva e 11 FaTTazzo 3eT description of )uca OttavTo Farnese. properties carried by speakers of prologue.

IJ. Thesoro (com.) L. Groto La Scena e _1n Hadrla. Below d.p.

La Hadrlana (trag.) L. Groto La Scena e j[n Hadrla. La Below d.p. ?^nt1ca.

La Alterla (com.) L. Groto La Scena e In^ Hadrla. Below d.p.

La Reclnda (trag.) C. Forzate La Scena e. In Alger. Below d.p.

L'Almerlgo (trag.) G. Zlnano La Scena e Constantlnopoll. Above d.p. nel PalagTo Regale.

La Spina (com.) L. Salvlatl La Scena e Genoua. Below d.p.

U3 Date Title Author Scene-designation f'*Sc-i'.,y Comments

1593 Le Trolane (traq.) L. Dolce 11 coro e dl Donne Trolane. Below d.p. La Scena e posta 1n Trola qla dlstrutta.

1594 Antlloco (trag.) G. B. Leon! Per scena si rappresenta 11 Below d.p. Cortiie del Palaqqlo d'Antlloco.

1595 Roselmlna (t.c.) G. B. Leon! La Scena si flnqe In Ibernla. Below d.p.

1596 La Fantesca (com.) G. B. Delia La Scena, dove si rappresenta Above d.p. . Porta la fauola,e Napoll. 1596 Prlqlone O'Amore (com.) S. Oddl 11 caso dl questa fauola si Above d.p. slnqe essere auuenuta In Ferrara fra Cavallerl e Dame dl quella corte, sotto 1 noml del l'lnfra- sorlttl.

1597 L'Appollo Favorevolo (t.c.) G. Turamlnl Roma e la Scena. Below d.p.

1597 11 Pastor Fldo (t.c.) G. B. Guarlnl La Scena e In Arcadia. Below d.p.

1607 F1111 dl Sclro (past.) G. Bonarelll La Scena e nell 'Isola dl Sclro. Below d.p. del la Rovere

1607 Glustlna, Relna dl Padoua C. Cortes 1 L'Attlone 1n Padova. Below d.p. (trag.)

1611 Gil Scambl (com.) B. Bulgarlnl La Scena si flnqe In Pisa, and Below d.p. 1u1 rappresentaita la Coimiedla.

1613 La Idroplca (com.) G. B. Guarlnl La Scena si flnqe In Padova. Below d.p.

1620 11 Tancredl (traq.) R. Campegg! La Scena e 1n Salerno dlnanzl 11 Below d.p. Palaqlo Reale.

1626 L'Europa (traq.) B. Honte La Scena e finta In Sldone Citta Below d.p. Slmoncelll Reqla del la Fenlcla. Pi ItiLiuu of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1641 L'Imeneo (t.c.) P. Bonarelll La Scena s1 flnqe Inanzl 11 Below d.p. della Rovere Templo Cerere, Elauslna In una Campaqna non molto lontana alTa (H tta?rAtene.

1642 La Fldalma (past.) P. Bonarelll La Scena s1 flnqe 1n Andro Below d.p. del la Rovere Isola del Mar 'Eqeo.

166? L'Honerata Poverta di G. Clcognlnl La Scena si flnqe nella Reqla di Below d.p. Rlnaldo (op. sc.) Parlql /Mutatlonl/ Campagna con mont 'Albano In lontanaza, e sale Regla.

1661 La Forza dell' Amlcltla G. Clcognlnl La fauola si flnge 1n Patera Below d.p. Desc. of sc. changes (op. sc.) citta famosa della Llcla, reglone listed below sc. d. dell' Asia Minore tr& la Pansllia & La Carla.

1663 11 Mustafa (op. sc.) G. Clcognlnl La Scena e PuslHpo. Below d.p.

1664 11 Principe Glardlnlero G. Clcognlnl La fauola si flnqe 1n Saraqozza Below d.p. Desc. of sc. changes (op. sc.) citta del Regno al Valenza. listed below sc. d.

1664 La Verlta Rlconoscluta G. Clcognlnl La Scena si flnqe In Mllana. Below d.p. (op. sc.)

1664 L'Innocente Glustlfacato G. Clcognlnl La Scena si flnqe In Sinlqlla. Below d.p. overo 11 Sognatur Fortunato (op. sc.)

1673 11 Cromvele (traq.) G. Gratlanl La Scena e In Londra. Below d.p.

1678 Le Glorle e qll Amorl di G. Clcognlnl La fauola s1 flnqe nella On separate page Alessandro Hatjno e famoslsslma citta di Slslmltre In with desc. of di Rossane (op. sc.) Barberla Reqione dell' Africa scenes. nell' Oriente 4 8 cauata dall' hlstorle d'Alessandro Maqno. APPENDIX C

SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED FRENCH DRAMATIC TEXTS,

1566-1682

This Appendix contains 53 French scene-designations that I found by examining 111 French dramatic texts from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

A list of abbreviations used in this Appendix appears on page

86.

97 Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1556 Aman (trag.) A. de Rlvaudeau L'action de la traoedle est Below d.p. establle £ Suse vllle^apTtale de 1'Emplre des PerseslLa Troupe do"TFt estre des~Damoise11es & fllles servantes de la Royne Fsther.

