Dryden, John. Of Dramatic Poesy: An Essay. London, 1668. Wing D2327.Google Scholar

Gosson, Stephen. Plays Confuted in Five Actions. London, 1589. STC 12095.Google Scholar

Greene, Robert. Menaphon. London, 1599. STC 12272.Google Scholar

Oldham, John. The Works. London, 1684. Wing O225.Google Scholar

Peele, George. A Farewell. London, 1589. STC 19537.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Poems. London, 1640. STC 22344.Google Scholar

Brome, Richard. Richard Brome Online. Cave, Richard Allen (gen. ed.). Sheffield: HRI Online. 2010–.Google Scholar

Chapman, George. The Conspiracy and Tragedy of Byron. Ed. Margeson, John. Manchester University Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Chapman, George. The Widow's Tears. Ed. Yamada, Akihiro. London: Methuen, 1975.Google Scholar

Clare, Janet, ed. Drama of the English Republic, 1649–60. Manchester University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Day, John. The Works of John Day. Ed. Bullen, A. H.. Rev. Jeffs, Robin. London: Holland Press, 1963.Google Scholar

Dekker, Thomas, and Middleton, Thomas. 1 The Honest Whore. Ed. Daalder, Joost. Digital Renaissance Editions, 2015.Google Scholar

Fletcher, John. The Island Princess. Ed. McManus, Clare. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2013.Google Scholar

Fletcher, John. The Wild-Goose Chase. Ed. Tomlinson, Sophie. In: Three Seventeenth-Century Plays on Women and Performance. Ed. Chalmers, Hero, Sanders, Julie, and Tomlinson, Sophie. Manchester University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

Fraser, Russell A., and Rabkin, Norman, eds. Drama of the English Renaissance. 2 vols. New York: Macmillan, 1976.Google Scholar

Greg, W. W., ed. Henslowe Papers. London: A. H. Bullen, 1907.Google Scholar

Henslowe, Philip. Henslowe's Diary. Ed. Greg, W. W.. 2 vols. London: A. H. Bullen, 1904 and 1908.Google Scholar

Heywood, Thomas. A Woman Killed with Kindness. Ed. van Fossen, R. W.. London: Methuen, 1961.Google Scholar

Howard, Edward. The Change of Crowns. Ed. Boas, F. S.. Oxford University Press [for The Royal Society of Literature], 1949.Google Scholar

Jonson, Ben. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Ben Jonson. Bevington, David, Butler, Martin, and Donaldson, Ian (gen. eds.). 7 vols. Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Jonson, Ben. King Leir. Ed. Richie, Donald M.. New York: Garland, 1991.Google Scholar

Jonson, Ben. King Leir. Ed. Stern, Tiffany. London: Nick Hern, 2003.Google Scholar

Kyd, Thomas. Soliman and Perseda. Ed. Erne, Lukas. Manchester University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Lodge, Thomas. The Wounds of Civil War. Ed. Houppert, Joseph W.. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1969.Google Scholar

Marlowe, Christopher. Dido, Queen of Carthage and The Massacre at Paris. Ed. Oliver, H. J.. London: Methuen, 1968.Google Scholar

Marlowe, Christopher. Edward the Second. Ed. Forker, Charles R.. Manchester University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Marlowe, Christopher. [1 and 2] Tamburlaine the Great. Ed. Cunningham, J. S.. Manchester University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Marston, John. Antonio and Mellida. Ed. Gair, W. Reavley. Manchester University Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Marston, John. The Dutch Courtesan. Ed. Crane, David. London: A&C Black, 1997.Google Scholar

Marston, John. The Works of John Marston. Ed. Bullen, A. H.. 3 vols. London: Nimmo, 1887.Google Scholar

Middleton, Thomas. Thomas Middleton: The Collected Works. Taylor, Gary and Lavagnino, John (gen. eds.). Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Morris, E. C., ed. ‘The Spanish Gipsie’ and ‘All's Lost by Lust’. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1908.Google Scholar

Peele, George. The Battle of Alcazar. In: The Stukeley Plays. Ed. Edelman, Charles. Manchester University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

Puttenham, George. The Art of English Poesy. Ed. Whigham, Frank and Rebhorn, Wayne A.. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Rowley, William. ‘All's Lost by Lust’ and ‘A Shoemaker, a Gentleman’. Ed. Stork, C. W.. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1910.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works. Ed. Wells, Stanley and Taylor, Gary. 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. The First Folio of Shakespeare: The Norton Facsimile. Ed. Hinman, Charlton. New York: W. W. Norton, 1968.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet: The Texts of 1603 and 1623. Ed. Thompson, Ann and Taylor, Neil. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2006.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Henry the Fourth, Part Two. Ed. Bate, Jonathan and Rasmussen, Eric. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Henry the Fourth, Part Two. Ed. Bevington, David. Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Henry the Fourth, Part Two. Ed. Gaby, Rosemary. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Henry the Fourth, Part Two. Ed. Kastan, David Scott. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2002.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. Henry the Fourth, Part Two. Ed. Weil, Herbert and Weil, Judith. Cambridge University Press, 1997; rev. edn 2007.Google Scholar

Shakespeare, William. The Works of Shakespear in Six Volumes. Ed. Pope, Alexander. 6 vols. London, 1723–5.Google Scholar

Sharpham, Edward. A Critical Old Spelling Edition of the Works of Edward Sharpham. Ed. Petter, Christopher Gordon. New York: Garland, 1986.Google Scholar

DEEP: Database of Early English Playbooks. Ed. Farmer, Alan B. and Lesser, Zachary. 2007–.Google Scholar

Digital Renaissance Editions [DRE]. Greatley-Hirsch, Brett (co-ord. ed.). 2015–.Google Scholar

