Bloody Banquet, The - Revision history

WDGreen: /* Works Cited */

2024-03-05T14:45:03Z

Works Cited

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:45, 5 March 2024
Line 231:		Line 231:
	Gaines, Barry, and Grace Ioppolo, eds (2023), ''The Collected Works of Thomas Heywood'', vol. iii (Oxford: Oxford University Press).		Gaines, Barry, and Grace Ioppolo, eds (2023), ''The Collected Works of Thomas Heywood'', vol. iii (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

	Greatley-Hirsch, Brett, Matteo Pangallo, and Rachel White (2024), ‘“Text up his name”: The Authorship of the Manuscript Play ''Dick of ~~Devonshire’~~, Studies in Philology'' (121), ~~forthcoming~~.		Greatley-Hirsch, Brett, Matteo Pangallo, and Rachel White (2024), ‘“Text up his name”: The Authorship of the Manuscript Play ''Dick of Devonshire''’, ''Studies in Philology'' (121), 163-87.

	Green, William David (2020), ‘“Such Violent Hands”: The Theme of Cannibalism and the Implications of Authorship in the 1623 Text of ''Titus Andronicus''’, ''Exchanges'' (7), 182–99.		Green, William David (2020), ‘“Such Violent Hands”: The Theme of Cannibalism and the Implications of Authorship in the 1623 Text of ''Titus Andronicus''’, ''Exchanges'' (7), 182–99.

WDGreen: /* Works Cited */

2024-03-05T14:39:10Z

Works Cited

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 5 March 2024
Line 241:		Line 241:
	Jackson, MacDonald P. (1979), ''Studies in Attribution: Middleton and Shakespeare'' (Salzburg: Universität Salzberg.		Jackson, MacDonald P. (1979), ''Studies in Attribution: Middleton and Shakespeare'' (Salzburg: Universität Salzberg.

	Kimball, Claire, and Charlene V. Smith (2024), ‘''The Bloody Banquet'' in Performance’, in William David Green, Anna L. Hegland, and Sam Jermy, eds, ''The Theatrical Legacy of Thomas Middleton, 1624–2024'' (London: Routledge)~~. Forthcoming~~.		Kimball, Claire, and Charlene V. Smith (2024), ‘''The Bloody Banquet'' in Performance’, in William David Green, Anna L. Hegland, and Sam Jermy, eds, ''The Theatrical Legacy of Thomas Middleton, 1624–2024'' (London: Routledge), 169-84.

	Lake, David J. (1975), ''The Canon of Thomas Middleton’s Plays: Internal Evidence for the Major Problems of Authorship'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).		Lake, David J. (1975), ''The Canon of Thomas Middleton’s Plays: Internal Evidence for the Major Problems of Authorship'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

WDGreen: /* Theatrical provenance (internal) */

2024-03-05T14:38:00Z

Theatrical provenance (internal)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:38, 5 March 2024
Line 108:		Line 108:
	Interestingly, in 1640 two playwrights associated with Beeston, Richard Brome and Thomas Nabbes, separately complained about the abridgement of their texts for performance (Bentley 1971: 236-7). This indicates an apparent preference for shorter plays on the part of Beeston, and Beeston’s willingness to commission cuts to pre-existing texts might explain further why the surviving version of ''The Bloody Banquet'' is shorter than any other play by Dekker or Middleton (except, in Middleton’s case, ''The Nice Valour'' (1622), although this work was published more than two decades after its original performances, and is itself likely a text that has undergone adaptation).		Interestingly, in 1640 two playwrights associated with Beeston, Richard Brome and Thomas Nabbes, separately complained about the abridgement of their texts for performance (Bentley 1971: 236-7). This indicates an apparent preference for shorter plays on the part of Beeston, and Beeston’s willingness to commission cuts to pre-existing texts might explain further why the surviving version of ''The Bloody Banquet'' is shorter than any other play by Dekker or Middleton (except, in Middleton’s case, ''The Nice Valour'' (1622), although this work was published more than two decades after its original performances, and is itself likely a text that has undergone adaptation).

