|
The
De Vere Society Dating Project
REPORT ON
THE DATING PROJECT
Towards
the end of the last century / millennium (1998, to be exact) the
Society gave itself the Dating Project. The orthodox
chronology of the plays suggests that Shakespeare wrote them, two
a year, between about 1592 and 1612. There is barely any evidence
for this oft-repeated assertion; indeed one orthodox editor (Signet
Edition) has admitted that the conventional chronology "is
as much indebted to informed guesswork and sensitivity [whatever
that is, in this context!] as it is to fact". But this "scholarly
consensus" (there have been a few dissidents, it should be
noted) however feebly based, causes two problems for Oxfordians:
it is the only chronology known to the general public, and it suggests
that at least eight of the plays "must have been" written
after Oxfords death in 1604.
The
Dating Projects objectives are, first, to establish whether
earlier dates are possible for each of the plays; secondly, if the
evidence justifies it, to challenge the conventional dating scheme;
and thirdly, to examine the effect an earlier dating of the plays
might have on the orthodox view of Elizabethan and Jacobean stage-history,
which includes the question of who influenced whom. Putting the
matter rather simplistically, it would obviously strengthen the
Oxfordian case, if it were rationally shown that the plays might
have been written ten or fifteen years earlier than is commonly
supposed; but the aim is not to prove that Oxford wrote the plays!
Members
of the Society were invited to deal with one or more of the plays,
so that the burden of tackling all thirty-six plays in the First
Folio could be spread.
There
was a ready and encouraging response, and papers have been written
for twenty-eight of them; work on four of the remainder has been
promised, but four plays are still in need of a writer to investigate
their possible dating I & 2 Henry IV, Cymbeline and Troilus
and Cressida. Competent volunteers are invited.
For
each play, the investigator must look at the evidence which suggests
when the play might have been first written (it is assumed that,
for most plays, revision and adaptation took place subsequently).
There are no dated manuscripts, so tangible evidence for the first
existence of a play includes, where known:
- date
of first recorded performance (perhaps under another title)
- date
of first registration for publishing
- date
of first printing
- date
when presumed sources were first available to the playwright
- internal:
references in the play to contemporary persons and events; references
to, and quotations from, already existing documents
- External:
reference to a Shakespearean play or its performance by a contemporary
writer; use of the plays text by contemporary writers
So
this is the format for investigation of each play:
- publication
date
- performance
date
- sources
- orthodox
date of writing (by Shakespeare of Stratford)
- internal
orthodox evidence
- external
orthodox evidence
- Oxfordian
date of writing
- internal
Oxfordian evidence
- external
Oxfordian evidence
- conclusion
- bibliography
The
editorial task, with a view to future publication of this evidence,
was first undertaken by Arthur Challinor (who had issued the initial
challenge on dating), then by Christopher Dams (who had persuaded
the Society to accept that challenge) and Elizabeth Winder. As a
result, of the twenty-eight plays that have been investigated, fifteen
have been committed to disc and had a first editing; but the other
thirteen exist only on paper (and eight have not been investigated
yet!). Of those on disc, seven have been newly worked over by the
current editors. With so many different writers involved, the editorial
task includes:
- ensuring
the standard format
- establishing
standard terminology and typography
- checking
facts, where possible
- ensuring
consistent and compatible information and interpretation
- keeping
the focus on evidence for dating, rather than for authorship
The
job will take several more years!
As
well as the essays on individual plays, the projected publication
will include an Introduction to the dating question. This will begin
by defining what might be meant by the date of a play
the date of the first manuscript, the date of the first performance,
or perhaps the date of the first publication. There will be some
discussion about the paucity of the evidence for deciding on any
one of these dates, and a table summarising the evidence that is
available, from Henslowes diary to Meres and more. The lack
of agreement among scholars from Malone to the present day inevitably
needs some mention. Finally, there will be a humble introduction
to us and our genuine re-examination of the dates of the plays.
After
individual investigators chapters on the Comedies, there will
be more tabulated information, presenting a selection of scholars
proposed dates. This should illustrate clearly the dissension that
exists among them, as well as indicating that the dates are not
settled by any means. A further set of information will separate
the Histories and the Tragedies, this time focussing on the dates
of possible early versions of plays, and the ideas of the revisionists.
Naturally, at the end of the book, after the Tragedies, our conclusions
will be summarised. The date range that orthodox scholars suggest
will be set next to the dates Oxfordians have suggested and argued
for in their chapters.
The
early results, which Christopher Dams and Arthur Challinor presented
to us several years ago, did not prove that Oxford wrote
the plays, and (we repeat) this proposed book is not aiming to achieve
that. But by researching the plays and their background and by keeping
to documentary evidence as much as possible we may be able to contribute
to discussion about the plays origins in a valid and enlightening
way.
Eddi
Jolly and Philip Johnson (editors of the Dating project)
Copyright
2007 the De Vere Society
|
 |