Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
<p>Abstract:</p><p>In the first half of the twentieth century, five scholars working in four different languages ascribed the anonymous 1592 tragedy <i>Arden of Faversham</i> to Thomas Kyd. Since 1963, however, attribution studies of <i>Arden</i> have been dominated by the influence of MacDonald P. Jackson, who has repeatedly rejected Kyd while attributing sections of the play to William Shakespeare. Thanks to Jackson, the play was included in <i>The New Oxford Shakespeare</i>, and a new search for potential coauthors has nominated a wide range of candidates. <i>The New Oxford Shakespeare</i>'s general editor, Gary Taylor, has published two essays claiming Thomas Watson as coauthor of <i>Arden</i>, one based on stylometric evidence and another arguing from literary and theatrical history. In this essay, I evaluate the methods Taylor has used to reach this conclusion and reconsider the merits of the evidence he has deployed, arguing against Watson's authorship of <i>Arden</i> and offering a renewed case for viewing Kyd as the play's author.</p>
Studies in Philology – University of North Carolina Press
Published: Mar 31, 2021
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.