Works cited
- Allen, Don Cameron, editor. “Francis Meres’s Treatise.” “Poetrie”: A Critical Edition, vol. 16, no. 3, 1933. Print.
- Auerbach, David. “‘A Cannon’s Burst Discharged against A Ruinated Wall’: A Critique of Quantitative Methods in Shakespearean Authorial Attribution.” Authorship, vol. 7, no. 2, 2018. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.authorship.ugent.be/article/view/9737/9392.
- Auerbach, David. “Statistical Infelicities in the New Oxford Shakespeare Authorship Companion.” American Notes and Queries, 2019. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0895769X.2018.1559023.
- Baldwin, T. W. On the Literary Genetics of Shakespeare’s Plays. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1959. Print.
- Boas, Frederick S., editor. The Works of Thomas Kyd. Clarendon Press, 1901. Print.
- Bogdanov, Michael. Shakespeare, the Director’s Cut. Capercaillie Books, 2003. Print.
- Connor, Francis X. “Potential Shakespeare: The Poetic Apocrypha and Methods of Modern Attribution.” The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion, edited by Gary Taylor and Gabriel Egan, Oxford UP, 2017, pp. 107–22. Print.
- Dekker, Thomas. A Knight’s Conjuring Done in Earnest: Discovered in Jest. STC 6508, 1607. Print.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “‘A Raven for a Dove’: Kyd, Shakespeare, and the Authorship of Arden of Faversham’s Quarrel Scene.” Archiv fuer das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, vol. 253, no. 1, 2016, pp. 39–64. Print.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “Kyd and Shakespeare: Authorship versus Influence.” Authorship, vol. 6, no. 1, 2017. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.authorship.ugent.be/article/view/4833.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “Augean Stables; Or, the State of Modern Authorship Attribution Studies.” Archiv fuer das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, vol. 255, no. 1, 2018a, pp. 60–81. Print.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “In Defence of Kyd: Evaluating the Claim for Shakespeare’s Part Authorship of Arden of Faversham.” Authorship, vol. 7, no. 2, 2018b. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.authorship.ugent.be/article/view/9736/9375.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “Corresponding Stage Directions in Plays Attributable to Kyd.” American Notes and Queries, vol. 32, no. 1, 2019a, pp. 16–17. Print.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “‘Fearful Dreams’ in Thomas Kyd’s Restored Canon.” Digital Studies/Le Champ Numérique, vol. 9, no. 1, 2019b. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.digitalstudies.org/articles/10.16995/dscn.309/.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren. “The Diminution of Thomas Kyd.” Journal of Early Modern Studies, vol. 8, 2019c, pp. 251–77. Print.
- Freebury-Jones, Darren, and Marcus Dahl. “The Limitations of Microattribution.” Texas Studies in Literature and Language, vol. 60, no. 4, 2018, pp. 467–95. Print. doi:10.7560/TSLL60404.
- Freeman, Arthur. Thomas Kyd: A Study of Facts and Problems. Clarendon Press, 1967. Print.
- Jackson, MacDonald P. Material for an edition of Arden of Faversham. 1963. Oxford University, B.Litt. thesis. Print.
- Jackson, MacDonald P. Determining the Shakespeare Canon: Arden of Faversham and A Lover’s Complaint. Oxford UP, 2014. Print.
- Jackson, M P. “Reconsidering A Lexical Test of Arden of Faversham: A Response to A Critique.” Shakespeare, 2019, pp. 1–6. Ahead of print. 10 Mar. 2019, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17450918.2019.1573847.
- McMillin, Scott, and MacLean. Sally-Beth. The Queen’s Men and Their Plays. Cambridge UP, 1998. Print.
- Rizvi, Pervez. “The Interpretation of Zeta Test Results.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 2018a. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://academic.oup.com/dsh/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/llc/fqy038/5078547?redirectedFrom=fulltext.
