Skip to main content
×
×
Home
'Counterfeiting' Shakespeare
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 4
  • Cited by
    This (lowercase (translateProductType product.productType)) has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Naeni, Leila M. Craig, Hugh Berretta, Regina Moscato, Pablo and Schlick, Tamar 2016. A Novel Clustering Methodology Based on Modularity Optimisation for Detecting Authorship Affinities in Shakespearean Era Plays. PLOS ONE, Vol. 11, Issue. 8, p. e0157988.


    Lučić, Ana and Blake, Catherine L. 2015. A syntactic characterization of authorship style surrounding proper names. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, Vol. 30, Issue. 1, p. 53.


    Sharpe, Will 2013. William Shakespeare and Others. p. 641.

    Tudeau-Clayton, Margaret 2005. Shakespeare's Extravagancy. Shakespeare, Vol. 1, Issue. 1-2, p. 136.


    ×
  • Export citation
  • Recommend to librarian
  • Recommend this book

    Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

    'Counterfeiting' Shakespeare
    • Online ISBN: 9780511484049
    • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511484049
    Please enter your name
    Please enter a valid email address
    Who would you like to send this to *
    ×
  • Buy the print book

Book description

'Counterfeiting' Shakespeare addresses the fundamental issue of what Shakespeare actually wrote, and how this is determined. In recent years his authorship has been claimed for two poems, the lyric 'Shall I die?' and A Funerall Elegye. These attributions have been accepted into certain major editions of Shakespeare's works but Brian Vickers argues that both attributions rest on superficial verbal parallels; both use too small a sample, ignore negative evidence, and violate basic principles in authorship studies. Through a fresh examination of the evidence, Professor Vickers shows that neither poem has the stylistic and imaginative qualities we associate with Shakespeare. In other words, they are 'counterfeits', in the sense of anonymously authored works wrongly presented as Shakespeare's. He argues that the poet and dramatist John Ford wrote the Elegye: its poetical language (vocabulary, syntax, prosody) is indistinguishable from Ford's, and it contains several hundred close parallels with his work. By combining linguistic and statistical analysis this book makes an important contribution to authorship studies.

Reviews

Review of the hardback:‘The reader of this long book, which largely consists of close stylistic analysis, is swept along by the power of its indignation … this battleship of a book delivers what are likely to be the final salvos of a hard-fought literary engagement.’

Source: The Times Literary Supplement

Review of the hardback:‘No one doing attribution work can ignore this book … Vickers has set out a programme and an example for authorship studies …’

Jonathan Hope Source: Literary and Linguistic Computing

Review of the hardback:‘Brian Vickers, a scholar brilliantly suited in intellectual acumen and feisty temperament for such a controversy … [has produced] a very valuable study, and one that justifies its length and attention to technical detail … This book is a tour de force of considerable beauty’.

David Bevington Source: Renaissance Quarterly

Review of the hardback:‘Marshalling a fearsome array of stylometric tables and statistical charts Vickers demonstrates in detail that every one of the linguistic, prosodic and rhetorical features that supposedly stamp the Funerall Elegye as 24-carat Shakespeare prove nothing of the sort … Counterfeiting Shakespeare [is] a major contribution to the arcane domain of attribution studies, which has wider implications for our understanding of Shakespeare’s poetry and plays. For, in the course of confuting misattributions … Vickers equips us with the means of identifying more confidently than was previously possible, the unmistakable music of Shakespeare’s mind at play in language …’

Kiernan Ryan Source: Timer Higher Education Supplement

Review of the hardback:‘Counterfeiting’ Shakespeare … demolishes the case for including either poem in Shakespeare’s canon. The book would be impressive if it did only that, but it is also a teach-by-example on how to correctly do authorship studies to an exacting standard … It is an important work about the Ford canon’.

Michael P. Jensen Source: The Shakespeare Newsletter

Review of the hardback:‘Vickers is a well-informed and sympathetic reviewer of quantitative work in attribution, and has emerged as a notable practitioner … His book is a profoundly interesting one and thoroughly justified as an essay on method and good practice in scholarship. It also includes valuable and persuasive evidence about revising the Ford canon …’.