1635 La Sophonlsbe (traq.) J. Hal ret La scene est dans Cyrte, Vllle Below d.p. de Num1d1e.

1637 Le Sollman (t.c.) P. Bonarelll La scene est en Alep^ vllle de Below d.p. del la Rovere, SyrTtTI adapt, by C. Dal 1b ray

1637 Le Marc-Antolne ou J. Malret La scene est en Alexandrle. Below d.p. Cleopatre (traq.)

1637 La Marlane (traq.) Tristan La Scene est en Jerusalem. Below d.p. L'Hermlte

1637 Le C1d (t.c.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Seville. Below d.p.

1637 La Place Royalle (com.) P. Cornellie La Scene est S la^ Place Royalle. Below d.p. crlt. ed. by J. C. Brunon. 1660 ed.: "La Scene est a Paris dans la Place Royalle!1

1638 L'Amant Liberal (t.c.) G. de Scudery La Scene est en L'Isle de Below d.p. CFlpre.

1638 L'Aveugle de Smyrne (t.c.) "Pars les Cinq La Scene est en 1'Isle de Below d.p. Autheurs." Smyrne.

io oo Printing ot Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d.

Sclplon (trag.) J. Desmarets La Scene est dans Cartaqene en Below d.p. Espagne autrefois appellee" Cartage la neufue.

1640 Alclonee (trag.) P. Du Ryer La Scene est dans Sardis, Vllle Below d.p. de Lydie.

1640 Edovard (t.c.) G. de la La Scene est a Londres. Below d.p. Calprenede

1641 L'lllustre Corsalre (t.c.) J. Mai ret La Scene est Marseille. Below d.p.

1641 Eudoxe (t.c.) G. de Scudery La Scene est devant le Palais Below d.p. Royal h Carthage.

1642 Saul (trag.) P. Ou Ryer La Scene est aux envlrons de Below d.p. Ront de Gelboe, en ludee."

1642 L'Athenals (t.c.) J. Hal ret La Scene est a_ Athenes, vllle de Below d.p. Grece.

1643 Sldonle (t.c. herolgue) J. Mai ret La Scene est a^ Ctesephonte. Below d.p. Eapltale (TRrmenle.

1649 Cosroes (trag.) P. Rotrou La Scene est dans le Palais de Below d.p. PersepoHs.

1653 L 'Amour a^ Mode (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a Paris. Below d.p.

1654 Le Parasite (com.) Tristan L*(termite La Scene est a_ Paris, devant la Below d.p. Forte du logls de Manille 1658 Timocrate (trag.) T. Cornellle La Scene est dans Argos. Below d.p. Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1660 Stlllcon (trag.) T. Cornellle La Scene est J Rome.

1660 Tite (t.c.) J. Magnon La Scene est a Rome, dans le Palais Imperial.

1660 La Galerle du Palais (com.) P. Cornellle La Scene est I Paris. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornellle, VoTTT

1660 La Sulvante (com.) P. Cornellle La Scene est ai Paris. In Le Theatre de Pierre CorrieTlle, VolTT

1660 Medee (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est 4 Corlnthe. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornellle, VoTTT

1660 Horace (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Rome, dans une In Le^ Theatre de Salle de la Halson d'Horace. Pierre CornellT¥, Vol. II

1660 Cinna (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est i Rome. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornellle, Vol. II

1660 Polyeucte (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est la Melltene Capltale In Le Theatre de tFArmenfe, dans le Palais de Felix Pierre Cornellle, VoTTTl

1660 Pompee (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est en Alexandrle, dans In Le Theatre de Ce Pala1s~RoyaT de Ptolomee. Pierre Cornel lTe. Vol. II

1660 Tlieodore (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Antloche dans Le In Le Theatre de Palais du Gouverneur. Pierre CornellT¥, VoT Tl"

1660 Le Menteur (com.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a^ Paris. In Le Theatre de Pierre CornellT¥, Vol. II"

1660 La Suite du Menteur (com.) P. Cornellle La Scene est j[ Lyons. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornellle. o Vol. II o Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1660 Rodogune (trag.) P. Cornel lie La Scene est a Seleucie dans le Below d.p. In Le^ Theatre de Palais Royal. Pierre CornellTe, Vol. Ill

1660 Heracllus (trag.) P. Cornellie La Scene est a Constantinople. Below d.p. In Le^ Theatre de Pierre CornellTe. VoTTTl] 1660 flndromede (trag.) P. Cornellie La Scene est tm Eth1op1ef dans la Below d.p. In Le. Theatre de vTlle capltale du Royaunie de Pierre CornellTe, Cephee. proche 3e la Her. Vol. Ill

1660 D. Sanche D'Arragon P. Cornellle La Scene est a Valladolld. Below d.p. In Le Theatre de (com. herolque) Pierre CornellTe\ Vol. Ill

1660 Nlcomedle (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Nlcomedle. Below d.p. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornellle, VHTTll

1660 Pertharlte (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Milan. Below d.p. In Le^ Theatre de Pierre CornellTe, VoTTTll

1660 Oedlpe (trag.) P. Cornellle La Scene est a Thebes. Below d.p. In Le Theatre de Pierre Cornel lTe\ Vol. IIT

1661 LesEngagemens du Hazard (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a Madrid. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatlques de Thomas Cornellle, \m~i

1661 Le Feint Astrologle (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a Madrid. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatiflues. |Vol71

1661 Le^ Berger Extravagant (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est en Brie. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatlques, i/ol71

1661 Le Charme de la Vo1x (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a Milan. Below d.p. In Poemes Drainatlluus, YolTT Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1661 Les lllustres Ennemls (com.) T. Cornellle La Scene est £ MadHd. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatlnues. VolTTl 1661 Berenice (trag.) T. Cornellle La Scene est dans Apamee. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatloues. Capltale de Phrygle. Vol. II ~ 1661 Commode (trag.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a Rome. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatiq ues. VolTTl 1661 Darius (trag.) T. Cornellle La Scene est a^ Persepolls. Below d.p. In Poemes Dramatij ues, VolTTl

