« VorigeDoorgaan »
RECENT LITERATURE OF THE ENGLISH
NOTE: The following bibliography endeavors to include: (1) all books and articles of scholarly interest and the more important book reviews which appeared in the year ending January 1, 1922; (2) all noteworthy books which appeared in 1920 but which were not included in the “Recent Literature " sections of Studies for April, 1920, and July, 1921. Thanks are due to Professors Oliver Towles and S. E. Leavitt for assistance in preparing Section VIII of the present bibliography and to Professor Howard R. Huse, who contributed most of the Dante bibliography.
THORNTON S. GRAVES.
I. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL AND GENERAL WORKS
Baskervill, Charles Read. Recent Works on Phases of the English
Renaissance. Modern Philology, XVIII, 168-176. Croll, Morris W. Attic Prose in the Seventeenth Century. Studies
in Philology, XVIII, 79-128. Gerould, James Thayer. Sources of English History of the Seven
teenth Century, 1603-1689. Research Publications (Bibliography No. 1) of University of Minnesota. Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota, 1921. Greenlaw, Edwin. Recent Literature. Studies in Philology, XVIII,
362-375. Jahrbuch der Deutschen Shakespeare-Gesellschaft, LVI (1920), pp.
115-149. Lee, Sir Sidney. The Year's Work in English Studies, 1919-1920.
Edited for the English Association by Sir Sidney Lee.
Oxford University Press, 1921. Peers, E. Allison, and others. Bibliography of English Language
and Literature, 1920. Compiled by Members of the Modern Humanities Research Association. Cambridge University
Press, 1921. Thompson, E. N. S. Mysticism in Seventeenth-Century English Literature. Studies in Philology, XVIII, 170-231.
II. THE DRAMA AND THE STAGE Allen, Morse. S. The Satire of John Marston. Princeton Uni
versity Dissertation. Columbus, Ohio. T. J. Heer Printing
Co., 1920. Bald, R. C. Cyril Tourneur's 'Atheist's Tragedy,' Act IV, sc. i.
Modern Language Review, xvi, 324. Boas, F. S. The Authorship of Fedele and Fortunio. London
Times Literary Supplement, May 5, 1921, p. 292. Dis
cussion by W. W. Greg, ibid., May 12, 1921, p. 308. Bradford, Gamaliel. The Women of Middleton and Webster.
Sewanee Review, xxix, 14-29. Brandl, Alois. Kyd an den Privy Council über Marlowe. Archiv
für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen,
142 (New Series 42), 257. Reprint of Kyd's letter printed by F. K. Brown in London Times
Literary Supplement. Brett-Smith, H. F. B. (ed.). Gammer Gurtons Needle. Percy
Reprints No. 2. Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1920. Carter, Henry Holland (ed.). Every Man in his Humour. By
Ben Jonson. Edited with Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. Pp. cv + 448. Yale Studies in English No. LII. Yale University Press, 1921. In his Preface, dated May 1, 1914, Dr. Carter makes the point that the present edition of Jonson's frequently printed play is sufficiently justified on the ground that it not only brings into the compass of a single volume the most important of the widely scattered information regarding the drama but prints together for the first time on opposite pages the texts of the first-quarto and first-folio versions. Whereas the objection may perhaps be raised that Dr. Carter's edition of Every Man in his Humour indicates an over-fondness for compilation at the expense of more original work, the editor has done a good deal more than merely accumulate the notes and opinions of other men. The 1601 quarto version of the play, owned by Mr. W. A. White of New York, the basis of the quarto text of the present edition, has been carefully collated with another quarto owned by the same gentleman and with the editions of Cunningham, Grabau, and Bang, based on quartos in the Bodleian Library and the British Museum. The results have been carefully tabulated in an extensive introduction, which also contains a discussion of the numerous editions of the 1616 folio text, a detailed comparison of the first-quarto and first-folio versions of the play, a rather unsatisfactory treatment of the complex
question of the date of composition, a short stage history of the drama, a pleasing discussion of the influence of the classics upon Jonson’s play, and a critical estimate of the production. The texts of the first quarto and first folio are conveniently printed on opposite pages with adequate textual notes at the bottom of each page. The text itself is followed by a hundred and fifty pages of explanatory notes, many of which are unnecessarily detailed, and a convenient glossary, a bibliography, and an index.
The editor perhaps wisely refrains from discussing such comprehensive subjects as the genesis of the humour-idea and the influence of Jonson's drama upon his contemporaries and successors. One wishes, however, that instead of spending so much energy on the preparation of explanatory notes the editor had gone more fully into the problem of date, instead of accepting substantially the conclusions of Nicholson. One wishes, too, that he had supplied us with more details regarding the stage history of the piece, instead of contenting himself with material found in Genest and Adams, or had attempted to improve upon Collier's conjecture regarding the ' principali comedians printed at the end of the folio and their connection with the acting of the play. In spite of the failure to grapple seriously with these dangerous but interesting problems, Dr. Carter's volume shows evidence of a large amount of labor, and deserves to be compared favorably with the other volumes in the very creditable edition of Jonson being
done by the students of Professor Cook. Chew, Samuel C. Beaumont on Drunkenness. Modern Language
Notes, XXXVI, 53-55. Clark, Arthur M. The Authorship of ' Appius and Virginia.'