Hugh Craig Source: Shakespeare Quarterly

Review of the hardback:'Counterfeiting Shakespeare is an admirable book, erudite, witty, incisive and vigorous in its narrative thrust. It makes important contributions to authorship studies as well as to Ford and Shakespeare scholarship and it authoritatively dispose once and for all of the 'counterfeit' claims of ‘Shall I die?’ and A Funerall Elegye.'

Source: Shakespeare in Southern Africa

Refine List
Actions for selected content:
Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Send to Kindle
  • Send to Dropbox
  • Send to Google Drive
  • Send content to

    To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to .

    To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

    Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

    Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

    Please be advised that item(s) you selected are not available.
    You are about to send
    ×

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
×
Bibliography
Abbott, E. A., 1886, A Shakespearian Grammar. An Attempt to illustrate some of the differences between Elizabethan and modern English, London; rev. edn (first edn 1869)
Abrams Richard, 1995, ‘Breaching the Canon. Elegy by W. S.: the State of the Argument’, Shakespeare Newsletter, The, vol. 45, no. 226: 51–2, 54
Abrams Richard, 1996a, ‘In Defence of W. S. Reasons for Attributing A Funeral Elegy to Shakespeare’, Times Literary Supplement, 9 February, pp. 25–6
Abrams Richard, 1996b, ‘W[illiam] S[hakespeare]'s “Funeral Elegy” and the Turn from the Theatrical’, Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, 36: 435–60
Anderson, Donald K., Jr, 1972, John Ford, New York
Aristotle, 1984, Rhetoric, tr. W. R. Roberts, in Jonathan Barnes (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols., Princeton, N J.
Bajetta Carlo, 1996, ‘Ralegh's Early Poetry and Its Metrical Context’, Studies in Philology, 93: 399–411
Baldwin, T. W., 1944, William Shakspere's ‘Small Latine and Lesse Greeke’, 2 vols., Urbana, IL
Ball Catherine N., 1996, ‘A Diachronic Study of Relative Markers in Spoken and Written English’, Language Variation and Change, 8: 227–58
Bang, W. (ed.), 1906, John Ford, The Queen in Materialien zur Kunde des älteren Englischen Dramas, vol. ⅩⅢ, Louvain
Barber, Charles, 1976, Early Modern English, London; rev. edn, Edinburgh, 1997
Barker, Richard H., 1945, ‘The Authorship of The Second Maiden's Tragedy and The Revenger's Tragedy’, Shakespeare Association Bulletin, 20: 51–62, 121–33
Barker, Richard H., 1958, Thomas Middleton, New York
Bately Janet M., 1964, ‘Dryden's Revisions in the Essay of Dramatic Poesy: the Preposition at the End of the Sentence and the Expression of the Relative’, Review of English Studies, 15: 268–82
Bately Janet M., 1965, ‘Who and Which and the Grammarians of the 17th Century’, English Studies, 46: 245–50
[Bathurst, Charles], 1857, Remarks on the Differences in Shakespeare's Versification in Different Periods of his Life, London
Baugh, Albert C., 1959, ‘A Medieval Survival in Elizabethan Punctuation’, in J. W. Bennett, O. Cargill, and V. Hall, Jr (eds.), Studies in the Elizabethan Drama (London), pp. 1–15
Beal, Peter, 1986a, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 3 January, p. 13
Beal, Peter, 1986b, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 24 January, p. 88
Bennett A. L., 1954, ‘The Principal Rhetorical Conventions in the Renaissance Personal Elegy’, Studies in Philology, 51: 107–26
Bentley, Gerald Eades, 1941–68, The Jacobean and Caroline Stage, 7 vols., Oxford