1662 Hani1us (t.c.) H. Vllledleu La Scene est au Camp des Romalns Below d.p. 3evant les tents du Consul.

1666 La Here Coquette (com.) D. de Vise La Scene est dans une salle, Below d.p. chez Luclnde.

1668 La Veuve ^ l_a Mode (com.) D. de Vise La Scene est dans une salle basse Below d.p. au logls de Cleon."

1675 Thesee (trag. 1n music) P. Qulnnault La Scene est a Athens. Below d.p.

1682 La Malade Imaglnalre (com.) Mollere La Scene est a Paris. Below d.p.

o INS APPENDIX D

SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS,

1573-1659

This Appendix lists every scene-designation that appears in an

English dramatic text printed in the period 1500-1659. There are 151

English scene-designations found in the 667 plays of this period.

A list of abbreviations used in this Appendix appears on page

86.

103 Printing ot Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1573 Supposes (com.) G. Gascolgne The Comedle Presented 1n Ferrara With d.p. 1575 text: "The Comedy Presented as it were 1n Ferrara."

1573 Jocasta (traq.) G. Gascolgne & The Tragedle Represented In With d.p. F. Klnwelmershe Thebes.

1575 The Glass of Government G. Gascolgne The Comedle to be Presented With d.p. (com.) as It were In Antwerpe.

1594 Cleopatra (traq.) S. Daniel The Scene Supposed Alexandria. With d.p.

1598 The Virtuous Octavla (traq.) S. Brandon The Stage Supposed Rome. With d.p.

1602 11 Pastor Fldo (t.c.) B. Guarlnl, The Scene 1s In Arcadia. With d.p. anon, trans.

1603 Darius (traq.) W. Alexander The Scene Supposed 1n Babllon. With d.p.

1604 Croesus (traq.) W. Alexander The Scene In Sardls. With d.p.

1607 Lingua T. Tomkls The Scene Is Hicrocosmus In a With d.p. Grove. The Time from Mornlnq * to N1qht.

1607 Cupid's Uhlrllqlq Anon. The Scene 1n London. Below H.T., at head of text proper

1607 Westward Ho Anon. Scene London. Below H.T., above act-scene heading Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1616 Everyman In His Humour B. Jonson The Scene. London. Below d.p. In Works. 1601 Q (com.) pr1nte3~w1thout sc. d. 1616 Cynthia's Revels (com.) G. Jonson The Scene. Garqaphle. Below d.p. In Works. 1601 Q printed "without sc. d. 1616 Poetaster (com.) B. Jonson The Scene. Rome. Below d.p. In Works. 1602 Q printed "without sc. d. 1616 Sejanus Ills Fall (traq.) B. Jonson The Scene. Rome. Below d.p. In Works. 1605 Q printed "without sc. d. 1616 Vol pone (com.) B. Jonson The Scene. Venice. Below d.p. In Works. 1607 Q printed without sc. d. 1616 Eplcoene (com.) 3. Jonson The Scene London. Below d.p. In Works. 1616 The Alchemist (com.) 3. Jonson The Scene London. Below d.p. In Works. 1612Q printed without sc. d. 1616 Catiline (traq.) 3. Jonson The Scene Rome. Below d.p. In Works. 1611Q printed without sc. d.

1618 Texnoqamla (com.) 5. Holyday The Scene. Insula Fortunata. 3e1ow d.p.

1623 The Devil's Law Case (t.c.) 1. Webster The Scene, Naples. tbove d.p. 1623 The Tempest (com.) 1. Shakespeare The Scene: An Uninhabited Island. 'toove d.p. In Folio of 1623 1623 Measure for Measure (com.) W. Shakespeare The Scene Vienna. Ujove d.p. In Folio of 1623

1629 The Lover's Melancholy (t.c.) J. Ford The Scene Famaqosta In Cyprus. \bove d.p.

1629 Albovlne (traq.) W. Davenant The Scene Verona. 7

1630 The Cruel Brother (traq.) W. Davenant The Scene, Italy. \bove d.p. Priuliny of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1630 The Just Italian (com.) W. Davenant The Scene Florence. Below d.p.

1630 The Grateful Servant (t.c.) J. Shirley The Scene Savoy. Below d.p.

1630 The Reneqado (t.c.) P. Masslnger The Scene Tunis. Below H.T., above Act/Scene Heading

1631 The New Inn (com.) 8. Jonson The Scene Barnet. Above d.p.

1631 Rhodon and Iris (past.) R. Knevet The Scene Is Thessaly. Below d.p.

1631 The Staple of News (com.) B. Jonson The Scene. London. Below d.p. In Horks, vol. II

1631 The Devil 1s an Ass (com.) B. Jonson The Scene, London. Below d.p. In Works, vol. II

1632 The Emperor of the East (t.c. )P. Masslnger The Scene Constantinople. Below H.T., Above Act/Scene heading.

1632 The Jealous Lovers (com.) T. Randolph The Scene Thebes. Below d.p.

1633 Love's Sacrifice (traq.) J. Ford The Scene Pauye. Above d.p.

1633 The Broken Heart (traq). J. Ford The Scaene, Sparta. Above d.p.

1633 'Tls Pity She's a Whore J. Ford The Scaene Parma. Above d.p. (trag.)

