Henslowe Papers - Being Documents Supplementary to Henslowe's Diary

From the PREFACE: IN issuing this volume of Henslowe Papers I have to thank in the first place the Governors of Dulwich College, and in particular Sir Robert Douglas, for making the originals accessible to me, and next Mr. A. H. Gilkes, Master, and Mr. P. Hope, Librarian, of Dulwich College, for facilities generously granted me for examining the same. To the officials of the British Museum my obligations constantly accumulate. Dr. Warner most kindly acceded to a shameless request to be allowed to make what use I liked of the notes in his catalogue of the Dulwich documents. The initial 'W.' is appended in the following pages to such information as is lifted bodily or substantially from his work (recourse being had where possible to later authorities), but I need hardly say that these specific instances form but a small part of my obligation to so learned a predecessor. To Mr. J. A. Herbert I am grateful for assistance on innumerable occasions, and it is a real regret not to be able to record a similar obligation to Francis Bickley, whose early death deprived scholarship of an able worker, and manuscript students of an ever courteous friend. A few words of explanation may be conveniently added. The conventions as to dates and the method of reference to authorities are the same as those adopted in my edition of Henslowe's Diary, where they are explained at length at the beginning of the second volume. Only two remarks, applying in particular to the present work, need be made here. One is that, where there is no statement to the contrary. Manuscripts are to be supposed paper, and Muniments vellum. The other is the confession that I have followed Dr. Warner, at first unwittingly, later advisedly for definite purposes of uniformity and convenience, in a not very strict method of reference to the documents printed by Malone. The simple reference 'Malone' indicates Boswell's 'Variorum' Shakespeare published in 1821, which contains, besides the documents previously printed by Malone, others which had been in his hands but which he had not published. Where it is desired to refer to the original publication, the date or title has been added (e. g. Malone, Inquiry (1796), Malone (Shakespeare), 1790, &c.). If this is borne in mind confusion will, I think, be avoided. Knowing that the Orlando manuscript was to be printed in Professor Churton Collins' edition of Greene's plays, I had not originally intended to include it in this collection. After the publication of that edition, however, it seemed desirable to do so. -Walter W. Greg, Park Lodge, Wimbledon