Early English Books Online [EEBO]. Chadwyck-Healey (ProQuest LLC). 2001–.Google Scholar

Intelligent Archive. Dev. Craig, Hugh, Whipp, R., Ralston, Michael, and Elliott, Jack. Centre for Literary and Linguistic Computing, University of Newcastle. 2007–.Google Scholar

Literature Online [LION]. Chadwyck-Healey (ProQuest LLC). 1998–.Google Scholar

Lost Plays Database. Ed. Knutson, Roslyn L., McInnis, David, and Steggle, Matthew. 2009–.Google Scholar

R. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 1994–.Google Scholar

SPSS [= IBM SPSS Statistics]. IBM Corporation. 1968–.Google Scholar

VARD. Baron, Dev. Alistair. Lancaster University. 2006–.Google Scholar

Abrams, Richard. ‘“Exercise in this Kind”: Shakespeare and the “Funeral Elegy” for William Peter’. Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 141–70.Google Scholar

Adamson, Sylvia. ‘Understanding Shakespeare's Grammar: Studies in Small Words’. In: Reading Shakespeare's Dramatic Language: A Guide. Ed. Adamson, Sylvia, Hunter, Lynette, Magnusson, Lynne, Thompson, Anne, and Wales, Katie. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2001. 210–36.Google Scholar

Alt, Mick. Exploring Hyperspace: A Non-Mathematical Explanation of Multivariate Analysis. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill, 1990.Google Scholar

Ambegaokar, Vinay. Reasoning about Luck: Probability and Its Uses in Physics. Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar

Anderson, Thomas, and Crossley, Scott. ‘“Rue with a Difference”: A Computational Stylistic Analysis of the Rhetoric of Suicide in Hamlet’. In: Stylistics and Shakespeare's Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches. Ed. Ravassat, Mireille and Culpeper, Jonathan. London: Continuum, 2011. 192–214.Google Scholar

Antonia, Alexis, Craig, Hugh, and Elliott, Jack. ‘Language Chunking, Data Sparseness, and the Value of a Long Marker List’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 29.2 (2014): 147–63.Google Scholar

Archer, Dawn, and Bousfield, Derek. ‘“See Better, Lear?” See Lear Better! A Corpus-Based Pragma-Stylistic Investigation of Shakespeare's King Lear’. In: Language and Style. Ed. McIntyre, Dan and Busse, Beatrix. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2010. 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Argamon, Shlomo. ‘Interpreting Burrows's Delta: Geometric and Probabilistic Foundations’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 23.2 (2008): 131–47.Google Scholar

Ascari, Maurizio. ‘The Dangers of Distant Reading: Reassessing Moretti's Approach to Literary Genres’. Genre 47.1 (2014): 1–19.Google Scholar

Astington, John H. Actors and Acting in Shakespeare's Time: The Art of Stage Playing. Cambridge University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barber, Charles. Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barish, Jonas A. Ben Jonson and the Language of Prose Comedy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960.Google Scholar

Barish, Jonas A. ‘Hal, Falstaff, Henry V, and Prose’. Connotations 2.3 (1992): 263–8.Google Scholar

Baron, Alistair, Rayson, Paul, and Archer, Dawn. ‘Word Frequency and Key Word Statistics in Historical Corpus Linguistics’. Anglistik 20.1 (2009): 41–67.Google Scholar

Bennett, Tony. ‘Counting and Seeing the Social Action of Literary Form: Franco Moretti and the Sociology of Literature’. Cultural Sociology 3.2 (2009): 277–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Beugnet, Frédéric, Porphyre, Thibaud, Sabatier, Paul, and Chalvet-Monfray, Karine. ‘Use of a Mathematical Model to Study the Dynamics of Ctenocephalides Felis Populations in the Home Environment and the Impact of Various Control Measures’. Parasite 11.4 (2004): 387–99.Google Scholar

Bevington, David. Action is Eloquence: Shakespeare's Language of Gesture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bevis, Richard W. English Drama: Restoration and Eighteenth Century, 1660–1789. London: Longman, 1988.Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge University Press, 1988.Google Scholar

Bickley, Pamela, and Stevens, Jenny. Shakespeare and Early Modern Drama: Text and Performance. London: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2016.Google Scholar

Binongo, José Nilo G., and Smith, M. W. A.. ‘The Application of Principal Component Analysis to Stylometry’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 14.4 (1999): 445–65.Google Scholar

Blake, N. F. Shakespeare's Language: An Introduction. London: Macmillan, 1983.Google Scholar

Bly, Mary. Queer Virgins and Virgin Queans on the Early Modern Stage. Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar

Booth, Stephen. ‘A Long, Dull Poem by William Shakespeare’. Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 229–37.Google Scholar

Borish, M. E. ‘John Day's Humour Out of Breath’. Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature 16 (1934): 1–11.Google Scholar

Bosonnet, Felix. The Function of Stage Properties in Christopher Marlowe's Plays. Bern: Francke Verlag, 1978.Google Scholar

Boyd, Brian. ‘Getting It All Wrong: The Proponents of Theory and Cultural Critique Could Learn a Thing or Two from Bioculture’. The American Scholar 1 Sept. 2006.Google Scholar

Boyd, Ryan L. and Pennebaker, James W.. ‘Did Shakespeare Write Double Falsehood? Identifying Individuals by Creating Psychological Signatures with Text Analysis’. Psychological Science 26.5 (2015): 570–82.Google Scholar

Bradley, A. C. Shakespearean Tragedy. London: Macmillan, 1904.Google Scholar

Breiman, Leo. ‘Random Forests’. Machine Learning 45.1 (2001): 5–32.Google Scholar

Brook, G. L. The Language of Shakespeare. London: André Deutsch, 1976.Google Scholar