Bevington, David (ed.), 1997, The Complete Works of Shakespeare. Updated Fourth Edition, New York
Booth Stephen, 1997, ‘A Long, Dull Poem by William Shakespeare’, Shakespeare Studies, 25: 229–37
Booty, John E. (ed.), 1976, The Book of Common Prayer 1559. The Elizabethan Prayer Book, Charlottesville, VA
Bradbrook Muriel, 1986, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 31 January, p. 115
Brooke, C. F. Tucker, 1908, The Shakespeare Apocrypha. Being a Collection of Fourteen Plays Which Have Been Ascribed to Shakespeare, Oxford; repr. 1918
Burelbach Frederick M. Jr, 1966, ‘John Ford's Style: the Apprentice Years’, McNeese Review, 17: 58–73
Burrow Colin, 1998, ‘Life and Work in Shakespeare's Poems’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 97: 15–50
Butler, Christopher S., 1985, Statistics in Linguistics, Oxford
Butler, Martin, 1988, ‘Love's Sacrifice: Ford's Metatheatrical Tragedy’, in Neill 1988, pp. 201–32
Byrne M. St C., 1932, ‘Bibliographic Clues in Collaborate Plays’, Library 4th s, 13: 21–48
Cantor, Paul A., 1987, ‘John Ford’, in F. Bowers (ed.), Jacobean and Caroline Dramatists (Dictionary of Literary Biography, vol. ⅬⅧ), Detroit, MI, pp. 91–106
Capell, Edward, 1783, ‘A brief Essay on Verse, asof Shakespeare's modeling: its Principles, and its Construction’, Notes and Various Readings to Shakespeare, 3 vols.; excerpts in Brian Vickers (ed.), Shakespeare: The Critical Heritage. Volume Ⅵ, 1774–1801, London and Boston, 1981, pp. 253–72
Chadwyck-Healey, 1995, English Poetry 900–1900, the full text database
Chadwyck-Healey, 1995, English Verse Drama, the full text database
Chalker, Sylvia and Weiner, Edmund (eds.), 1994, The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar, Oxford
Chambers, David L., 1903, The Metre of Macbeth. Its Relation to Shakespeare's Earlier and Later Work, Princeton, N J.
Chambers, E. K., 1930, William Shakespeare. A Study of Facts and Problems, 2 vols., Oxford
Crain Caleb, 1998, ‘The Bard's Fingerprints’, Lingua Franca July/August: 28–39
Davison, Peter, 1988, review of S. Wells and G. Taylor, et al. (eds.), William Shakespeare. The Complete Works and Textual Companion, Library,6th s., 10: 255–67
Davril, Robert, 1954, Le Drame de John Ford, Paris
Davril Robert, 1958, ‘Shakespeare and Ford’, Shakespeare Jahrbuch, 94: 121–31
Dekker, Thomas, 1953–61, The Dramatic Works, ed. F. Bowers, 4 vols., Cambridge
Deloney, Thomas, 1912, The Works of Thomas Deloney, ed. F. O Mann, Oxford
Du Vair, Guillaume, 1951, The Moral Philosophie of the Stoicks, tr. T. James (1598), ed. R. Kirk, New Brunswick NJ
Duncan-Jones Katherine, 1983, ‘Was the 1609 Shake-speares Sonnets Really Unauthorized?’, Review of English Studies, n. s., 34: 151–71
Duncan-Jones Katherine, 1997, ‘Who Wrote A Funerall Elegie?’, Shakespeare Studies 25: 192–210
Eliot, T. S., 1932, ‘John Ford’, Selected Essays, London, pp. 193–204; rev. edn 1951, pp. 193–204
Elliott Ward E. Y., and Valenza Robert J., 1991, ‘A Touchstone for the Bard’, Computers and the Humanities, 25: 199–209
Elliott Ward E. Y., and Valenza Robert J., 1996, ‘And Then There Were None: Winnowing the Shakespeare Claimants’, Computers and the Humanities, 30: 191–245
Elliott Ward E. Y., and Valenza Robert J., 1997, ‘Glass Slippers and Seven-League Boots: C-Prompted Doubts About Ascribing A Funeral Elegy and “A Lover's Complaint” to Shakespeare’, Shakespeare Quarterly 48: 177–207
Elliott Ward E. Y., and Valenza Robert J., 1998, ‘The Professor Doth Protest Too Much, Methinks: Problems with the Foster “Response”’, CHum 32: 425–90