1634 Perkln Warbeck (hist.) J. Ford The Scene, The Continent of Above d.p. Great Brltayne.

1635 The Traitor (traq.) J. Shirley The Scene, Florence. Above d.p.

1635 The Shepherd's Holiday J. Rutter The Scene Arcady. Below d.p. (t.c.)

1635 Adrasta (t.c.) J. Jones The Scene Florence. Below d.p.

1636 The Platonic Lovers (t.c.) W. Davenant The Scene Slcllle. Below d.p.

1636 The Wits (com.) W. Davenant The Scene London. Below d.p. Pi itiLmy of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1G37 The lady of Pleasure (com.) J. Shirley Scene the Strand. Below d.p.

1637 IIM Cld. (t.c.) P Cornellle, The Scene Seville. Below d.p. trans, by J. Rutter

1638 The Fancies (com.) J. Ford The Scene Siena. Above Prol. Rare example of text without d.p but with sc.d.

1638 Love's Riddle (past.) A. Crowley The Scaene Sicily. Above d.p.

1638 Tottenham Court (com.) T. Nabbes The Scoene, Tottenham Court and Below d.p. the flelHs about 1t.

1638 Aglaura (trag.) J. Suckling Scena Persia. Above d.p.

1638 Covent Garden (com.) T. Nabbes The Scoene, Covent Garden With d.p.

1638 flmyntas (past.) T. Randolph Theme Scenescene aicilie,Slcllle. inIn tnethe HolyHoi Below d.p. VaTe" TFe time an ffstrological! day from Noone to Noone.

1639 I 8 II Arvlragus and L. Carlell Scene Brltalne. Above d.p. PhlUcIa, (t.c.)

1639 Cleopatra (trag.) T. May The Scene Aeqypt. Below d.p.

1639 The Lady's Trial (com.) J. Ford The Scene, Genoa. Above d.p.

1639 The Unnatural Combat (trag.) P. Masslnger Scene Marseilles. On t.p.

1639 Albertus Wallensteln (hist.) H. Glapthorne Scene, Eqers. On t.p.

1639 The City Hatch (com.) J. Mayne The Scene London. With d.p.

1639 The Phoenix In Her Flames. W. Lower The Scene Arabia. On t.p. TtragTr

1639 The Royal Slave (t.c.) W. Cartwrlght The Habits Persian. With d.p. The Scene Sardls.

1640 The Bride (com.) T. Nabbes The Scene London. Below d.p. Prinliny of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1640 The Unfortunate Mother T. Nabbes The Scene the Court of Ferrara. ? (trag.J

1640 The Rebellion (traq.) T. Rawlins The Scene Slvlll.

1640 The Arcadia (past.) J. Shirley The Scene Arcadia. Below d.p.

1640 The Ladles Prlvlleqe (t.c.) H. Glapthorne The Scene Genoa. Below d.p.

1640 Wit In a Constable (com.) II. Glapthorne The Scene London. Below d.p.

1640 The Constant Maid (com.) J. Shirley The Scene London. Below d.p.

1640 The Hollander (com.) II. Glapthorne The Scene London Below d.p.

1640 11 The CId (t.c.) J. Rutter The Scene The Court of Seville. Below d.p. Based on Oesfontalne's La Vrale Suite duTld

1640 Sicily and Naples (traq.) S. Harding The Scene. Naples. Below d.p.

1641 The Antiquary (com.) S. Marmlon The Scene Pisa. With d.p.

1641 Mercurlus Brltannlcus Trans, by The Scene Smyrna. 7 (Latin Pol. comedy) R. Brathwalte

1641 The Magnetic Lady (com.) B. Jonson The Scene, London. Above d.p. In Works, vol. Ill

1641 A Tale of a Tub (com.) B. Jonson The Scene, Flnsbury-hundred. Below d.p. In Works, vol. Ill

1641 The Sad Shepherd (past.) B. Jonson The Scene is Sher-wood. Below d.p. In Works, vol. Ill

1641 The Prisoners (t.c.) T. Kllllgrew The Scene Sardinia. With d.p. In Two Tragi­ comedies

1642 Brennovalt (traq.) J. Suckling The Scaene Poland. With d.p. fniiiiuy or Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1642 The Sophy (trag.) J. Denham Scena Persia. With d.p.

1643 The Unfortunate Lovers W. Davenant The Scene Verona. With sc.d. (trag.)

1647 11 Pastor F1do (past.) B. Guarinl, The Scene Arcadia. With d.p. trans, by F. Fanshaw

1647 The Conmlttee-Man Curried, S. Sheppard The Scaene London. With d.p. Part I (com.)

1647 The Country Girl (com.) T. Brewer [?] The Scoene, London and Edmonton. With d.p.

1648 The Amorous War (t.c.) J. Mayne The Scoene, Btthynla. ?

1648 Medea (traq.) Seneca, trans, The Scene. Corinth. 7 by E. Sherburne

1649 Love and Honour (t.c.) W. Davenant The Scene Savoy. 7

1649 Love 1n Its Ecstasy W. Peaps [?] The Scene Lelybaeus. 7 (past, t.c.)

1649 New Market Fair, part I. Anon. The Scene Westminster. 7 (t.c.)

1651 The Distracted State J. Tatham Scene Clclly. 7 (trag.)

1651 The Jovial Crew (com.) S. Sheppard The Scene, London. 7

1651 Marcus Tulllus Cicero (traq. Anon. The Scene Rome. 7

1651 Plutus (com.) Aristophanes, Scene, London. 7 trans, by T. Randolph

1651 The Prince of Priqs Revels J.S[?] The Scene, Enqland. 7 (com.)

1651 The Lady Errant (t.c.) W. Cartwrlght The Scene Cyprus. 7 In Comedies. Traql-Comedies, with other poems Date Title Author Scene-designation ' lic-d!"J Comments

