Momus Triumphans: or, the Plagiaries of the English Stage (1688[1687])Langbaine, Gerard
General
Momus Triumphans: or, the Plagiaries of the English Stage (1688[1687])
Langbaine, Gerard
English drama -- Bibliography
In _Momus_ Langbaine has entries for two hundred and thirty-two
authors, of whom twenty-six have "_discover_[ed] _themselves but by
halves_" ([A3v]) and are listed only by initials. Langbaine claims to
"_have been Master of above_ Nine Hundred _and_ Fourscore _English_
Plays _and_ Masques, _besides_ Drolls _and_ Interludes" (A2r), and
_Momus_ lists approximately one thousand and forty plays, though the
number may actually be slightly higher since a few of these entries
represent collections ("Terence's plays," for example) and in footnotes
many foreign plays are given as sources for the English ones. Of the
total, thirty-five are given to supposed authors and one hundred and
sixty-nine are listed alphabetically by title since their authors are
unknown to Langbaine even by initial. Although the _Account_ represents
a five-hundred page expansion (but in octavo), the enlargement is
accomplished within the basic arrangement and largely with the lists
of authors and plays established in _Momus_. Langbaine adds only ten
new authors,[19] while he deletes two,[20] and adds about fifty-one
new plays, while omitting three.[21] The expansion takes the form,
mainly, of added biographical, critical and source material, including
discussions of classical authors and of non-dramatic works. The
corrections take the form of deletion and reassignment, change of dates
and format, and, most interestingly, change of genre designation.
There are over one hundred and fifteen genre changes, of which at
least three-quarters involve tragi-comedy, and of these nearly one
half (about forty) represent a shift in description from comedy to
tragi-comedy. These changes suggest that Langbaine was reading or
re-reading the plays carefully between the end of 1687 and 1691 and
perhaps the critical commentary on genre by the Caroline dramatists
as well since many of the conversions occur in describing the works
of Beaumont and Fletcher, Massinger, and Shirley. For bibliographical
detail _Momus_ is not entirely superseded by the _Account_ since
over sixteen descriptions of format[22] and thirty of genre are not
incorporated in the later catalogue. Furthermore, about thirty-eight
plays are given sources in _Momus_ which are not carried over into
the _Account_. A large number of the source references in _Momus_,
especially those not transferred to the _Account_, are general in
nature, to national histories or to the compilations of Eusebius and
Heylin.
* * * * *
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account