Brown, Bill. ‘Thing Theory’. Critical Inquiry 28.1 (2001): 1–22.Google Scholar

Brown, Roger, and Gilman, Albert. ‘The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity’. In: Style in Language. Ed. Sebeok, Thomas A.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960. 253–76.Google Scholar

Bruster, Douglas. ‘Christopher Marlowe and the Verse/Prose Bilingual System’. Marlowe Studies 1 (2011): 141–65.Google Scholar

Bruster, Douglas. ‘The Dramatic Life of Objects in the Early Modern English Theater’. In: Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama. Ed. Harris, Jonathan Gil and Korda, Natasha. Cambridge University Press, 2002. 67–96.Google Scholar

Bruster, Douglas. ‘The Politics of Shakespeare's Prose’. In: Rematerializing Shakespeare: Authority and Representation on the Early Modern English Stage. Ed. Reynolds, Bryan and West, William N.. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. 95–114.Google Scholar

Bruster, Douglas. Shakespeare and the Question of Culture: Early Modern Literature and the Cultural Turn. New York: Palgrave, 2003.Google Scholar

Bruster, Douglas, and Smith, Geneviève. ‘A New Chronology for Shakespeare's Plays’. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 31.2 (2016): 301–20.Google Scholar

Burlinson, Christopher. ‘Money and Consumerism’. In: Ben Jonson in Context. Ed. Sanders, Julie. Cambridge University Press, 2010. 281–8.Google Scholar

Burns, Michael. ‘Why No Henry VII? (With a Postscript on Malvolio's Revenge)’. In: Manner and Meaning in Shakespeare: Stratford Papers 1965–67. Ed. Jackson, B. A. W.. Hamilton: McMaster University Library Press, 1969. 208–31.Google Scholar

Burrows, John. Computation into Criticism: A Study of Jane Austen and an Experiment in Method. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.Google Scholar

Burrows, John. ‘Delta: A Measure of Stylistic Difference and a Guide to Likely Authorship’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17.3 (2002): 267–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Burrows, John. Jane Austen's ‘Emma’. Sydney University Press, 1968.Google Scholar

Burrows, John. ‘Questions of Authorship: Attribution and Beyond’. Computers and the Humanities 37.1 (2003): 5–32.Google Scholar

Burrows, John, and Craig, D. H.. ‘Lyrical Drama and the “Turbid Mountebanks”: Styles of Dialogue in Romantic and Restoration Tragedy’. Computers and the Humanities 28 (1994): 63–86.Google Scholar

Burton, Dolores M. Shakespeare's Grammatical Style: A Computer-Assisted Analysis of ‘Richard II’ and ‘Antony and Cleopatra’. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1973.Google Scholar

Busse, Ulrich. Linguistic Variation in the Shakespeare Corpus: Morpho-Syntactic Variability of Second Person Pronouns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2002.Google Scholar

Butler, Martin. Theatre and Crisis 1632–1642. Cambridge University Press, 1984.Google Scholar

Canfield, J. Douglas. Tricksters and Estates: On the Ideology of Restoration Comedy. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1997.Google Scholar

Cathcart, Charles. ‘Authorship, Indebtedness, and the Children of the King's Revels’. SEL: Studies in English Literature 1500–1900 45.2 (2005): 357–74.Google Scholar

Cathcart, Charles. Marston, Rivalry, Rapprochement, and Jonson. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008.Google Scholar

Chambers, E. K. William Shakespeare: A Study of Facts and Problems. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930.Google Scholar

Chapman, R. W., ed. Jane Austen's Six Novels. 5 vols. 3rd illus. edn. Oxford University Press, 1932–5.Google Scholar

Chatfield, Christopher, and Collins, Alexander J.. Introduction to Multivariate Analysis. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1980.Google Scholar

Clare, Janet. Shakespeare's Stage Traffic: Imitation, Borrowing and Competition in Renaissance Theatre. Cambridge University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Clemen, Wolfgang. English Tragedy before Shakespeare. London: Routledge, 1961.Google Scholar

Collins, Eleanor. ‘Richard Brome and the Salisbury Court Contract’. Richard Brome Online. Cave, Richard Allen (gen. ed.). 2010.Google Scholar

Collins, Eleanor. ‘Richard Brome's Contract and the Relationship of Dramatist to Company in the Early Modern Period’. Early Theatre 10.2 (2007): 116–28.Google Scholar

Connors, Louisa. ‘Computational Stylistics, Cognitive Grammar, and The Tragedy of Mariam: Combining Formal and Contextual Approaches in a Computational Study of Early Modern Tragedy’. Ph.D. thesis: University of Newcastle, 2013.Google Scholar

Cook, Ann Jennalie. The Privileged Playgoers of Shakespeare's London, 1576–1642. Princeton University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Corman, Brian. Genre and Generic Change in English Comedy, 1660–1710. University of Toronto Press, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Costantini, Domenico, and Garibaldi, Ubaldo. ‘A Stochastic Foundation of the Approach to Equilibrium of Classical and Quantum Gases’. In: The Foundations of Quantum Mechanics: Historical Analysis and Open Questions. Ed. Garola, Claudio and Rossi, Arcangelo. New Jersey: World Scientific Publishing Co., 2000. 137–50.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘A and an in English Plays, 1580–1639’. Texas Studies in Literature and Language 53.3 (2011): 273–93.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Authorial Attribution and Computational Stylistics: If You Can Tell Authors Apart, Have You Learned Anything about Them?’ Literary and Linguistic Computing 14.1 (1999): 103–13.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Grammatical Modality in English Plays from the 1580s to the 1640s’. English Literary Renaissance 30.1 (2000): 32–54.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Is the Author Really Dead? An Empirical Study of Authorship in English Renaissance Drama’. Empirical Studies in the Arts 18.2 (2000): 119–34.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Plural Pronouns in Roman Plays by Shakespeare and Jonson’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 6 (1991): 180–6.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Myth and Reality’. Shakespeare Quarterly 62.1 (2011): 53–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘“Speak, That I May See Thee”: Shakespeare Characters and Common Words’. Shakespeare Survey 61 (2008): 281–8.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh. ‘Style, Statistics, and New Models of Authorship’. Early Modern Literary Studies 15.1 (2009–10): 1–42.Google Scholar