1651 The Ordinary (com.) W. Cartwrlght The Scene, London. ? In Comedies Tragi­ comedies, with other poems

1651 The Siege (t.c.) W. Cartwrlght The Scene, Byzantium. ? In Comedies, Tragi­ comedies, with other poems

1652 The Just General (t.c.) C. Manuche The Scene Sicilie. 7

1652 The Wlld-Goose Chase (com.) F. Beaumont S The Scene Paris. ? J. Fletcher

1652 The Bastard (traq.) Anon. The Scene Slvill. ?

1652 The Loyal Lovers (t.c.) C. Manuche The Scene Amsterdam. ? 1652 Sophompaneas (traq.) H. Grotius, The Scene, Memphis. ? trans, by F. Goldsmith

1653 The Chanqellnq (traq.) T. Mlddleton & The Scene Alleqant. ? W. Rowley

1653 The Ghost (com.) Anon. The Scene Paris. ?

1653 The Spanish Gypsy (t.c.) T. Mlddleton & The Scene, Alleqant ? W. Rowley

1653 A Mad Couple Well Hatched R. Brome The Scene London. ? In Five New Plays Tcom.)

1653 The Novella (com.) R. Brome The Scaene Venice. ? In Five New Plays

1653 The Damolselle (com.) R. Brome The Scene London. ? In Five New Plays

1653 The Brothers (com.) J. Shirley Scene Madrid. ? In Six New Plays

1653 The Sisters (com.) J. Shirley Scene Parma. ? In Six New Plays

1653 The Doubtful Heir (t.c.) J. Shirley Scene Murcla. ? In Six New Plays Priming of Date Title Author Scene-tlcsl gnat Ion Sc-d.' Comments

1653 The Cardinal (traq.) J. Shirley Scene Navarre. ? In Six New Plays

1653 The Court Secret (t.c.) J. Shirley Scene Madrid. ? In Six New Plays 1654 The Extravagant Shepherd T. Cornellie, The Scene In Brie. ? (past.) trans, by T.Rt?]

1655 Fortune by Land and Sea T. Heywood & The Scene London. ? (com.) W. Rowley

1655 The Lovesick Klnq (traq.) A. Brewer The Scene England. ?

1655 The Poor Han's Comfort(t.c. R. Dauborne The Scene Thessaly. ?

1655 The Twins (t.c.) W. Rider The Scene Italy. 7

1655 Mlrza (traq.) R. Baron The Scene, Persia. ?

1655 F1111 dl Sclro (past.) C. G. de Bona- The Scene lies 1n the Isle of ? relH, Trans, Scyros. by G. Talbot

1655 The Gentleman of Venice J. Shirley The Scene, Venice. ? (t.c.)

1655 I & II The Passionate L. Carlell The Scenes Burqony. Neustrea. ? Lover (t.c./

1655 The Polltltlan (traq.) J. Shirley Scene Norway. ?

1655 Polyeuctes (traq.) P. Cornellie, The Scene Is Mlletene. Capltall ? trans, by W. City of Armenia, In the Palace Lower of Felix.

1655 A Very Woman (t.c.) P. Masslnger The Scene Sicily. ? In Three New Plays 1656 The Careless Shepherdess T. Goffe The Scene, Arcadia. ? (t.c.)

1656 The Hectors (com.) Anon. The Scene London. On t.p. Date Title Author Scene-designation Pr^c-j'.19 Comments

1656 I The Siege of Rhodes W. Davenant The Scene, Rhodes. 7 Tt.c.)

1656 Horatlus (traq.) P. Cornellle, The Scene Is at Rome, 1n a Hall ? trans, by W. of Horatlus house. Lower

1656 The Old Law (com.) T. Mlddleton, The Scene Eplre. 7 W. Rowley, & P. Masslnger

1657 The Obstinate Lady (com.) A. Cokaln The Scene London. On t.p.

1657 The Queen's Exchanqe R. Brome Scene England. 7 (com.)

1657 The False Favorite G. G. D'Ouvllle The Scene, Florence. 7 Disgraced (t.c.)

1657 Lust's Dominions (traq.) Anon. The Scene, Spain. 7

1657 No W1t Like a Woman's T. Mlddleton' The Scene London. 7 (com.)

1657 The Fool Would be a Favor- L. Carl ell Scene Mllaln. 7 In Two New Plays Tie (t.c.)

1657 More Dissemblers Besides T. Mlddleton Scaen Milan. 7 In Two New Plays Women (com.)

1657 Women Beware Women T. Mlddleton The Scaen, Florence. 7 In Two New Plays (trag.)

1658 Orgula (trag.) L. Wlllan The Scene Segusla. An Antique 7 name of a City and Province, on the East Gaule, or France.

1658 The City Madam (com.) P. Masslnger Scene London. 7

1658 The Enchanted Lovers W. Lower The Scene Is In the Island of 7 (past.) Erlthrea In Portugal.

1658 Love and War (traq.) T. Merlton Scene, Bruzantla. 7 Prinlimj of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1658 The Unhappy Fair Irene G. Swlnhoe The Scene, Hadrlanople. On t.p. (trag.)

1658 Trappolln Creduto A. Cokaln The Scene part of Italy. On t.p. Principe (t.c.)

1659 The Blind Beqqar of J. Day Scene Bednal Green. ? Bednal Green (com.)

1659 Lady Alimony (com.) Anon. Scene Slvll. ? 1659 The Noble Inqratltude P. Qulnault, The Scene Is In the Forrest of ? (t.c.) trans, by Arqler. W. Lower

1659 The Enqllsh Moor (com.) R. Brome The Scene London. ? In Five New Plays

1659 The Lovesick Court (com.) R. Brome The Scene Thessaly. ? In Five New Plays

1659 The Queen and Concubine R. Brome The Scoene Slcllle. 7 In Five New Plays (com.)

1659 The Sad One (trag.) J. Suckling The Scene, Sicily. ? In Last Remains APPENDIX E

SCENE-DESIGNATIONS IN SELECTED ENGLISH DRAMATIC TEXTS,

1660-1685

Listed in this Appendix are 120 scene-designations found in the

176 English Dramatic texts of the early Restoration that I examined.

A list of the abbreviations used in this Appendix appears on page 86.

