Knave in Print, or One for Another, A: Difference between revisions
David Nicol (talk | contribs) (new entry) |
David Nicol (talk | contribs) (new entry) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
==Theatrical Provenance== | ==Theatrical Provenance== | ||
The theatrical provenance is unknown. Although F.G. Fleay stated that the play belonged to the King's Men in 1622-5 (2:207), Bentley | The theatrical provenance is unknown. Although F.G. Fleay stated that the play belonged to the King's Men in 1622-5 (2:207), he offered no evidence (see Bentley 5:1024-5). | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues== | ==Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues== | ||
Although Rowley was payee for a court performance of a two-part play entitled ''The Knaves'' in 1613, there is no evidence that he wrote it, and Bentley thus states that "there is no adequate reason" to | Although Rowley was payee for a court performance of a two-part play entitled ''The Knaves'' in 1613, there is no evidence that he wrote it, and Bentley thus states that "there is no adequate reason" to connect ''The Knaves'' with ''A Knave in Print'' (5:1024). | ||
| Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
Site created and maintained by [[ | Site created and maintained by [[David Nicol]], Dalhousie University; updated 15 July 2010. | ||
[[category:all]] | [[category:all]] | ||
Revision as of 08:30, 15 July 2010
William Rowley, date unknown
Historical Records
From a long list of plays entered by Humphrey Moseley on 9 September, 1653:
- "The Foole without Booke
- } by Wm: Rowley
- A Knaue in Print, or One for another"
([http://www.archive.org/stream/1913transcriptof01statuoft#page/n7/mode/2up Arber II, 1:429; Greg, BEPD, 1:61; Bentley, 5:1022).
Theatrical Provenance
The theatrical provenance is unknown. Although F.G. Fleay stated that the play belonged to the King's Men in 1622-5 (2:207), he offered no evidence (see Bentley 5:1024-5).
Probable Genre(s)
Comedy.
Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues
Although Rowley was payee for a court performance of a two-part play entitled The Knaves in 1613, there is no evidence that he wrote it, and Bentley thus states that "there is no adequate reason" to connect The Knaves with A Knave in Print (5:1024).
References to the Play
None known.
Critical Commentary
Bentley (5:1025) notes that Moseley's list contains a number of instances in which plays with alternative titles are in fact a "fraudulent entry of two different plays as one". He suggests therefore that One for Another may be a different play from A Knave in Print.
For What It's Worth
<Enter any miscellaneous points that may be relevant, but don't fit into the above categories. This is the best place for highly conjectural thoughts.>
Works Cited
- Fleay, F.G., A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama, 2 vols. (London: Reeves and Turner, 1891)
<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 David Nicol, Dalhousie University; updated 15 July 2010.