	It is worth noting here that the quarto text’s use of act/scene divisions that are clumsily imposed upon the text after 5.1.110 (creating a false scene break into 5.1 and a non-existent ‘5.2’; see below) suggests that the copy of the play that lies behind the quarto may have had its act/scene divisions imposed onto it sometime after its original performance. Indeed, if the play was originally performed at an outdoor theatre (like the Red Bull) it would not have used act divisions (see Taylor 1993), but these would have been added into the play when it transferred to an indoor theatre (the Cockpit). The problematic split in the middle of 5.1 could be evidence of later act/scene divisions added into the text as part of a textual restructuring undertaken following the larger process of adaptation. Claire Kimball and Charlene V. Smith have pointed out that the encounter between Tymethes and the Young Queen in 4.3 benefits from the application of pitch darkness that would have been made possible by performance in an indoor playhouse (Kimball and Smith 2024: ~~forthcoming~~), in similar vein to a ‘dark scene’ in Webster’s Blackfriars play ''The Duchess of Malfi'' (1614); if so, it might indicate that something in the dramaturgy of this scene might also have been altered by the play’s adapter, if the play were transported from an outdoor playhouse to the indoor Cockpit.		It is worth noting here that the quarto text’s use of act/scene divisions that are clumsily imposed upon the text after 5.1.110 (creating a false scene break into 5.1 and a non-existent ‘5.2’; see below) suggests that the copy of the play that lies behind the quarto may have had its act/scene divisions imposed onto it sometime after its original performance. Indeed, if the play was originally performed at an outdoor theatre (like the Red Bull) it would not have used act divisions (see Taylor 1993), but these would have been added into the play when it transferred to an indoor theatre (the Cockpit). The problematic split in the middle of 5.1 could be evidence of later act/scene divisions added into the text as part of a textual restructuring undertaken following the larger process of adaptation. Claire Kimball and Charlene V. Smith have pointed out that the encounter between Tymethes and the Young Queen in 4.3 benefits from the application of pitch darkness that would have been made possible by performance in an indoor playhouse (Kimball and Smith 2024: 177-8), in similar vein to a ‘dark scene’ in Webster’s Blackfriars play ''The Duchess of Malfi'' (1614); if so, it might indicate that something in the dramaturgy of this scene might also have been altered by the play’s adapter, if the play were transported from an outdoor playhouse to the indoor Cockpit.

	=== Metrical evidence ===		=== Metrical evidence ===

BGreatley-Hirsch at 17:12, 6 April 2023

2023-04-06T17:12:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:12, 6 April 2023
Line 2:		Line 2:
	The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.		The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.