Craig, Hugh, and Whipp, R.. ‘Old Spellings, New Methods: Automated Procedures for Indeterminate Linguistic Data’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 25.1 (2010): 37–52.Google Scholar

Crystal, David. ‘Think on My Words’: Exploring Shakespeare's Language. Cambridge University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Culpeper, Jonathan. ‘Keywords and Characterization: An Analysis of Six Characters in Romeo and Juliet’. In: Digital Literary Studies: Corpus Approaches to Poetry, Prose and Drama. Ed. Hoover, David L., Culpeper, Jonathan, and O'Halloran, Kieran. New York: Routledge, 2014. 9–34.Google Scholar

Cutts, John P. ‘Thomas Heywood's “The Gentry to the King's Head” in The Rape of Lucrece and John Wilson's Setting’. Notes & Queries 8.10 (1961): 384–7.Google Scholar

de Man, Paul. ‘Literary History and Literary Modernity’. Daedalus 99.2 (1970): 384–404.Google Scholar

Desmet, Christy. Reading Shakespeare's Characters: Rhetoric, Ethics, and Identity. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1992.Google Scholar

Dessen, Alan, and Thomson, Leslie. A Dictionary of Stage Directions in English Drama, 1580–1642. Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Dixon, Peter, and Bortolussi, Marisa. ‘Fluctuations in Literary Reading: The Neglected Dimension of Time’. In: The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Literary Studies. Ed. Zunshine, Lisa. Oxford University Press, 2015. 541–56.Google Scholar

Dobson, James E. ‘Can an Algorithm Be Disturbed?: Machine Learning, Intrinsic Criticism, and the Digital Humanities’. College Literature 42.4 (2015): 543–64.Google Scholar

Downer, Alan S. ‘The Life of Our Design: The Function of Imagery in the Poetic Drama’. The Hudson Review 2.2 (1949): 242–63.Google Scholar

Duncan-Jones, Katherine. ‘Who Wrote A Funerall Elegie?’ Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 192–210.Google Scholar

Dutton, Richard, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theatre. Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar

Edmondson, Paul, and Wells, Stanley. Shakespeare Bites Back: Not So Anonymous. Stratford-upon-Avon: Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, 2011.Google Scholar

Egan, Gabriel. ‘What Is Not Collaborative about Early Modern Drama in Performance and Print?’ Shakespeare Survey 67 (2014): 18–28.Google Scholar

Ehrenfest, Paul, and Ehrenfest, Tatiana. ‘Über zwei bekannte Einwände gegen das Boltzmannsche H-Theorem’. Physikalische Zeitschrift 8 (1907): 311–14.Google Scholar

Eliot, T. S. ‘The Function of Criticism’ (1923). In: Selected Essays. 2nd edn. London: Faber and Faber, 1932. 23–34.Google Scholar

Eliot, T. S. Poetry and Drama. London: Faber and Faber, 1951.Google Scholar

Elliott, Jack. ‘Patterns and Trends in Harlequin Category Romance’. In: Advancing Digital Humanities: Research, Methods, Theories. Ed. Arthur, Paul Longley and Bode, Katherine. New York: Palgrave, 2014. 54–67.Google Scholar

Elliott, Jack, and Greatley-Hirsch, Brett. ‘Arden of Faversham, Shakespeare, and “the print of many”’. In: The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion. Ed. Taylor, Gary and Egan, Gabriel. Oxford University Press, 2017. 139–81.Google Scholar

Elliott, Ward E. Y., and Valenza, Robert J.. ‘Oxford by the Numbers: What Are the Odds that the Earl of Oxford Could Have Written Shakespeare's Poems and Plays?’ The Tennessee Law Review 72.1 (2004): 323–453.Google Scholar

Elliott, Ward E. Y., and Valenza, Robert J.. ‘Shakespeare's Vocabulary: Did It Dwarf All Others?’ In: Stylistics and Shakespeare's Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches. Ed. Ravassat, Mireille and Culpeper, Jonathan. London: Continuum, 2011. 34–57.Google Scholar

Engle, Lars. Shakespearean Pragmatism: Market of His Time. University of Chicago Press, 1993.Google Scholar

Enkvist, Nils Erik. ‘On Defining Style: An Essay on Applied Linguistics’. In: Linguistics and Style. Ed. Enkvist, Nils Erik, Spencer, John, and Gregory, Michael. Oxford University Press, 1964. 1–56.Google Scholar

Erne, Lukas. Beyond ‘The Spanish Tragedy’: A Study of the Works of Thomas Kyd. Manchester University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley E. ‘Mind Your P's and B's: The Digital Humanities and Interpretation’. Opinionator 23 Jan. 2012.Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley E. ‘What Is Stylistics and Why Are They Saying Such Terrible Things about It?’ In: Approaches to Poetics: Selected Papers from the English Institute. Ed. Chatman, Seymour. New York: Columbia University Press, 1973. 109–52.Google Scholar

Fish, Stanley E. ‘What Is Stylistics and Why Are They Saying Such Terrible Things about It? Part ii’. In: Is There a Text in This Class? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980. 246–67.Google Scholar

Floridi, Luciano. Information: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Forker, Charles R. ‘Marlowe's Edward II and Its Shakespearean Relatives: The Emergence of a Genre’. In: Shakespeare's English Histories: A Quest for Form and Genre. Ed. Velz, John W.. Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1996. 55–90.Google Scholar

