Philipo and Hippolito: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
Collier identified ''Philipo and Hippolito'' with a play putatively by [[Massinger, Philip | Philip Massinger]], [[''Philenzo and Hippolyta'']], which he considered "in all probability, revived and altered" from the Admiral's play (55). In an additional note, Collier announced that Massinger's play had been found in manuscript in "the Conway Papers" (xxxi) [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books] | Collier identified ''Philipo and Hippolito'' with a play putatively by [[Massinger, Philip | Philip Massinger]], [[''Philenzo and Hippolyta'']], which he considered "in all probability, revived and altered" from the Admiral's play (55). In an additional note, Collier announced that Massinger's play had been found in manuscript in "the Conway Papers" (xxxi) [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books] | ||
Fleay | Fleay followed suit, expanding Collier's identification by ascribing ''Philipo and Hippolito'' to Dekker (1.121). [http://www.archive.org/stream/biographicalchro01flea#page/120/mode/2up Internet Archive] | ||
Greg added a third incarnation by suggesting that ''Philipo and Hippolito'' "was the original of ''Julio and Hyppolita'' in the German Collection of 1620" (II.165-6, Item 46). | |||
Chambers, his patience tested, considered the long life of ''Philipo and Hippolito'' through much later (and lost) plays to be a "game ... hazardous" to play (2.145). | |||
Bentley repeated the hypothetical survival of ''Philipo and Hippolito'' in Massinger's lost play without endorsement, saying there was "no way of knowing" if the plays were related (4.808). | |||
| Line 85: | Line 90: | ||
==Works Cited== | ==Works Cited== | ||
Collier [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books] | Collier, John Payne. [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books] | ||
Fleay | Fleay | ||
Revision as of 13:21, 24 February 2010
Historical Records
Henslowe's Diary
F. 9v (Greg I.18)
ye 9 of Julye 1594 ne Rd at <the> phillipo & hewpolyto iijli ijs ye 13 of Julye 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xxxxs ye 18 of Julye 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xxxs ye 24 of Julye 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xxxs ye 3 of aguste 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolito xxxs ye 7 of aguste 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolito xxixs ye 15 of aguste 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xxjs
F.10 (Greg I.19)
ye 24 of aguste 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xxviijs ye 4 of septmb[er] 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolito xxijs ye 13 of septmb[er] 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolito xxs ye 19 of septmb[er] 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolyto xiiijs vjd ye 7 of octob[er] 1594 Rd at phillipo & hewpolito xijs
Theatrical Provenance
The Admiral's men introduced this play as "ne" in fourth week of their return to the Rose following the 10-day run at the playhouse at Newington with the Chamberlain's men. It stayed in repertory for 12 performances through 7 October, after which it disappeared from records in the diary.
Probable Genre(s)
Tragi-comedy? (Harbage)
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
See Critical Commentary, below.
References to the Play
None known.
Critical Commentary
Collier identified Philipo and Hippolito with a play putatively by Philip Massinger, ''Philenzo and Hippolyta'', which he considered "in all probability, revived and altered" from the Admiral's play (55). In an additional note, Collier announced that Massinger's play had been found in manuscript in "the Conway Papers" (xxxi) Google Books
Fleay followed suit, expanding Collier's identification by ascribing Philipo and Hippolito to Dekker (1.121). Internet Archive
Greg added a third incarnation by suggesting that Philipo and Hippolito "was the original of Julio and Hyppolita in the German Collection of 1620" (II.165-6, Item 46).
Chambers, his patience tested, considered the long life of Philipo and Hippolito through much later (and lost) plays to be a "game ... hazardous" to play (2.145).
Bentley repeated the hypothetical survival of Philipo and Hippolito in Massinger's lost play without endorsement, saying there was "no way of knowing" if the plays were related (4.808).
For What It's Worth
Philenzo and Hippolyta was registered at Stationers' Hall on 29 June 1660 by Humphrey Moseley with a considerable number of other plays. Moseley there attributed authorship to Massinger and assigned the genre of tragicomedy. It also was listed by Thomas Warburton as one of the plays lost to the fire that baked his cook's pies.
Arthur Freeman and Janet Ing Freeman do not list "Conway Papers" in the index of John Payne Collier: Scholarship and forgery in the Nineteenth Century, 2 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. Nor does Bentley identify the source (4.808). Since the Massinger play, Philenzo and Hippolyta, remains lost, one must assume that Collier erred in claiming its survival in the Conway Papers (whatever they are).
Works Cited
Collier, John Payne. Google Books
Fleay
<If you haven't done so already, also add here any key words that will help categorise this play. Use the following format, repeating as necessary:>
Site created and maintained by your name, affiliation; updated DD Month YYYY.