Elliott, Ward E. Y., and Valenza, Robert J., 2000, ‘So much hardball, so little of it over the plate. Conclusions from our “debate” with Donald Foster’, posted online at http://govt.claremontmckenna.edu/welliott/hardball.htm, pp. 1–25. A much-shortened version is forthcoming in Computers and the Humanities
Elliott Ward E. Y., and Valenza Robert J., 2001, ‘Smoking Guns and Silver Bullets. Could John Ford Have Written the Funeral Elegye?’, Literary and Linguistic Computing, 16: 205–32
Ellis, John M., 1997, Literature Lost. Social Agendas and the Corruption of the Humanities, New Haven and London
Ellis-Fermor, Una, 1958, The Jacobean Drama, London; rev. edn (first edn 1936)
Empson, William, 1947, Seven Types of Ambiguity, London (first edn 1930)
Evans, G. Blakemore (ed.), 1997, The Riverside Shakespeare. Second Edition, Boston
Farr, Dorothy M., 1979, John Ford and the Caroline Theatre, London
Fellowes, E. H., 1967, English Madrigal Verse 1588–1632, 3rd edn, revised and enlarged by Frederick W. Sternfeld and David Greer, Oxford
Fischer, O., 1992, ‘Syntax’, in Norman Blake (ed.), The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume Ⅱ. 1066–1476, Cambridge, pp. 207–408
Foster Donald W., 1986a, Letter to the Editor, New York Times Book Review, The, 19 January, p. 4
Foster Donald W., 1986b, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 24 January, pp. 87–8
Foster Donald W., 1986c, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 7 March, p. 247
Foster Donald W., 1987, ‘“Shall I Die” Post Mortem: Defining Shakespeare’, Shakespeare Quarterly 38: 58–77
Foster, Donald W., 1989, Elegy by W. S. A Study in Attribution, Newark and London
Foster Donald W., 1995, ‘Shaxicon 1995’, Shakespeare Newsletter, The 45: 1, 30, 32
Foster Donald W., 1996a, ‘A Funeral Elegy: W[illiam] S[hakespeare's] “Best-speaking Witnesses”’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 111: 1080–105
Foster Donald W., 1996b, ‘Response to Elliott and Valenza, “And Then There Were None”’, Computers and the Humanities, 30: 247–55
Foster Donald W., 1997, ‘Attributing A Funeral Elegye: Reply’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 112: 432–4
Foster Donald W., 1998, ‘The Claremont Shakespeare Authorship Clinic: How Severe are the Problems?’, Computers and the Humanities, 32: 491–510
Foster, Don, 2000, Author Unknown: On the Trail of Anonymous, New York
Franz, Wilhelm, 1939, Shakespeare-Grammatik, 4th edn: Die Sprache Shakespeares In Vers und Prosa, Halle (earlier edns 1898–1923)
Frost, David L., 1968, The School of Shakespeare, Cambridge
Garner Bryan A., 1987, ‘Shakespeare's Latinate Neologisms’, in Salmon and Burgess 1987, pp. 207–28; fromShakespeare Studies, 15 (1982): 149–70
Gayley, Charles Mills (ed.), 1937, Representative English Comedies … Volume Ⅲ. The Later Contemporaries of Shakespeare, New York; The Spanish Gypsy, pp. 119–203
Gibson, Colin A., 1988, ‘“The Stage of My Mortality”: Ford's Poetry of Death’, in Neill 1988, pp. 55–80
Giroux Robert, 1986, Letter to the Editor, New York Times Book Review, The, 19 January, pp. 4, 24
Graham-White, Anthony, 1995, Punctuation and its Dramatic Value in Shakespearean Drama, Newark, N J, and London
Greenblatt, Stephen, Cohen, Walter, Howard, Jean E., Maus, Katharine Eisaman (eds.), 1997, The Norton Shakespeare. Based on the Oxford Edition, New York
Greg, W. W., 1955, The Shakespeare First Folio. Its Bibliographic and Textual History, Oxford
Greg, W. W., 1966, ‘An Elizabethan Printer and his Copy’, in Greg, Collected Papers, ed. J. C. Maxwell (Oxford, 1966), pp. 95–109; originally in Library, 4 (1923): 102–18
