Knave in Print, or One for Another, A: Difference between revisions

mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
::::::::::} by W<sup>m</sup>: Rowley
::::::::::} by W<sup>m</sup>: Rowley
:A Knaue in Print, or One for another"
: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).
([http://www.archive.org/stream/1913transcriptof01statuoft#page/n7/mode/2up S.R.2], 1:429; Greg, ''BEPD'', 1:61; Bentley, 5:1022).
<br><br><br>
<br><br><br>
==Theatrical Provenance==
==Theatrical Provenance==

Revision as of 12:24, 18 February 2011

William Rowley, date unknown


Historical Records

From a long list of plays entered into the Stationers' Register by Humphrey Moseley on 9 September, 1653:

"The Foole without Booke
} by Wm: Rowley
A Knaue in Print, or One for another"

(S.R.2, 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




Works Cited

  • Fleay, F.G., A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama, 2 vols. (London: Reeves and Turner, 1891)




Site created and maintained by David Nicol, Dalhousie University; updated 15 July 2010.