Foster, Donald W. ‘A Funeral Elegy: W[illiam] S[hakespeare]'s “Best-Speaking Witnesses”’. PMLA 111.5 (1996): 1080–105.Google Scholar

Foster, Donald W. ‘A Funeral Elegy: W[illiam] S[hakespeare]'s “Best-Speaking Witnesses”’. Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 115–40.Google Scholar

Foster, Donald W. ‘The Text of A Funeral Elegy by W. S.’. Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 95–114.Google Scholar

Frow, John. Genre. New York: Routledge, 2006.Google Scholar

Gair, Reavley. The Children of Paul's: The Story of a Theatre Company, 1553–1608. Cambridge University Press, 1982.Google Scholar

Geertz, Clifford. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books, 1983.Google Scholar

Gibbons, Brian. ‘Romance and the Heroic Play’. In: The Cambridge Companion to English Renaissance Drama. Ed. Braunmuller, A. R. and Hattaway, Michael. Cambridge University Press, 1990. 207–36.Google Scholar

Gleick, James. The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood. New York: Pantheon, 2011.Google Scholar

Gombrich, Ernst H. ‘Style’. In: International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Ed. Sills, David L.. 18 vols. New York: Macmillan, 1968–79. Vol. xv: 352–61.Google Scholar

Goodwin, Jonathan, and Holbo, John, eds. Reading Graphs, Maps, Trees: Responses to Franco Moretti. Anderson: Parlor Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Graves, R. B. Lighting the Shakespearean Stage, 1567–1642. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Greenacre, Michael. Biplots in Practice. Bilbao: Fundación BBVA, 2010.Google Scholar

Greene, Thomas. ‘The Flexibility of the Self in Renaissance Literature’. In: The Disciplines of Criticism. Ed. Demetz, Peter, Greene, Thomas, and Nelson, Lowry, Jr. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968. 241–64.Google Scholar

Griffith, Eva. A Jacobean Company and Its Playhouse: The Queen's Servants at the Red Bull Theatre (c. 1605–1619). Cambridge University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespeare Company, 1594–1642. Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

Gurr, Andrew. Shakespeare's Opposites: The Admiral's Company, 1594–1625. Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespearian Playing Companies. Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar

Haaker, Ann. ‘The Plague, the Theater, and the Poet’. Renaissance Drama 1 (1968): 283–306.Google Scholar

Hacking, Ian. The Taming of Chance. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar

Hadfield, Andrew. Shakespeare and Republicanism. Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

Hanan, Jim, Prusinkiewicz, Przemyslaw, Zalucki, Myron, and Skirvin, David. ‘Simulation of Insect Movement with Respect to Plant Architecture and Morphogenesis’. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 35.2–3 (2002): 255–69.Google Scholar

Harbage, Alfred, and Schoenbaum, Samuel. Annals of English Drama, 975–1700. 2nd edn. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1964.Google Scholar

Hartman, Geoffrey. ‘Toward Literary History’. Daedalus 99.2 (1970): 355–83.Google Scholar

Harris, Jonathan Gil, and Korda, Natasha, eds. Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama. Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar

Hauert, Christoph, Nagler, Jan, and Schuster, Heinz Georg. ‘Of Dogs and Fleas: The Dynamics of N Uncoupled Two-State Systems’. Journal of Statistical Physics 116.5–6 (2004): 1453–69.Google Scholar

Heffner, Hubert C. ‘Pirandello and the Nature of Man’. Tulane Drama Review 1.3 (1957): 23–40.Google Scholar

Hieatt, Charles W., Hieatt, Kent, Thomas, Sidney, Hirsh, James, and Foster, Donald W.. ‘Forum: Attributing A Funeral Elegy’. PMLA 112.3 (1997): 429–34.Google Scholar

Higdon, David Leon. ‘The Concordance: Mere Index or Needful Census?’ Text 15 (2003): 51–68.Google Scholar

Hirsch, Brett D. ‘Moving Targets: Constructing Canons, 2013–2014’. Early Theatre 18.1 (2015): 115–32.Google Scholar

Holbrook, Peter. English Renaissance Tragedy: Ideas of Freedom. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Holmes, David I. ‘The Evolution of Stylometry in Humanities Scholarship’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 13.3 (1998): 111–17.Google Scholar

Hoover, David L. ‘Corpus Stylistics, Stylometry, and the Styles of Henry James’. Style 41.2 (2007): 174–203.Google Scholar

Hoover, David L. ‘Testing Burrows's Delta’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 19.4 (2004): 453–75.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan. The Authorship of Shakespeare's Plays: A Socio-Linguistic Study. Cambridge University Press, 1994.Google Scholar

Hope, Jonathan, and Witmore, Michael. ‘The Hundredth Psalm to the Tune of “Green Sleeves”: Digital Approaches to Shakespeare's Language of Genre’. Shakespeare Quarterly 61.3 (2010): 357–90.Google Scholar

Hotelling, Harold. ‘Analysis of a Complex of Statistical Variables into Principal Components’. Journal of Educational Psychology 24.6 (1933): 417–41.Google Scholar

Housman, A. E. ‘The Application of Thought to Textual Criticism’. Proceedings of the Classical Association 18 (1921): 67–84.Google Scholar

Hume, Robert D. ‘Diversity and Development in Restoration Comedy, 1660–1679’. Eighteenth-Century Studies 5.3 (1972): 365–97.Google Scholar

Hunter, G. K. English Drama, 1586–1642: The Age of Shakespeare. Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

Hunter, G. K. Lyly and Peele. London: Longman, 1968.Google Scholar

Hunter, Lynette, and Lichtenfels, Peter. Negotiating Shakespeare's Language in ‘Romeo and Juliet’: Reading Strategies from Criticism, Editing and the Theatre. Farnham: Ashgate, 2009.Google Scholar