114 Date Title Author Scene-designation ^'ic-d'.'9 °f Comments

1660 Troades (traq.) Seneca, trans, The Scene Troy. Above arg. by S. Pordage

1660 Andromana (traq.) J. Shirley (?) Scene, Iberia. On t.p.

1660 The Amorous Phantasm H. Lower The Scene 1s at Ferrara, 7 (t.c.)

1661 Ermlnla (t.c.) R. Flecknoe The Scene, Mlssena 1n Greece. below d.p. The Habits, the ancient military attire.

1661 Love's Labyrinth (t.c.) T. Forde The Scene Arcadia. below d.p.

1662 The Adventures of Five S. Tuke The Scene Sevll. below d.p. Hours (com.)

1662 Anythlnq for a Quiet Life T. Mlddleton The Scene London. ? (com.)

1662 The Birth of Merlin W. Rowley The Scene Brlttaln. ? (Romance) S ?

1662 Thorney Abbey (hist.) "T.W." The Scene London. ? In Gratlae Theatrlcales

1662 The Marrlaqe Broker (com.) "M.W." The Scene London. ? In Gratlae Theatrlcales

1662 Grim the Collier of W. Haughton The Staqe 1s Enqland. 7 In Gratlae Groydon (com.) Theatrlcales

1663 The Cutter of Coleman- A. Cowley The Scene London 1n the year On t.p. Street (com.) 1658.

1663 II The Sleqe of Rhodes M. Davenant The Scene Rhodes. 7 (t.c.)

1663 The Villain (traq.) T. Porter Scene, Tours. Above d.p.

1663 The Sllqhted Maid (t.c.) R. Stapylton The Scene, Naples. Above d.p.

1664 Heracllus (traq.) P. Cornellle, The Scene, Constantinople. Below d.p. trans, by L. Carlell Pi'idling oT Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1664 The Rival Ladles (t.c.) J. Dryden The Scene A1leant. Below d.p.

1664 The Marriage Night (t.c.) H. Cary Castile. Above d.p.

1664 Love's Kingdom (t.c.) R. Flecknoe The Scene, Cyprus, with all the Below d.p. Rules of Time and Place so exactly observed, as whilst for Time 'tis all comprlz'd In as few hours as there are Acls; for place, It never goes out ofthe view or prospect of Love's Temple.

1664 The Prlncesse (traq.) T. KilUgrew The Scene Naples and Sicily. On t.p. In Comedies & Tragedies

1664 The Parson's Weddlnq (com. T. Kill1grew The Scene London. On t.p. In Comedies 8 Tragedies

1664 The Pilgrim (tragi) T. Kill 1grew The Scene H1lla1n. On t.p. In Comedies 8 Tragedies

1664 ClcWa and Clorlnda (t.c. T. Kllllgrew The Scene Lombardy. On t.p. In Comedies 8 Traqedies

1664 Thomaso (com.) T. K1111 grew The Scene Madrid. On t.p. In Comedies & Traqedies

1664 I & II Bellamlra T. Kllllgrew The Scene Naples and On t.p. In Comedies 8 Her Dream (t.c.) sraiv. Traqedies

1664 Clarlcllla (t.c.) T. Kllllgrew The Scene Sicily. On t.p. In Comedies 8 Traqedies

1664 The Prisoners (t.c.) T. K1111 grew The Scene Sardinia. On t.p., and In Comedies 8 below d.p. Traqedies

1664 Pandora (com.) U. Kllllgrew The Scene In Syracutla. Below head title, above Act heading

1664 The Carnival (com.) T. Porter The Scene Sevll. Below d.p. I'rintliKj oi Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Commonts

1664 The Step-Mother (t.c.) R. Stapylton The Scene Verulam. Above d.p. 1664 The Cheats (com.) J. Wilson The Scene London. Below d.p. 1664 Andronlcus Comnenlus (traq. J. Wilson The Scene, Constantinople Below d.p. 1664 Amorous Orontus (com.) P. Cornellle, The Scene 1n London. Below d.p. trans, by J. Bulteel

1665 The Vestal Virgins (trag.) R. Howard Scene Rome. Below d.p. 1666 Sellndra (t.c.) W. KllUgrew Scene Is the Eniporors Palace at Above Act In Four Hew Plays Blzantlum. heading. 1666 Love & Friendship (t.c.) W. KllUgrew The Scene In the Island of Below head- In Four New Plays Cltherea. title, above Act heading. 1667 Elvira (com.) G. Bristol Scoene Valencia. Below d.p. 1667 Damolselle a la Mode R. Flecknoe The Scaene Paris. The Unity of Below d.p. (com.) Persons, Time, and Place exactly observed. 1667 The Indian Emperour (traa.) J. Dryden The Scene Mexico and two leaques Below d.p. about 1t. 1667 The Amazon Queen (t.c.) J. Weston The Scene, the Banks of the River Below d.p. Thermodow on the Borders of the Amazon Country. 1668 The Felqn'd Astroloqer P. Cornellle, The Scene London. Below d.p. (com.) Anon, trans. 1668 Secret Love (T.C.) J. Dryden The Scene Sicily. Below d.p. 1668 Sir Martin Mar-all (com.) J. Dryden The Scene Covent-Garden. Below d.p. 1668 The Usurper (traq.) E. Howard The Scene Sicily. Below d.p. 1668 The Great Favorite (traq.) R. Howard The Scene Madrid. Below d.p.