Haack Susan, 1999, ‘Staying for an Answer. The Untidy Process of Groping for Truth’, Times Literary Supplement 9 July, pp. 12–14
Hannemann, Eduard, 1888, ‘Metrische Untersuchungen zu John Ford’, Inaugural-Dissertation der vereinigten Friedrichs-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle a. S
Harbage, Alfred (ed.), rev. Schoenbaum, S., 1964, Annals of English Drama 975–1700, London; Supplements 1–2 (1966 and 1970)
Harner, James L. (ed.), 2000, The World Shakespeare Bibliography 1980–1996 on CD-ROM, Cambridge
Hart, Alfred, 1934a, Shakespeare and the Homilies. And Other Pieces of Research into the Elizabethan Drama, Melbourne and London; repr. New York, 1970, 1977
Hart Alfred, 1934b, ‘Shakespeare and the Vocabulary of The Two Noble Kinsmen’, in Hart 1934a, pp. 242–56; fromReview of English Studies 10 (1934): 278–87
Hart Alfred, 1943a, ‘The Vocabularies of Shakespeare's Plays’, Review of English Studies, 19: 128–40
Hart Alfred, 1943b, ‘The Growth of Shakespeare's Vocabulary’, Review of English Studies, 19: 242–54
Hart, Dominick J., 1985, ‘The Fancies, Chast and Noble’ by J. Ford. A Critical Edition, New York and London
Herdan Gustav, 1965, ‘Discussion on the Paper by Mr Morton’, following A. Q. Morton, ‘The Authorship of Greek Prose’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series a, 128: 169–233
Hieatt A. Kent, 1997a, ‘Attributing A Funeral Elegye’, Letter to the Editor, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 112: 430–1
Hieatt Charles W., 1997b, ‘Attributing A Funeral Elegye’, Letter to the Editor, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 112: 429–30
Hirsh James, 2000, ‘A Funeral Elegy, Shakespeare, and Elizabeth Cary’, The Ben Jonson Journal 7: 567–87
Honigmann E. A. J., 1990, review of Foster 1989, Notes and Queries, 235: 465–7
Hope, Jonathan, 1994, The Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays. A Socio-Linguistic Study, Cambridge
Horden, John (ed.), 1980, Samuel Halkett and John Laing, A Dictionary of Anonymous and Pseudonymous Publications in the English Language. Third (revised and enlarged) edition, 1475–1640, London
Houston, John Porter, 1988, Shakespearean Sentences. A Study in Style and Syntax, Baton Rouge, LA
Hoy Cyrus, 1959, ‘The Shares of Fletcher and his Collaborators in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon (Ⅳ)’, Studies in Bibliography, 12: 91–116
Hoy Cyrus, 1960, ‘The Shares of Fletcher and his Collaborators in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon (Ⅴ)’, Studies in Bibliography, 13: 77–108
Hoy, Cyrus, 1980, Introductions, Notes, and Commentaries to Texts in ‘The Dramatic Works of Thomas Dekker’, 4 vols., Cambridge
Huebert, Ronald, 1977, John Ford. Baroque English Dramatist, Montreal and London
Ingram John K., 1874, ‘On the “weak endings” of Shakspere, with some account of the history of the verse-tests in general’, Transactions of the New Shakspere Society, 1: 442–64
Jackson, MacDonald P., 1979, Studies in Attribution. Middleton and Shakespeare, Salzburg
Jackson MacDonald P., 1991, review of Foster 1989, Shakespeare Survey 43: 258–61
Jackson, MacDonald P., 1995, ‘Function Words in the Funeral Elegy’, Shakespeare Newsletter, The, vol. 45, no. 227: 74, 78
Jentoft C. W., 1976, ‘Surrey's Five Elegies: Rhetoric, Structure, and the Poetry of Praise’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 91: 23–32
Johnson Gerald D., 1992, ‘Thomas Pavier, Publisher, 1600–25’, Library 6th s., 14: 12–50