Ilsemann, Hartmut. ‘More Statistical Observations on Speech-Lengths in Shakespeare's Plays’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 23.4 (2008): 397–407.Google Scholar

Jackson, MacDonald P. Determining the Shakespeare Canon: ‘Arden of Faversham’ and ‘A Lover's Complaint’. Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Jannidis, Fotis, and Lauer, Gerhard. ‘Burrows's Delta and Its Use in German Literary History’. In: Distant Readings: Topologies of German Culture in the Long Nineteenth Century. Ed. Erlin, Matt and Tatlock, Lynne. Rochester: Camden House, 2014. 29–54.Google Scholar

Jolliffe, I. T. Principal Component Analysis. New York: Springer, 1986.Google Scholar

Jones, Emrys. ‘The First West End Comedy’. Proceedings of the British Academy 68 (1982): 215–58.Google Scholar

Kac, Mark. Probability and Related Topics in Physical Sciences. New York: Interscience Publishers, 1959.Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. ‘Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht’ = ‘Idea of a Universal History on a Cosmo-Political Plan’. Trans. Thomas de Quincy. The London Magazine Oct. 1824: 385–93.Google Scholar

Kastan, David Scott. ‘The Body of the Text’. ELH 81.2 (2014): 443–67.Google Scholar

Kaufer, David, Ishizaki, Suguru, Butler, Brian, and Collins, Jeff. The Power of Words: Unveiling the Speaker and Writer's Hidden Craft. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004.

Kaufmann, R. J. Richard Brome, Caroline Playwright. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961.Google Scholar

Kay, W. David. ‘The Shaping of Ben Jonson's Career: A Reexamination of Facts and Problems’. Modern Philology 67.3 (1970): 224–37.Google Scholar

Keenan, Siobhan. Acting Companies and Their Plays in Shakespeare's London. London: Arden Shakespeare, 2014.Google Scholar

Kermode, Frank. Shakespeare's Language. London: Penguin, 2000.Google Scholar

Kirkup, Les, and Frenkel, Bob. An Introduction to Uncertainty and Measurement. Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar

Kirsch, Adam. ‘Technology Is Taking over English Departments: The False Promise of the Digital Humanities’. New Republic 2 May 2014.Google Scholar

Klarer, Mario. An Introduction to Literary Studies. 3rd edn. New York: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar

Knutson, Roslyn L. Playing Companies and Commerce in Shakespeare's Time. Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Knutson, Roslyn L. The Repertory of Shakespeare's Company, 1594–1613. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Knutson, Roslyn L. ‘The Start of Something Big’. In: Locating the Queen's Men, 1583–1603. Ed. Ostovich, Helen, Syme, Holger Schott, and Griffin, Andrew. Farnham: Ashgate, 2009. 99–108.Google Scholar

Kolb, Justin. ‘“To me comes a creature”: Recognition, Agency, and the Properties of Character in Shakespeare's The Winter's Tale’. In: The Automaton in English Renaissance Literature. Ed. Hyman, Wendy Beth. Farnham: Ashgate, 2011. 45–60.Google Scholar

Kramnick, Jonathan. ‘Against Literary Darwinism’. Critical Inquiry 37.2 (2011): 315–47.Google Scholar

Lake, D. J. ‘Three Seventeenth-Century Revisions: Thomas of Woodstock, The Jew of Malta, and Faustus B’. Notes & Queries 30.2 (1983): 133–43.Google Scholar

Lake, D. J. ‘Probing Shakespeare's Idiolect in Troilus and Cressida, 1.3.1–29’. University of Toronto Quarterly 68 (1999): 728–67.Google Scholar

Lascelles, Mary. Jane Austen and Her Art. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939.Google Scholar

Leggatt, Alexander. ‘The Companies and Actors’. In: The Revels History of Drama in English. Ed. Leech, Clifford et al. 8 vols. London: Methuen, 1975–83. Vol. iii: 95–118.Google Scholar

Logan, Robert A. Shakespeare's Marlowe: The Influence of Christopher Marlowe on Shakespeare's Artistry. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007.Google Scholar

Love, Harold. ‘Restoration and Early Eighteenth-Century Drama’. In: The Cambridge History of English Literature, 1660–1780. Ed. Richetti, John. Cambridge University Press, 2005. 109–31.Google Scholar

Lynch, Kathleen M. The Social Mode of Restoration Comedy. New York: Macmillan, 1926.Google Scholar

MacFaul, Tom. Problem Fathers in Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama. Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Magnusson, Lynne. ‘A Play of Modals: Grammar and Potential Action in Early Shakespeare’. Shakespeare Survey 62 (2009): 69–80.Google Scholar

Maguire, Laurie, and Smith, Emma. 30 Great Myths about Shakespeare. Oxford: Blackwell, 2013.Google Scholar

Manley, Lawrence. ‘Playing with Fire: Immolation in the Repertory of Strange's Men’. Early Theatre 4 (2001): 115–21.Google Scholar

Manley, Lawrence, and MacLean, Sally-Beth. Lord Strange's Men and Their Plays. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Marche, Stephen. ‘Literature Is Not Data: Against Digital Humanities’. Los Angeles Review of Books 28 Oct. 2012.Google Scholar

Margaret of Anjou: A New Shakespeare Play. Dir. McCutcheon, Rebecca. Caryl Churchill Theatre, Egham. 8 Mar. 2016.Google Scholar

Marsh, Christopher. Music and Society in Early Modern England. Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Masten, Jeffrey. Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities in Renaissance Drama. Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar

McCarty, Willard. ‘Getting There from Here: Remembering the Future of Digital Humanities’. Literary and Linguistic Computing 29.3 (2014): 283–306.Google Scholar