- Rizvi, Pervez. “The Problem of Microattribution.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 2018b. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://academic.oup.com/dsh/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/digitalsh/fqy066/5174703?redirectedFrom=fulltext.
- Rizvi, Pervez. “Small Samples and the Perils of Authorship Attribution for Acts and Scenes.” American Notes and Queries, 2018c. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0895769X.2018.1537841.
- Rizvi, Pervez. “Authorship Attribution for Early Modern Plays Using Function Word Adjacency Networks: A Critical View.” American Notes and Queries, 2018d. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0895769X.2018.1554473?journalCode=vanq20.
- Sutton, Dana F., editor. “Thomas Watson: Minor, Lost, and Doubtful or Spurious Works.” The Philological Museum, 4 May 2011, http://www.philological.bham.ac.uk/watson/opuscula/text.html. Accessed 18 Feb. 2019.
- Taylor, Gary. “Empirical Middleton: Macbeth, Adaptation, and Microauthorship.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 65, 2014, pp. 239–72. doi:10.1353/shq.2014.0030. Print.
- Taylor, Gary. “Authorial Frames & Canonical Reigns: Henry VI & Not-Shakespeare.” Paper given at “Marlowe and Shakespeare: Kingston Shakespeare Conference”, 18 Nov. 2017, Kingston-upon-Thames, The Rose Theatre.
- Taylor, Gary. “Finding ‘Anonymous’ in the Digital Archives: The Problem of Arden of Faversham.” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. Ahead of print. 18 Feb. 2019, https://academic.oup.com/dsh/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/llc/fqy075/5277049?redirectedFrom=fulltext.
- Taylor, Gary, and Gabriel Egan, editors. The New Oxford Shakespeare: Authorship Companion. Oxford UP, 2017. Print.
- Taylor, Gary, and John V. Nance. “Imitation or Collaboration? Marlowe and the Early Shakespeare Canon.” Shakespeare Survey, vol. 68, 2015, pp. 32–47. Print.
- Taylor, Gary, et al. “Shakespeare and Who? Aeschylus, Edward III and Thomas Kyd.” Shakespeare Survey, vol. 70, 2017, pp. 146–53. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “Counterfeiting” Shakespeare: Evidence, Authorship and John Ford‘S Funerall Elegye. Cambridge UP, 2002. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “Thomas Kyd, Secret Sharer.” Times Literary Supplement, 13, April 2008, pp. 13–15. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “The Two Authors of Edward III.” Shakespeare Survey, vol. 67, 2014, pp. 102–18. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “Marlowe in Edward II: Lender or Borrower?” The Text, the Play, and the Globe. Essays on Literary Influence in Shakespeare’s World and His Work in Honor of Charles R. Forker, edited by Joseph Candido, Fairleigh Dickinson UP, 2016, pp. 43–74. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “Micro-Attribution and Scholarship.” Email received by Darren Freebury-Jones, 1 Dec 2017.
- Vickers, Brian. “Verbal Repetition in Arden of Faversham: Shakespeare or Kyd?” Notes and Queries, vol. 65, no. 4, 2018a, pp. 498–502. doi:10.1093/notesj/gjy170. Print.
- Vickers, Brian. “Authorship Attribution and Elizabethan Drama: Qualitative versus Quantitative Methods.” Authorship, vol. 7, no. 2, 2018b. 18 Feb. 2019, https://www.authorship.ugent.be/article/view/9734/9390.
- Vincent, Paul J. When harey Met Shakespeare: The Genesis of The First Part of Henry the Sixth. 2005. University of Auckland, Doctoral thesis. 18 Feb. 2019, https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/294.
- Williams, William Proctor. “Review of MacDonald P. Jackson, Determining the Shakespeare Canon: Arden of Faversham and A Lover’s Complaint.” Notes and Queries, vol. 66, no. 1, 2019, pp. 141–43. doi:10.1093/notesj/gjy227. Print.