The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.0245 Monday, 7 February 2005
Date: Friday, 4 Feb 2005 19:10:38 -0500
Subject: 16.0235 Date of King John
Comment: Re: SHK 16.0235 Date of King John
> Beaurline [p.3] points out that although it
> had not yet been printed Frances Meres in 1598 >mentioned *King John*
as one of Shakespeare's >tragedies.
Wow. I thought to check to see if Meres had mentioned it, then decided
not to. I figured that if he'd mentioned it, no one would claim it
hadn't been performed! (Yes, I'm aware that it's possible Meres would
have known an unperformed, unpublished play of Shakespeare's, but not
very likely, I wouldn't think.
To comment on another post: I don't see why Richard II might have
replaced King John. Why wouldn't King John be performed, too?
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.