McDonald, Russ. Shakespeare and the Arts of Language. Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

McManaway, James G. ‘Philip Massinger and the Restoration Drama’. ELH 1 (1934): 276–304.Google Scholar

McMillin, Scott, and MacLean, Sally-Beth. The Queen's Men and Their Plays. Cambridge University Press, 1998.Google Scholar

McMullan, Gordon. Shakespeare and the Idea of Late Writing: Authorship in the Proximity of Death. Cambridge University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Monsarrat, G. D. ‘A Funeral Elegy: Ford, W. S., and Shakespeare’. Review of English Studies 53.210 (2002): 186–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moretti, Franco. ‘Style, inc. Reflections on Seven Thousand Titles (British Novels, 1740–1850)’. Critical Inquiry 36.1 (2009): 134–58.Google Scholar

Morgann, Maurice. An Essay on the Dramatic Character of Sir John Falstaff. London: T. Davies, 1777.Google Scholar

Mosteller, Frederick, and Wallace, David L.. Inference and Disputed Authorship: The Federalist Papers. Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1964.Google Scholar

Munro, Lucy. Children of the Queen's Revels: A Jacobean Theatre Repertory. Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar

Murray, Barbara A. Restoration Shakespeare: Viewing the Voice. Madison: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Nance, John. ‘From Shakespeare “To ye Q”’. Shakespeare Quarterly 67.2 (2016): 204–31.Google Scholar

Nason, A. H. James Shirley, Dramatist: A Biographical and Critical Study. New York: A. H. Nason, 1915.Google Scholar

Nettleton, George Henry. English Drama of the Restoration and Eighteenth Century (1642–1780). New York: Macmillan, 1914.Google Scholar

Nevalainen, Terttu, and Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England. London: Longman, 2003.Google Scholar

Nichols, Tom. The Art of Poverty: Irony and Ideal in Sixteenth-Century Beggar Imagery. Manchester University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Novak, Maximilian E. ‘The Politics of Shakespeare Criticism in the Restoration and Early Eighteenth Century’. ELH 81 (2014): 115–42.Google Scholar

Oras, Ants. Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama: An Experiment in Prosody. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1960.Google Scholar

Orlin, Lena Cowen. ‘Things with Little Social Life (Henslowe's Properties and Elizabethan Household Fittings)’. In: Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama. Ed. Harris, Jonathan Gil and Korda, Natasha. Cambridge University Press, 2002. 99–128.Google Scholar

Ostovich, Helen, Syme, Holger Schott, and Griffin, Andrew, eds. Locating the Queen's Men, 1583–1603: Material Practices and Conditions of Playing. Farnham: Ashgate, 2009.Google Scholar

Palfrey, Simon, and Stern, Tiffany. Shakespeare in Parts. Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Pearson, Karl. ‘On Lines and Planes of Closest Fit to Systems of Points in Space’. Philosophical Magazine 2.6 (1901): 559–72.Google Scholar

Petersen, Lene B. Shakespeare's Errant Texts: Textual Form and Linguistic Style in Shakespearean ‘Bad’ Quartos and Co-Authored Plays. Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Petrovskii, Sergei, Petrovskaya, Natalia, and Bearup, Daniel. ‘Multiscale Approach to Pest Insect Monitoring: Random Walks, Pattern Formation, Synchronization, and Networks’. Physics of Life Reviews 11.3 (2014): 467–525.Google Scholar

Pollard, A. W., and Redgrave, G. R.. A Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England, Scotland, & Ireland and of English Books Printed Abroad, 1475–1640. 2nd edn. Rev. and enl. Jackson, W. A., Ferguson, F. S., and Panzer, Katherine F.. 3 vols. London: Bibliographical Society, 1976–91.Google Scholar

Randall, Dale B. J. Winter Fruit: English Drama, 1642–1660. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1995.Google Scholar

Richardson, Catherine. Shakespeare and Material Culture. Oxford University Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Rivere de Carles, Nathalie. ‘Performing Materiality: Curtains on the Early Modern Stage’. In: Shakespeare's Theatres and the Effects of Performance. Ed. Karim-Cooper, Farah and Stern, Tiffany. London: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2013. 51–69.Google Scholar

Roberts, Sasha. ‘“Let me the curtains draw”: The Dramatic and Symbolic Properties of the Bed in Shakespearean Tragedy’. In: Staged Properties in Early Modern English Drama. Ed. Harris, Jonathan Gil and Korda, Natasha. Cambridge University Press, 2002. 153–74.Google Scholar

Robertson, J. M. The Problem of ‘The Merry Wives of Windsor’. London: Chatto and Windus [for The Shakespeare Association], 1917.Google Scholar

Ronan, Clifford. ‘Antike Roman’: Power Symbology and the Roman Play in Early Modern England, 1585–1635. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1995.Google Scholar

Rosso, Osvaldo A., Craig, Hugh, and Moscato, Pablo. ‘Shakespeare and Other English Renaissance Authors as Characterized by Information Theory Complexity Quantifiers’. Physica A 388 (2009): 916–26.Google Scholar

Rutter, Tom. ‘Repertory Studies: A Survey’. Shakespeare 4.3 (2008): 336–50.Google Scholar

Rutter, Tom. Shakespeare and the Admiral's Men: Reading across Repertories on the London Stage, 1594–1600. Cambridge University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Rybicki, Jan. ‘The Great Mystery of the (Almost) Invisible Translator: Stylometry in Translation’. In: Quantitative Methods in Corpus-Based Translation Studies. Ed. Oakes, Michael P. and Ji, Meng. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2012. 231–48.Google Scholar

Salomon, Brownell. ‘Visual and Aural Signs in the Performed English Renaissance Play’.Renaissance Drama 5 (1972): 143–69.Google Scholar

