This work set out to discover how an Elizabethan would approach a tragedy by Marlowe, Tourneur, Webster or Middleton. At the time it was written, T. S. Eliot's studies of Elizabethan drama were illuminating the issue; today, conventions are generally recognised and utilised in the theatrical revival which has been so noticeable since the modern stage regained a form nearer to the Elizabethan.

In recent years, scholarship has been concerned largely with the forms of various earlier stages, and the relation of plays to other dramatic rituals, entertainments and masques. I find my own concern with performance has steadily grown. By comparison, work on the conventions of language has been sparse, yet a literary approach, such as is attempted here, is requisite, since form inheres in the text itself. We start here.

Shakespeare is so flexible that he can fit almost any stage; in performance he is always in practice adapted to current conventions. Whilst I have taken examples from his plays in Part I, for the purpose of defining conventions, the more limited perspectives give sharper focus. We tend to think Shakespeare our contemporary; we know Tourneur is not.

A new chapter, on performance, links this book with others that followed, and indicates the part played by some important figures not given separate consideration — Marston, Chapman, Ford.