1954
DOI: 10.2307/3718861
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Shakespeare's "Lost Source-Plays"

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Though a supporter of Shakespeare as a reviser, E. A. J. Honigmann rejected the revisionist theory for A Shrew/The Shrew, claiming that 'A Shrew was composed after The Shrew, when the text of The Shrew was not available'. 28 In their editions, Hibbard (1968), Morris (1981), and Oliver (1982) reaffirm Alexander's 'memorial reconstruction' theory. Thompson (1984), even though she admits the Elizabethans' non-discrimination between the two plays, claims that 'A Shrew is of no direct use in establishing an authoritative text for The Shrew'.…”
Section: Intertexts: a Shrew And The Shrewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Though a supporter of Shakespeare as a reviser, E. A. J. Honigmann rejected the revisionist theory for A Shrew/The Shrew, claiming that 'A Shrew was composed after The Shrew, when the text of The Shrew was not available'. 28 In their editions, Hibbard (1968), Morris (1981), and Oliver (1982) reaffirm Alexander's 'memorial reconstruction' theory. Thompson (1984), even though she admits the Elizabethans' non-discrimination between the two plays, claims that 'A Shrew is of no direct use in establishing an authoritative text for The Shrew'.…”
Section: Intertexts: a Shrew And The Shrewmentioning
confidence: 99%