Satterthwaite, F. E. ‘An Approximate Distribution of Estimates of Variance Components’. Biometric Bulletin 2.6 (1946): 110–14.Google Scholar

Schoone-Jongen, Terence G. Shakespeare's Companies: William Shakespeare's Early Career and the Acting Companies, 1577–1594. Farnham: Ashgate, 2008.Google Scholar

Schopenhauer, Arthur. ‘A Few Parables’. Studies in Pessimism: A Series of Essays. Trans. Saunders, T. Bailey. London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1893. 137–42.Google Scholar

Shannon, C. E. ‘A Mathematical Theory of Communication’. Bell System Technical Journal 27 (1948): 379–423.Google Scholar

Shannon, C. E. ‘Prediction and Entropy of Printed English’. Bell System Technical Journal 30 (1951), 50–64.Google Scholar

Shapiro, James. 1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare. London: Faber and Faber, 2005.Google Scholar

Smith, Peter W. H., and Aldridge, W.. ‘Improving Authorship Attribution: Optimizing Burrows’ Delta Method’. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 18.1 (2011): 63–88.Google Scholar

Snedecor, George W., and Cochran, William G.. Statistical Methods. 8th edn. Ames: Iowa State College Press, 1989.Google Scholar

Snyder, Susan. The Comic Matrix of Shakespeare's Tragedies. Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar

Sofer, Andrew. The Stage Life of Props. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2003.Google Scholar

Sofer, Andrew. ‘“Take up the Bodies”: Shakespeare's Body Parts, Babies, and Corpses’. Theatre Symposium 18 (2010): 135–48.Google Scholar

Sprague, A. C. Beaumont and Fletcher on the Restoration Stage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926.Google Scholar

Steggle, Matthew. Richard Brome: Place and Politics on the Caroline Stage. Manchester University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

‘Student’ [= W. S. Gosset]. ‘The Probable Error of a Mean’. Biometrika 6.1 (1908): 1–25.Google Scholar

Tarlinskaja, Marina. Shakespeare and the Versification of English Drama, 1561–1642. Farnham: Ashgate, 2014.Google Scholar

Tarrant, Harold, and Roberts, Terry. ‘Appendix 2: Report of the Working Vocabulary of the Doubtful Dialogues’. In: Alcibiades and the Socratic Lover-Educator. Ed. Johnson, Marguerite and Tarrant, Harold. London: Bristol Classical Press, 2012. 223–36.Google Scholar

Tave, Stuart M. Some Words of Jane Austen. University of Chicago Press, 1973.Google Scholar

Taylor, Gary. ‘The Fly Scene in Titus’. Paper presented at Shakespeare 450, Paris, 25 Apr. 2014.Google Scholar

Teague, Frances. Shakespeare's Speaking Properties. Cranbury: Associated University Presses, 1991.Google Scholar

Teichmann, Howard, and Kaufman, George S.. The Solid Gold Cadillac: A Comedy. New York: Random House, 1954.Google Scholar

Timberlake, Philip W. The Feminine Ending in English Blank Verse. Menasha: George Banta, 1931.Google Scholar

Tomlinson, Tracey E. ‘The Restoration English History Plays of Roger Boyle, Earl of Orrery’. SEL: Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900, 43.3 (2003): 559–77.Google Scholar

Trumpener, Katie. ‘Paratext and Genre System: A Response to Franco Moretti’. Critical Inquiry 36.1 (2009): 159–71.Google Scholar

Tschopp, Elizabeth. The Distribution of Verse and Prose in Shakespeare's Dramas. Berne: Francke Verlag, 1956.Google Scholar

van Peer, Willie. ‘Quantitative Studies of Literature: A Critique and an Outlook’. Computers and the Humanities 23.4–5 (1989): 301–7.Google Scholar

Vickers, Brian. The Artistry of Shakespeare's Prose. London: Methuen, 1968.Google Scholar

Vickers, Brian. (ed.), Seventeenth-Century Prose. London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1991.Google Scholar

Wakasa, Tomoko. ‘Swords in Early Modern English Plays’. M.Phil. thesis: University of Birmingham, 2011.Google Scholar

Weimann, Robert. Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theater: Studies in the Social Dimension of Dramatic Form and Function. Ed. Schwartz, Robert. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Welch, B. L. ‘The Generalization of “Student's” Problem When Several Different Population Variances Are Involved’. Biometrika 34.1–2 (1947): 28–35.Google Scholar

Wells, Stanley. ‘“A Funeral Elegy”: Obstacles to Belief’. Shakespeare Studies 25 (1997): 186–91.Google Scholar

Werstine, Paul. Early Modern Playhouse Manuscripts and the Editing of Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Whitworth, Charles W. ‘The Wounds of Civil War and Tamburlaine: Lodge's Alleged Imitation’. Notes & Queries 22 (1975): 245–7.Google Scholar

Wiggins, Martin, in association with Richardson, Catherine. British Drama, 1533–1642: A Catalogue. 10 vols. Oxford University Press, 2011–.Google Scholar

Wilson, John Harold. The Influence of Beaumont and Fletcher on Restoration Drama. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1928.Google Scholar

Wing, Donald. Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales and British America and of English Books Printed in Other Countries, 1641–1700. 2nd edn. Rev. and enl. Morrison, John J., Nelson, Carolyn W., and Seccombe, Matthew. 4 vols. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1972–98.Google Scholar

Wiseman, Susan. Drama and Politics in the English Civil War. Cambridge University Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Witmore, Michael, and Hope, Jonathan. ‘Shakespeare by the Numbers: On the Linguistic Texture of the Late Plays’. In: Early Modern Tragicomedy. Ed. Mukherji, Subha and Lyne, Raphael. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2007. 133–53.Google Scholar