Modern Language Review, xvi, 1-17. An argument that play was plotted and written by Heywood as a companion piece to The Rape of Luorece. Play was later revised hastily by Webster, who did not relish the job imposed upon him by
the company. De Perott, Joseph. Welsh Bits in the Tudor and Stuart Drama.
Modern Language Notes, XXXVI, 352-54. Flood, W. H. Grattan. The King's Players at Dunwich in 1607.
London Times Literary Supplement, April 28, 1921, p. 276. The Site of the Globe Playhouse, Southwark. With an Appendix
by the Architect to the Council on the Architecture of the Building. Published by the London County Council. Pp. 43. London, P. S. King and Son, 1921. The Preface to this very valuable brochure, signed by James Bird, Clerk of the Council, states that the collection and investigation of the evidence for determining the site of the Globe was done by Mr.
W. W. Braines. Mr. Braines has done a thoroughly convincing job of exploding the theory advanced several years ago by Professor C. W. Wallace (cf. London Times for October 2 and 4, 1909 and April 30 and May 1, 1914) that the Globe playhouse was located, not on the south side of Park Street as indicated by the tablet placed on the wall of the brewery of Barclay, Perkins and Company, Limited, but on the north side of the thoroughfare. By patient and ingenious examination of documents hitherto inaccessible to students, Mr. Braines shows conclusively that the plot of ground leased in 1598 by a syndicate composed of the two Burbages, Shakspere and others was to the south of Maid Lane (now Park Street) and consisted of property now occupied by Southwark Bridge Road and the brewery of Barclay, Perkins and Company. In other words, the results of the investigation of the London County Council agree remarkably with the description of the site of the Globe given in 1795 by Concanan and Morgan in their History of Southwark. Mr. Braines refrains from attempting an exact location of the playhouse on a plot of ground with a 156-foot frontage. “The material,” he writes (p. 34), “for determining its exact location, however, is so slight as to be practically negligible, and it has therefore not been considered advisable, in an essay which has been based on ascertained facts, to deal with ta question which would have to be decided mainly as the result of considerations of a more or less hypothetical character.”
The Appendix, entitled “The Architecture of the First Globe Theatre,” by G. Topham Forrest, Architect to the Council, offers nothing that is very new, unless it be his belief that the Globe was polygonal (sixteen-sided) instead of round and his placing the staircases to the galleries and tiring-house in projections—a feature suggested to him by the projections shown in the Hollar view (1647) of the Globe and Hope. The five pictures of his conjectural reconstruction of the famous playhouse from various points of view are interesting and well done, though they perhaps owe too much to the numerous recent “reconstructions " of the Fortune and other theatres. It is to be regretted that, probably under the influence of the De Witt sketch of the Swan and such modern reconstructions as those of Albright, the London Stage Society, and even Godfrey, Mr. Forrest has placed the “ heavens or cover to the projecting stage at such a low height as to obscure for those in the upper gallery all action on
the balcony and rear stage. Gollancz, Sir Israel. Contemporary Lines to Heminge and Condell.
London Times Literary Supplement, January 26, 1922, p.
56. Graves, Thornton S. The Echo-Device. Modern Language Notes,
XXXVI, 120-121. Graves, Thornton S. Some Allusions to Richard Tarleton. Mod
ern Philology, XVIII, 493-96.
Graves, Thornton S. Notes on Puritanism and the Stage. Studies
in Philology, XVIII, 141-169. Greg, W. W. Bale's Kynge Johan. Modern Language Notes,
Reply to Mrs. Le Boutillier's article listed below. Greg, W. W. 'Bengemenes Johnsones Share. Modern Language
Review, XVI, 323.
Reply to Thaler's argument (cf. below) that Jonson was a share
holder in Admiral's Company in July, 1597. Hillebrand, Harold N. Review of The Stonyhurst Pageants edited
by Carleton Brown (Göttingen, 1920). Journal English
and Germanic Philology, xx, 574-77. . Hillebrand, Harold N. Review of Robert Withington's English
Pageantry, Vol. 1 (Harvard University Press, 1918). Jour
nal English and Germanic Philology, xx, 118-24. Hills, W. N. The Shakesperian Stage. Oxford University Press,
Colored wall map (27x20) with an explanatory leaflet. Holthausen, F. Zu Everyman. Beiblatt zur Anglia, 42 (Sept.,
1921), 212-215. Jordan, John C. Davenport's The City Nightcap' and Greene's
'Philomela. Modern Language Notes, XXXVI, 281-284. Judson, Alexander Corbin (ed.). The Captives; or, The Lost
Recovered. Written by Thomas Heywood. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. Pp. 180. Yale University Press, 1921. Students of the drama will welcome this first volume published under the auspices of the Elizabethan Club of Yale University in memory of Francis Bergen. The manuscript of The Captives, the only known play by Heywood not included in the 1874 Pearson edition of the dramatist's works, was discovered in the British Museum by the late A. H. Bullen in 1885 and printed in the fourth volume of his Collection of Old English Plays, only one hundred and fifty copies of which were issued. Professor Judson's reprint makes easily accessible an interesting old drama heretofore denied to a large body of students.
Professor Judson has wisely refrained from burdening his readers with elaborate and tedious critical apparatus. His Introduction handles briefly the authorship and date of the play, the nature of the manuscript, and the dramatist's treatment of his principal sources -Plautus's Rudens and a novella of Masuccio di Salerno. The text