1668 Taruqo's Wiles (com.) T. St. Serfe A Coffee-house, where 1s pre­ Below d.p. sented a mixture of aindrnT of people. I'riniiiKj oi Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1668 The Sullen Lovers (com.) T. Shadwell The place of the scene London. Below d.p. The time in the Moneth of March. 166778. "

1668 The Wild Gallant (com.) J. Dry den The Scene London. Above d.p. and between head title/Act head­ ing.

1669 The Royal Shepherdess T. Shadwell Scene Arcadia. Below d.p. (t.c.)

1669 The Han's the Master (com.) Scarron, trans. The Scene Madrid and in one Below d.p. by W. Davenant house.

1669 The Imperial Traqedy (traq.) W. Ki Hi grew The Scene at Constantinople. Below head title, above Act heading.

1669 Hero and Leander (traq.) R. Stapylton The Scene. The Towers and Towns Below d.p. of Sestos and Abydos, the Hellespont flowlnq between them.

1670 Tyrannick Love (traq.) J. Dryden Scene the camp of Maximim, under Below d.p. the walls of AqiHleia.

1671 The Amorous Prince (com.) A. Behn Scene the Court of Florence. Below d.p.

1671 The Forc'd Marriaqe (t.c.) A. Behn Scene within the Court of France. Below d.p.

1671 Horace (traq.) P. Cornellie, The Scene Rome in a Parlour of Below d.p. trans, by Horatio's House. C. Cotton

1671 Juliana or the Princess of J. Crown The Scene Warsaw in Poland, at Below d.p. Poland (t.c.) the meeting of the Ban, and Arreer Ban, armed in the field for the Election of a Kinq.

1671 Nicodeme (t.c.) P. Cornellie, The Scene at Nlcomedla. Below d.p. trans, by J. Dancer Date Title Author Scene-designation ' rsc^'.,?' of Comments

1671 An Evenlnqs Love (com.) J. Dryden The Scene Madrid, 1n the year Below d.p. 1665. The Time the last evening of the Carnival.

1671 The Women's Conquest (t.c.) E. Howard The Scene Scythla. Below d.p.

1671 The Six Days Adventure E. Howard Scene, Utopia. Below d.p. (com.)

1671 The Roman Empress (trag.) W. Joyner The Scene of this drama or Action Below d.p. Is about the banks of Tiber: wfiere Host 111us and his party are supposed to be In Rome, or on the Roman siHe of the River: And Valentlus with his Party encampt on the other side In the nature of Besiegers.

1671 Wrangling Lovers (com.) E. Ravenscroft The Scene Toledo. Below d.p.

1671 Cambyses, Klnq of Persia E. Settle The Scene Susa and Camb.yses Camp Below d.p. (trag.) near the Walls of Susa.

1671 The Humorists (com.) T. Shadwell Scene London, In the year 1670. Below d.p. Duration of the Scene 24 hours.

1672 Emilia (t.c.) Anon. The Scene. Mlcena. The Unity of Below d.p. Mace (besides that of Time and Persons) so exactly observed, as there 1s never any breach or breaking of the scenes, until the end of the Act.

1672 The Generous Enemies J. Corye The Scene Sivll. Above d.p. (com.)

1672 The History of Charles the J. Crowne The Scene Naples. Below d.p. Eighth (trag.)

1672 All Mistaken (t.c.) J. Howard Scene Italy. Below d.p. Prinliny of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d. Comments

1672 The Citizen Turn'd E. Ravenscroft Scene London. Below d.p. Gentlemen tcom.)

1672 The Rehersal (Burlesque) G. Vllllers, Scene Brentford. Below d.p. et al.

1673 The Dutch Lover (com.) A. Behn The Scene Madrid. Below d.p.

1673 News from Plymouth (com.) W. Davenant Scene Plymouth. 7 In the Works of William Davenant

1673 The Distresses (com.) W. Davenant Scene Cordua. 7 In the Works of William Davenant

1673 The Sleqe (t.c.) W. Davenant Scene Pisa. ? In the Works of William Davenant

1673 Amboyna (traq.) J. Dryden Scene Ainboyna. Below d.p.

1673 The Assignation (com.) J. Dryden Scene, Rome. Below d.p.

1673 Marrlaqe a la Mode (com.) J. Dryden Scene, S1cl11e. Below d.p.

1673 Herod and Marlamne (traq.) S. Pordage The Scene Jerusalem. Below d.p.

1673 The Careless Lovers (com.) E. Ravenscroft The Scene Covent Garden. Below d.p.

1674 The Enqllsh Monsieur (com.) J. Howard Scene London. Below d.p.

1674 Thyestes (traq.) Seneca, trans, The Scene Arqos. Below d.p. by J. Wright 1675 The Woman Turn'd Bully Anon. Scene, London. Below d.p. (com.)

1675 Andromache (traq.) Racine, trans, The Scene, Buthrotes Capital Below d.p. by J. Crowne City of Eplrus.

1675 Aqrlppa King of Alba (traq.) Quinault, trans, The Scene In the Palace of the Below d.p. by J. Dancer Kings of Alba, 1n the Princess Lavfnla's Apartment.