	[[File:Bloodiebanquettr00tdac0013.jpg\|alt=Title page of 1639 Quarto.\|thumb\|[https://archive.org/details/bloodiebanquettr00tdac/page/n11/mode/2up ~~Title page of 1639 Quarto~~]~~. Barton Collection, Boston Public Library (G.3810.11).~~]] In Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino’s companion to the 2007 ''Collected Works of Middleton'' (colloquially known as ''The Oxford Middleton''), a date of 1608–9 is given (2007a: 364). Stylistic evidence is offered showing that versification and verbal parallels in the shares of both authors indicate a date of composition at the end of the first decade of the seventeenth century. As pointed out elsewhere by Taylor, whereas Dekker’s rate of rhymed lines as proportionate to lines of verse follows no clear pattern, Middleton’s rate began clearly dropping after the composition of ''A Mad World, My Masters'' in 1605: the rate in the Middleton scenes of ''The Bloody Banquet'' (21%) places that play within Middleton’s 1605–11 range (2001: 4–5). Their other evidence for dating is also taken from Taylor’s analysis, specifically: references to court drunkenness (2.1.37–41), which would have been particularly topical in light of the Jacobean court’s reputation for drunkenness, particularly after 1606 (2001: 8); references to a dearth in harvests (2.1.43–6; 2.2.2–10), which would be topical in 1608-9 due to the high corn prices of those years leading to rioting in England (2001: 8–9); and an apparent reference to pirates (2.1.70–3), which would have been particularly topical from 1609 onward, following King James I’s ‘Proclamation against Pirats’ of 8 January 1609 (2001: 10). From this convergence of evidence, 1608-9 arises as the most plausible date range for the ''Oxford Middleton'' editors.		[[File:Bloodiebanquettr00tdac0013.jpg\|alt=Title page of 1639 Quarto.\|thumb\|Title page of the 1639 Quarto. Barton Collection, Boston Public Library (G.3810.11). [https://archive.org/details/bloodiebanquettr00tdac/page/n11/mode/2up Internet Archive]]] In Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino’s companion to the 2007 ''Collected Works of Middleton'' (colloquially known as ''The Oxford Middleton''), a date of 1608–9 is given (2007a: 364). Stylistic evidence is offered showing that versification and verbal parallels in the shares of both authors indicate a date of composition at the end of the first decade of the seventeenth century. As pointed out elsewhere by Taylor, whereas Dekker’s rate of rhymed lines as proportionate to lines of verse follows no clear pattern, Middleton’s rate began clearly dropping after the composition of ''A Mad World, My Masters'' in 1605: the rate in the Middleton scenes of ''The Bloody Banquet'' (21%) places that play within Middleton’s 1605–11 range (2001: 4–5). Their other evidence for dating is also taken from Taylor’s analysis, specifically: references to court drunkenness (2.1.37–41), which would have been particularly topical in light of the Jacobean court’s reputation for drunkenness, particularly after 1606 (2001: 8); references to a dearth in harvests (2.1.43–6; 2.2.2–10), which would be topical in 1608-9 due to the high corn prices of those years leading to rioting in England (2001: 8–9); and an apparent reference to pirates (2.1.70–3), which would have been particularly topical from 1609 onward, following King James I’s ‘Proclamation against Pirats’ of 8 January 1609 (2001: 10). From this convergence of evidence, 1608-9 arises as the most plausible date range for the ''Oxford Middleton'' editors.

	In his entry for ''The Bloody Banquet'' in ''British Drama, 1533-1642: A Catalogue'' (#1624), Martin Wiggins (in association with Catherine Richardson) pushes this slightly later, to 1610, observing that 1608–9 is ‘inherently less plausible owing to theatre closures in those years’. Wiggins notes that the reference to Lapyrus as the ‘devil in the vault’ (2.2.36) associates him with a description often applied to Guy Fawkes, suggesting that the play must at the very least post-date the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot in November 1605, but he also points out that there were a cluster of such allusions in 1610-11, including, perhaps most relevantly, in Thomas Dekker and Thomas Middleton’s ''The Roaring Girl'' (1611) and Dekker’s ''If This Be Not a Good Play, The Devil Is In It'' (1611).		In his entry for ''The Bloody Banquet'' in ''British Drama, 1533-1642: A Catalogue'' (#1624), Martin Wiggins (in association with Catherine Richardson) pushes this slightly later, to 1610, observing that 1608–9 is ‘inherently less plausible owing to theatre closures in those years’. Wiggins notes that the reference to Lapyrus as the ‘devil in the vault’ (2.2.36) associates him with a description often applied to Guy Fawkes, suggesting that the play must at the very least post-date the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot in November 1605, but he also points out that there were a cluster of such allusions in 1610-11, including, perhaps most relevantly, in Thomas Dekker and Thomas Middleton’s ''The Roaring Girl'' (1611) and Dekker’s ''If This Be Not a Good Play, The Devil Is In It'' (1611).