Joseph, Sister Miriam, 1947, Shakespeare's Use of the Arts of Language, New York; repr. 1966
Kenny, Anthony, 1982, The Computation of Style. An Introduction to Statistics for Students of Literature and Humanities, Oxford
Kerl, Erich, 1922, ‘Das Hendiadyoin bei Shakespeare’, PhD Diss., Universität Marburg
Krüger, Alfred, 1929, ‘Studien über die Syntax des englischen Relativpronouns zu Beginn der spätenglischen Zeit’, PhD Diss., Universität Giessen
Lake, David J., 1975, The Canon of Thomas Middleton's Plays, Cambridge
Lass, Roger (ed.), 1999, The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume Ⅲ. 1476–1776, Cambridge
Leech, Clifford, 1957, John Ford and the Drama of His Time, London
Leishman, J. B. (ed.), 1949, The Three Parnassus Plays, London
Lipsius, Iustus, 1939, Two Bookes of Constancie Written in Latin by Iustus Lipsius, Englished by Sir John Stradling, ed. R. Kirk, New Brunswick, N J
Littledale, Harold, and Greg, W. W. (eds.), 1920, The Welsh Ambassador, Oxford (Malone Society Reprint)
Lloyd Bertram, 1945, ‘The Authorship of The Welsh Embassadour’, Review of English Studies, 21: 192–201
Lomax, Marion (ed.), 1995, John Ford: The Lover's Melancholy, The Broken Heart, 'Tis Pity She's a Whore, and Perkin Warbeck, Oxford (Oxford Drama Library)
Lucas, F. L. (ed.), 1927, The Works of John Webster, 4 vols., London
Maule Jeremy, 2000, ‘“To the Memory of the Late Excellent Poet John Fletcher”: a New Poem by John Ford’, English Manuscript Studies 1100–1700 8: 136–59
Maxwell, Baldwin, 1956, Studies in the Shakespeare Apocrypha, New York; repr. New York, 1969
Monsarrat Gilles D., 1971, ‘John Ford's Authorship of Christes Bloodie Sweat’, English Language Notes 9: 20–5
Monsarrat, Gilles D., 1975, ‘Les Thèmes Stoïciens dans la littérature de la Renaissance Anglaise’, Thèse, Université de Lille
Monsarrat Gilles D., 1980, ‘The Unity of John Ford: 'Tis Pity She's a Whore and Christ's Bloody Sweat’, Studies in Philology, 77: 247–70
Monsarrat, Gilles D., 1984, Light from the Porch. Stoicism and English Renaissance Literature, Paris
Monsarrat Gilles D., 2002, ‘A Funeral Elegy: Ford, W. S., and Shakespeare’, Review of English Studies vol. 53, no. 210
Müller C. F. W., 1852, ‘Ueber das sogenannte hen dia dyoin im lateinischen’, Philologus 7: 297–318
Neill, Michael (ed.), 1988, John Ford. Critical Re-Visions, Cambridge
Ness, Frederic W., 1941, The Use of Rhyme in Shakespeare's Plays, New Haven, CT
Oates Joyce Carol, 1999, ‘The Mystery of Jon Benét Ramsey’, New York Review of Books 24 June, pp. 31–2, 34–6
Oliphant E. H. C., 1926, ‘The Authorship of The Revenger's Tragedy’, Studies in Philology, 23: 157–68
Oliphant, E. H. C., 1927, The Plays of Beaumont and Fletcher. An Attempt to Determine Their Respective Shares and the Shares of Others, New Haven, CT, 1927; New York, 1970
Oliver, H. J., 1955, The Problem of John Ford, Melbourne
Oras, Ants, 1960, Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama. An Experiment in Prosody, Gainesville, FL
Obortello, Alfredo, 1949, Madrigali Italiani in Inghilterra. Storia, Critica, Testi, Milan
Parkes, M., 1993, Pause and Effect. An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West, London, Berkeley, and Los Angeles
Partridge, A. C., 1964, Orthography in Shakespeare and Elizabethan Drama. A Study of Colloquial Contractions, Elision, Prosody and Punctuation, London
Partridge, A. C., 1976, A Substantive Grammar of Shakespeare's Nondramatic Texts, Charlottesville, VA
Peacham, Henry, 1954, The Garden of Eloquence (1593), ed. W. G. Crane, Gainesville, FL; repr. Delmar, NY, 1977