1675 The Traqedy of Nero (traq.) N. Lee The Scene Rome. Below d.p. Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Comments

1676 Sophonlsba (traq.) N. Lee The Scene Zama. Below d.p.

1676 The Town-Fopp (com.) A. Behn Scene Covent Garden. Below d.p.

1676 Aurenq-Zebe (traq.) J. Dryden Scene, Aqra, 1n the year 1660. Below d.p.

1676 Glorlana (traq.) N. Lee The Scene, the Palace of Auqustus Below d.p. Caesar.

1676 The Virtuoso (com.) T. Shadwell Scene, London. Below d.p.

1677 I The Rover (com.) A. Behn The Scene Naples In Carnival time. Below d.p.

1677 Tom Essence (com.) Rawlins The Scene, London. Below d.p.

1677 The Debauchee (com.) A. Behn Scene, London. Below d.p.

1677 Abdelazer (traq.) A. Behn Scene Spain, and 1n the camp. Below d.p.

1677 The Rival Queens (traq.) N. Lee Scene. Babylon. Below d.p.

1677 Titus and Berenice (traq.) T. Otway The Scene. Rome. Below d.p.

1677 King Edqar and Alfreda E. Ravenscroft The Scene, Mercla, or Middle Below d.p. TETc.) England.

1677 Ibrahim the Illustrious E. Settle The Scene Solymans Serai1o. Below d.p. Bassa (trag.)

1677 Cytherea (com.) J. Smith Scene, City of York. Below d.p.

1678 All for Love (traq.) J. Dryden Scene Alexandria. Below d.p.

1678 The Man of Newmarket (com.) E. Howard The Scene. London. Below d.p.

1678 The Sleqe of Babylon (traq.) S. Pordage The Scene Babylon and the Fields Below d.p. Adjacent.

1678 The Enqllsh Lawyer (com.) E. Ravenscroft Scene Burdeaux. Below d.p.

1670 Henry the Third of France T. Shlpman The Scene. Blols, removed at the Below d.p. (trag.) Fourth Act to the Camp at St. Clou, before Paris. Printing of Date Title Author Scene-designation Sc-d.' Comments

1679 The Feigned Curtlzans A. Behn Scene, Rome. Below d.p. (com.)

1679 The Ambitious Statesman J. Crowne The Scene Paris. Below d.p. (trag.)

1679 Troades (traq.) Seneca, trans, The Scene, the Rulnes of Troy. Below d.p. by E. Sherburne

1680 Caesar Borqla (traq.) N. Lee The Scene Rome. Below d.p.

1680 Theodoslus (traq.) • N. Lee The Scene Constantinople Below d.p.

1680 The Orphan (traq.) T. Otway Scene Bohemia. Below d.p.

1681 Thyestes (traq.) Seneca, trans, Scene Atreus his Court. Below d.p. by J. Crowne

1681 Lucius Junius Brutus N. Lee Scene Rome. Below d.p. (trag.)

1681 The Soldiers Fortune (com.) T. Otway Scene London. Below d.p.

1681 II The Rover (com.) A. Behn Scene Madrid. Below d.p.

1682 The C1ty-He1ress (com.) A. Behn Scene Within the Walls of London. Below d.p.

1682 London Cockolds (com.) E. Ravenscroft Scene London. Below d.p.

1682 The Lancashire Witches T. Shadwell The Scene 1n Lancashire, near Below d.p. (com.J Pendle-IH lis.

1682 The Inqratltude of a N. Tate Scene, the Clttles of Rome and Below d.p. Commonwealth (traq.T CorToles.

1685 The Mistaken Beauty (com.) Anon, adapt, of The Scene Paris. Below d.p. P. Cornellie's Le Menteur REFERENCES

Aristotle. Poetics. Trans. S. H. Butcher. Introd. Francis Fergusson. New York: Hi 11 and Wang, 1961.

Dryden, John. "A Defence of an Essay of Dramatique Poesie," The Works of John Dryden: Plays. Ed. John Loftis and Vinton Dearing. Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press, 1966. pp. 3-22.

Greg, W. W. A Bibliography of the English Printed Drama to the Restoration. 4 voTs. Oxford: The University Press, 1939-59.

Harbage, Alfred. Annals of English Drama, 975-1700. Rev. S. Schoenbaum. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1964.

Cavalier Drama. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 1936.

Herrick, Marvin T. Comic Theory in the Sixteenth Century, Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, Vol. 34, Nos. 1 and 2. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1950.

. Italian Tragedy in the Renaissance. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1965.

Hinman, Charlton, ed. The First Folio of Shakespeare: The Norton Facsimile. New York: Norton, 1968.

Lancaster, H. C. The Period of Corneille, 1635-1651. Vol. II of A History of French Dramatic Literature in the Seventeenth Century. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1932.

. The Preclassical Period, 1610-1634. Vol. I of A History of French Dramatic Literature in the Seventeenth Century. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1929.

Murray, Gilbert, ed. Euripides Fabulae. Vol. II. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1908.

Nicoll, Allardyce. The Development of the Theatre. 3rd ed. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1948.

Pfeiffer, Rudolf. History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1968.

123 124

Richards, Kenneth R. "Changeable Scenery for Plays on the Caroline Stage," Theatre Notebook, 23, No. 1 (1968), 6-20.

Sandys, J. E. A History of Classical Scholarship. Vol. II. Cambridge: The University Press, 1908.

Southern, Richard. Changeable Scenery: Its Origin and Development in The British Theatre. London: Faber and Faber, Ltd., 1952.

Spingarn, J. E. A History of Literary Criticism in the Renaissance. 2nd. ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1930.

Turyn, Alexander. The Byzantine Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Euripides. Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, Vol. 43. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press, 1957.

Weinberg, Bernard. A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian Renaissance. 2 vols. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1961.