BGreatley-Hirsch at 17:05, 6 April 2023

2023-04-06T17:05:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 6 April 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Bloodiebanquettr00tdac0013.jpg\|alt=Title page of 1639 Quarto.\|thumb\|[https://archive.org/details/bloodiebanquettr00tdac/page/n11/mode/2up Title page of 1639 Quarto]. Barton Collection, Boston Public Library (G.3810.11).]]

	== Year (composition) ==		== Year (composition) ==
	The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.		The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.

	In Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino’s companion to the 2007 ''Collected Works of Middleton'' (colloquially known as ''The Oxford Middleton''), a date of 1608–9 is given (2007a: 364). Stylistic evidence is offered showing that versification and verbal parallels in the shares of both authors indicate a date of composition at the end of the first decade of the seventeenth century. As pointed out elsewhere by Taylor, whereas Dekker’s rate of rhymed lines as proportionate to lines of verse follows no clear pattern, Middleton’s rate began clearly dropping after the composition of ''A Mad World, My Masters'' in 1605: the rate in the Middleton scenes of ''The Bloody Banquet'' (21%) places that play within Middleton’s 1605–11 range (2001: 4–5). Their other evidence for dating is also taken from Taylor’s analysis, specifically: references to court drunkenness (2.1.37–41), which would have been particularly topical in light of the Jacobean court’s reputation for drunkenness, particularly after 1606 (2001: 8); references to a dearth in harvests (2.1.43–6; 2.2.2–10), which would be topical in 1608-9 due to the high corn prices of those years leading to rioting in England (2001: 8–9); and an apparent reference to pirates (2.1.70–3), which would have been particularly topical from 1609 onward, following King James I’s ‘Proclamation against Pirats’ of 8 January 1609 (2001: 10). From this convergence of evidence, 1608-9 arises as the most plausible date range for the ''Oxford Middleton'' editors.		[[File:Bloodiebanquettr00tdac0013.jpg\|alt=Title page of 1639 Quarto.\|thumb\|[https://archive.org/details/bloodiebanquettr00tdac/page/n11/mode/2up Title page of 1639 Quarto]. Barton Collection, Boston Public Library (G.3810.11).]] In Gary Taylor and John Lavagnino’s companion to the 2007 ''Collected Works of Middleton'' (colloquially known as ''The Oxford Middleton''), a date of 1608–9 is given (2007a: 364). Stylistic evidence is offered showing that versification and verbal parallels in the shares of both authors indicate a date of composition at the end of the first decade of the seventeenth century. As pointed out elsewhere by Taylor, whereas Dekker’s rate of rhymed lines as proportionate to lines of verse follows no clear pattern, Middleton’s rate began clearly dropping after the composition of ''A Mad World, My Masters'' in 1605: the rate in the Middleton scenes of ''The Bloody Banquet'' (21%) places that play within Middleton’s 1605–11 range (2001: 4–5). Their other evidence for dating is also taken from Taylor’s analysis, specifically: references to court drunkenness (2.1.37–41), which would have been particularly topical in light of the Jacobean court’s reputation for drunkenness, particularly after 1606 (2001: 8); references to a dearth in harvests (2.1.43–6; 2.2.2–10), which would be topical in 1608-9 due to the high corn prices of those years leading to rioting in England (2001: 8–9); and an apparent reference to pirates (2.1.70–3), which would have been particularly topical from 1609 onward, following King James I’s ‘Proclamation against Pirats’ of 8 January 1609 (2001: 10). From this convergence of evidence, 1608-9 arises as the most plausible date range for the ''Oxford Middleton'' editors.