Pendleton Thomas A., 1986, Letter to the Editor, New York Times Book Review, The, 19 January, p. 24
Pendleton Thomas A., 1989, ‘The Non-Shakespearian Language of “Shall I Die?”’, Review of English Studies, n. s. 40: 323–51
Peters Hans, 1996, ‘Early Modern English Who: Discourse Function and Standardization’, North-Western European Language Evolution, 27: 67–185
Pierce, Frederick E., 1909, The Collaboration of Webster and Dekker, New Haven
Pierce Frederick E., 1912a, ‘The Collaboration of Dekker and Ford (Ⅰ). The Authorship of The Sun's Darling’, Anglia n. f. 34: 141–68
Pierce Frederick E., 1912b, ‘The Collaboration of Dekker and Ford (Ⅱ). The Authorship of The Witch of Edmonton’, Anglia n. f. 34: 289–312
Prestin, Terry, 1997, ‘From Sonnets to Ransom Notes. Shakespeare Sleuth Helps Police in Literary Detection’, New York Times, 19 November, p. a24
Proudfoot Richard, 1990, review of Foster 1989 inTimes Literary Supplement, 8–14 June, p. 420
Puttenham, George, 1936, The Arte of English Poesie, ed. G. D. Willcock and A. Walker, Cambridge; repr. 1970
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan, 1972, A Grammar of Contemporary English, London
Ringler, William A. Jr (ed.), 1962, The Poems of Sir Philip Sidney, Oxford
Rissanen, Matti, 1999, ‘Syntax’, in Lass 1999, pp. 187–331
Robbins Robin, 1985, ‘A New Shakespeare Poem? … The Counter-Arguments’, Times Literary Supplement, 20 December, pp. 1449–50
Rowntree, Derek, 1981, Statistics Without Tears. A Primer for Non-mathematicians, Harmondsworth
Rydén, Mats, 1966, Relative Constructions in Early Sixteenth-Century English. With Special Reference to Sir Thomas Elyot, Uppsala
Salmon, Vivien and Burgess, Edwina (eds.), 1987, A Reader in the Language of Shakespearean Drama, Amsterdam and Philadelphia
Sampley Arthur M., 1933, ‘“Verbal Tests” for Peele's Plays’, Studies in Philology, 30: 473–96
Sargeaunt M. Joan, 1934, ‘Writings Ascribed to John Ford by Joseph Hunter in Chorus Vatum’, Review of English Studies, 10: 165–76
Sargeaunt, M. Joan, 1935, John Ford, Oxford; New York 1966
Schäfer, Jürgen, 1973, Shakespeares Stil. Germanisches und romanisches Vokabular, Frankfurt
Schäfer, Jürgen, 1980, Documentation in the OED Shakespeare and Nashe as Test Cases, Oxford
Schoenbaum, S., 1966, Internal Evidence and Elizabethan Dramatic Authorship, London
Sedge, Douglas, 1963, ‘An Edition of The Queen; or, The Excellency of her Sex’, MA thesis, the Shakespeare Institute, University of Birmingham
Shaheen, Naseeb, 1987, Biblical References in Shakespeare's Tragedies, Newark and London
Shaheen, Naseeb, 1989, Biblical References in Shakespeare's History Plays, Newark and London
Shaheen, Naseeb, 1993, Biblical References in Shakespeare's Comedies, Newark and London
Shapiro I. A., 1985, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 27 December, pp. 1481, 1492
Sheen Erica and Maule Jeremy, 1986, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement 17 January, p. 61
Spevack, Marvin, 1973, The Harvard Concordance to Shakespeare, Hildesheim
Stock, L. E., Monsarrat, Gilles D., Kennedy, Judith M., and Danielson, Dennis (eds.), 1991, The Nondramatic Works of John Ford, Binghamton, NY
Sutfin, Joe Andrews, 1964, ‘Ford's Love's Sacrifice, The Lady's Trial, and The Queen. Critical, Old-spelling Editions of the Texts of the Original Quartos’, PhD Diss., Vanderbilt University (University Microfilms, 64–10, 565)
Sykes, H. Dugdale, 1924, Sidelights on Elizabethan Drama. A Series of Studies Dealing with the Authorship of Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Plays, Oxford; repr. London, 1966
