Galfrido and Bernardo: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
m (added HADP image) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
NB This record is a '''hoax'''. It is listed here simply to document that it is indeed inauthentic. | NB This record is a '''hoax'''. It is listed here simply to document that it is indeed inauthentic. | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
==Historical Records== | ==Historical Records== | ||
An interpolated entry at the bottom of one of the pages of the manuscript of Henslowe's ''Diary'': | An interpolated entry at the bottom of one of the pages of the manuscript of Henslowe's ''Diary'': | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
:18 of maye 1595… Rd at galfrido & Bernardo… xxxi<sup>s</sup>. (Foakes ed., ''Diary'', 28.) | :18 of maye 1595… Rd at galfrido & Bernardo… xxxi<sup>s</sup>. (Foakes ed., ''Diary'', 28.) | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
[[Image:HADP MSS7, 11v.jpg]] | |||
<br> | |||
[http://henslowe-alleyn.org.uk/images/MSS-7/011v.html ''Henslowe-Alleyn Digitisation Project'', MSS 7, 11v] | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
The entry was not reported by Malone, first appearing in print in J. P. Collier's edition of the ''Diary''. It was recognized as Collier's own forgery within his own lifetime, and is categorized as such by the subsequent editors of the ''Diary'', Greg and Foakes. | The entry was not reported by Malone, first appearing in print in J. P. Collier's edition of the ''Diary''. It was recognized as Collier's own forgery within his own lifetime, and is categorized as such by the subsequent editors of the ''Diary'', Greg and Foakes. | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
==Theatrical Provenance== | ==Theatrical Provenance== | ||
Line 25: | Line 36: | ||
==Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues== | ==Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues== | ||
Collier clearly intended it to look like an adaptation of the 1570 poem ''Galfrido and Bernardo'', discussed by Mike Pincombe | Collier clearly intended it to look like an adaptation of the 1570 poem ''Galfrido and Bernardo'', discussed by Mike Pincombe [http://www.hrionline.ac.uk/origins/DisplayServlet?id=drout7241.5&type=print here]. | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
==References to the Play== | ==References to the Play== | ||
Line 36: | Line 48: | ||
==Critical Commentary== | ==Critical Commentary== | ||
This forgery was caught fairly early on, but it had already made it into some reference works besides Collier's own edition - for instance, J. O. Halliwell-Phillips's ''Dictionary of Old English Plays'' (1860), 105-6. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DZEUAAAAQAAJ&q=galfrido#v=snippet&q=galfrido&f=false | This forgery was caught fairly early on, but it had already made it into some reference works besides Collier's own edition - for instance, J. O. Halliwell-Phillips's ''Dictionary of Old English Plays'' (1860), 105-6. [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DZEUAAAAQAAJ&q=galfrido#v=snippet&q=galfrido&f=false GoogleBooks] | ||
<br><br> | |||
As late as 1904 it was still causing W. W. Greg needless suspicion about the genuineness of the 1570 poem itself (Greg ed., ''Diary'', 2.36-7). | As late as 1904 it was still causing W. W. Greg needless suspicion about the genuineness of the 1570 poem itself (Greg ed., ''Diary'', 2.36-7). | ||
<br><br> | |||
The fullest discussion is in Freeman and Freeman, 2.367-8. | The fullest discussion is in Freeman and Freeman, 2.367-8. | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
==For What It's Worth== | ==For What It's Worth== | ||
It's not. | It's not. | ||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
==Works Cited== | ==Works Cited== | ||
Collier, John Payne (ed.) ''The Diary of Philip Henslowe, from 1591 to 1609''. London: Shakespeare Society, 1845. [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books]< | <div style="padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em">Collier, John Payne (ed.) ''The Diary of Philip Henslowe, from 1591 to 1609''. London: Shakespeare Society, 1845. [http://www.google.com/books?id=gne_jHo3StIC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false Google Books]</div> | ||
Fleay, F. G. ''A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama, 1559—1642''. 2 vols. 1891; rpt New York: Burt Franklin, 1962. [http://www.archive.org/stream/biographicalchro01flea#page/n7/mode/2up Internet Archive | <div style="padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em">Fleay, F. G. ''A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama, 1559—1642''. 2 vols. 1891; rpt New York: Burt Franklin, 1962. [http://www.archive.org/stream/biographicalchro01flea#page/n7/mode/2up Internet Archive (vol. 1)]</div> | ||
Freeman, Arthur and Janet Ing Freeman. ''John Payne Collier: Scholarship and Forgery in the Nineteenth Century''. 2 vols. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004. | <div style="padding-left: 2em; text-indent: -2em">Freeman, Arthur and Janet Ing Freeman. ''John Payne Collier: Scholarship and Forgery in the Nineteenth Century''. 2 vols. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004.</div> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> |
Revision as of 18:17, 19 May 2015
Falsely attributed to Anon. (falsely attributed to 1595)
NB This record is a hoax. It is listed here simply to document that it is indeed inauthentic.
Historical Records
An interpolated entry at the bottom of one of the pages of the manuscript of Henslowe's Diary:
- 18 of maye 1595… Rd at galfrido & Bernardo… xxxis. (Foakes ed., Diary, 28.)
File:HADP MSS7, 11v.jpg
Henslowe-Alleyn Digitisation Project, MSS 7, 11v
The entry was not reported by Malone, first appearing in print in J. P. Collier's edition of the Diary. It was recognized as Collier's own forgery within his own lifetime, and is categorized as such by the subsequent editors of the Diary, Greg and Foakes.
Theatrical Provenance
n/a
Probable Genre(s)
n/a
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
Collier clearly intended it to look like an adaptation of the 1570 poem Galfrido and Bernardo, discussed by Mike Pincombe here.
References to the Play
None
Critical Commentary
This forgery was caught fairly early on, but it had already made it into some reference works besides Collier's own edition - for instance, J. O. Halliwell-Phillips's Dictionary of Old English Plays (1860), 105-6. GoogleBooks
As late as 1904 it was still causing W. W. Greg needless suspicion about the genuineness of the 1570 poem itself (Greg ed., Diary, 2.36-7).
The fullest discussion is in Freeman and Freeman, 2.367-8.
For What It's Worth
It's not.
Works Cited
Site created and maintained by Matthew Steggle, Sheffield Hallam University; updated 18 May 2015.