	In his entry for ''The Bloody Banquet'' in ''British Drama, 1533-1642: A Catalogue'' (#1624), Martin Wiggins (in association with Catherine Richardson) pushes this slightly later, to 1610, observing that 1608–9 is ‘inherently less plausible owing to theatre closures in those years’. Wiggins notes that the reference to Lapyrus as the ‘devil in the vault’ (2.2.36) associates him with a description often applied to Guy Fawkes, suggesting that the play must at the very least post-date the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot in November 1605, but he also points out that there were a cluster of such allusions in 1610-11, including, perhaps most relevantly, in Thomas Dekker and Thomas Middleton’s ''The Roaring Girl'' (1611) and Dekker’s ''If This Be Not a Good Play, The Devil Is In It'' (1611).		In his entry for ''The Bloody Banquet'' in ''British Drama, 1533-1642: A Catalogue'' (#1624), Martin Wiggins (in association with Catherine Richardson) pushes this slightly later, to 1610, observing that 1608–9 is ‘inherently less plausible owing to theatre closures in those years’. Wiggins notes that the reference to Lapyrus as the ‘devil in the vault’ (2.2.36) associates him with a description often applied to Guy Fawkes, suggesting that the play must at the very least post-date the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot in November 1605, but he also points out that there were a cluster of such allusions in 1610-11, including, perhaps most relevantly, in Thomas Dekker and Thomas Middleton’s ''The Roaring Girl'' (1611) and Dekker’s ''If This Be Not a Good Play, The Devil Is In It'' (1611).

BGreatley-Hirsch at 17:05, 6 April 2023

2023-04-06T17:05:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:05, 6 April 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[File:Bloodiebanquettr00tdac0013.jpg\|alt=Title page of 1639 Quarto.\|thumb\|[https://archive.org/details/bloodiebanquettr00tdac/page/n11/mode/2up Title page of 1639 Quarto]. Barton Collection, Boston Public Library (G.3810.11).]]

	== Year (composition) ==		== Year (composition) ==
	The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.		The date of composition remains uncertain, but probably falls within the range 1608-10.

BGreatley-Hirsch: Added Green's entry

2023-04-06T14:46:07Z

Added Green's entry

Show changes

BGreatley-Hirsch at 14:23, 6 April 2023

2023-04-06T14:23:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:23, 6 April 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{Entry}}~~		== Year (composition) ==
			This is the year.

			== Year (first printed) ==

			== Reprints (until 1700) ==

			== Authors (title-page ascription, including reprints) ==

			== Authors proposed (attribution scholarship) ==

			== Genre ==

			== Sources ==

			== Auspices ==

			<br />

			== External Documentary Evidence ==

			=== Payments ===
			=== Stationers’ Register ===
			=== Title-page ascription(s) ===
			=== Biographical evidence (external) ===
			=== Theatrical provenance (external) ===
			=== Allusions ===
			=== Print and MS attributions ===

			<br />

			== Internal Evidence ==

			=== Palaeographical evidence ===
			=== Biographical evidence (internal) ===
			=== Theatrical provenance (internal) ===
			=== Metrical evidence ===
			=== Chronological evidence ===
			=== Vocabulary ===
			=== Oaths and interjections ===
			=== Linguistic evidence ===
			=== Stage directions ===
			=== Verbal parallels ===
			=== Image clusters ===

			<br />

			== Critical Debate ==

			== Critical Commentary ==

			== Further Thoughts ==

			== Works Cited ==

	[[category:1609]]		[[category:1609]]

BGreatley-Hirsch at 14:18, 6 April 2023

2023-04-06T14:18:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:18, 6 April 2023
Line 4:		Line 4:
	[[category:Middleton,_Thomas]]		[[category:Middleton,_Thomas]]
	[[category:Dekker,_Thomas]]		[[category:Dekker,_Thomas]]


			----

			Page created and maintained by William David Green; updated on 24 March 2023.

			[[Category:Green, William David]]

RLoughnane at 11:35, 4 November 2021

2021-11-04T11:35:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:35, 4 November 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Entry}}		{{Entry}}

	[[category:~~1610~~]]		[[category:1609]]
	[[category:Middleton,_Thomas]]		[[category:Middleton,_Thomas]]
	[[category:Dekker,_Thomas]]		[[category:Dekker,_Thomas]]