Fletcher and Massinger and Field together wrote _The Knight of Malta_ and _The Queen of Corinth_--according to received theory, in 1617 or 1618. Thereafter, the last two collaborators (desirous, perhaps, of trying what they could do unaided and unshackled by the dominating association of the chief dramatist of the day) joined hands in the production of the tragedy which is the subject of our study. Then, upon Field’s retirement, Massinger struck off, with _The Unnatural Combat_, into unassisted composition; but we next find him, whether because he recognized the short-comings of this turgid play or for other reasons, again in double harness, at work upon _The Virgin Martyr_ and _The Little French Lawyer_. On this hypothesis, _The Fatal Dowry_ would be dated 1618-9. SOURCES No source is known for the main plot of _The Fatal Dowry_. A Spanish original has been suspected, but it has never come to light. The stress laid throughout the action on that peculiarly Spanish conception of “the point of honor” (see under CRITICAL ESTIMATE, in consideration of the character of Charalois) is unquestionably suggestive of the land south of the Pyrenees, and we have an echo of _Don Quixote_ in the exclamation of Charalois (III, i, 441): “Away, thou curious impertinent.” The identification, however, of the situation at Aymer’s house in IV, ii with a scene in Cervantes’ _El viejo celoso_ (Obras Completas De Cervantes, Tomo XII, p. 277) is extremely fanciful. The only similarity consists in the circumstance that in both, while the husband is on the stage, the wife, who, unknown to him, entertains a lover in the next room, is heard speaking within. But this is a spontaneous outcry on the part of Beaumelle, who does not suspect the proximity of her husband, and her discovery follows, and from this the denouement of the play; whereas in Cervantes’ _entremes_ the wife deliberately calls in bravado to her niece, who is also on-stage, and boasts of her lover,--and the husband thinks this is in jest, and nothing comes of it but comedy. The theme of the son’s redemption of his father’s corpse by his own captivity is from the classical story of Cimon and Miltiades, as narrated by Valerius Maximus, De dictis factisque memorabilibus, etc. Lib. V, cap. III. De ingratis externorum: _Bene egissent Athenienses cum Miltiade, si eum post trecenta millia Persarum Marathone devicta, in exilium protinus misissent, ac non in carcere et vinculis mori coegissent; sed, ut puto, hactenus saevire adversus optime meritum abunde duxerunt: immo ne corpus quidem eius, sic expirare coacti sepulturae primus mandari passi sunt, quam filius eius Cimon eisdem vinculis se constrigendum traderet. Hanc hereditatem paternam maximi ducis filius, et futurus ipse aetatis suae dux maximus, solam se crevisse, catenas et carcerem, gloriari potuit._ In the version of Cornelius Nepos (Vitae, Cimon I) Cimon is incarcerated against his will.