Tarlinskaja, Marina, 1987, Shakespeare's Verse. Iambic Pentameter and the Poet's Idiosyncrasies, New York
Taylor Gary, 1985a, ‘Shakespeare's New Poem: a Scholar's Clues and Conclusions’, New York Times Book Review, The, 15 December, pp. 11–14
Taylor Gary, 1985b, ‘A New Shakespeare Poem? The Evidence …’, Times Literary Supplement, 20 December, pp. 1447–8
Taylor Gary, 1986, ‘“Shall I Die” Immortalized?’, Times Literary Supplement 31 January, pp. 123–4
Taylor Gary, 1988, ‘Poem by Shakespeare! Read All About It!’, New York Times Book Review, The, 26 June
Thomas, Steve, 2000, JonBenét. Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation (with Don Davis), rev. edn, New York
Ure Peter, 1951, ‘A Note on “Opinion” in Daniel, Greville, and Chapman’, Modern Language Review, 46: 331–8
Vickers, Brian, 1968, The Artistry of Shakespeare's Prose, London; repr. 1979
Vickers, Brian, 1971, ‘Shakespeare's Use of Rhetoric’, in K. Muir and S. Schoenbaum (eds.), A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies, Cambridge, pp. 83–98, 266–7 (repr. in Salmon and Burgess 1987, pp. 391–406)
Vickers, Brian., 1984, ‘Rhetoric and Feeling in Shakespeare's Sonnets’, in Shakespeare Today: Directions and Methods of Research, ed. K. Elam, Florence, pp. 53–98
Vickers, Brian, 1988, In Defence of Rhetoric, Oxford; rev. edn, 1997
Vickers, Brian, 1989, review of S. Wells and G. Taylor (eds.), William Shakespeare. The Complete Works and A Textual Companion, Review of English Studies, 40:402–11
Vickers Brian, 1993, ‘Shakespearian Consolations’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 82: 219–84
Vickers, Brian (ed.), 1996, Francis Bacon, Oxford
Vickers, Brian, 1999, English Renaissance Literary Criticism, Oxford
Vickers, Brian, 1996b, ‘Whose Thumbprints? A More Plausible Author for A Funeral Elegy’, Times Literary Supplement, 8 March, pp. 16–18
Vickers, Brian, 2002, Shakespeare, Co-author. A Historical Study of Five Collaborative Plays, Oxford
Möllendorf Peter, 1996, ‘Hendyiadyoin’, Historisches Wörterbuch der Rhetorik, Tübingen, vol. III, cols. 1344–50
Warren Michael J., 1977, ‘Repunctuation as Interpretation in Editions of Shakespeare’, English Literary Renaissance, 7: 155–69
Wells, Stanley and Taylor, Gary, with Jowett, John and Montgomery, William, 1987, William Shakespeare. A Textual Companion, Oxford
Wells Stanley, 1996a, ‘In Memory of Master William Peter. The Difficulties of Attributing A Funeral Elegy to Shakespeare’, Times Literary Supplement, 26 January, p. 28
Wells Stanley, 1996b, ‘Shakespeare and the Funeral Elegy’, Letter to the Editor, Times Literary Supplement, 16 February, p. 17
Wells Stanley, 1997, ‘A Funeral Elegy: Obstacles to Belief’, Shakespeare Studies 25: 186–91
Williams, C. B., 1970, Style and Vocabulary: Numerical Studies, London
Williams Franklin B. Jr, 1957, ‘An Initiation into Initials’, Studies in Bibliography, 9: 163–78
Wood, Thomas A., 1965, ‘John Ford: Three Studies’, PhD Diss., University of Birmingham
Wright George T., 1981, ‘Hendiadys and Hamlet’, Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 96: 168–93
Wright George T., 1986, ‘The Meter of “Shall I die?”’, Eidos. The International Prosody Bulletin, 3: 6, 11, 12
Wright, George T., 1988, Shakespeare's Metrical Art, Berkeley and Los Angeles

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 194 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 558 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 16th January 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.