John Ford's Substantive Accidentals in Perkin Warbeck

Abstract

Abstract Critics usually take it for granted that John Ford ‘knew’ that Perkin Warbeck had been an impostor, but the play is sometimes judged to preserve the balance between his claim and Henry’s. Few critics think Ford probably believed that Warbeck was Prince Richard. The 1634 quarto contains an unusual number of words in capitals or italics; all the capitalized and many italicized words highlight Warbeck’s claim. The royal ‘WEE’, ‘KING’, etc., refer to Warbeck. Several politically important words are italicized only with reference to Warbeck; ‘ Vsurpers of our throne and right ’ and ‘O Divinitie Of royall birth !’ (IV. 5. 6 and 56-7) can be contrasted with Henry’s ‘our owne royall birth-right’ (I. 1. 9). The princes’ skeletons had not yet been found and, like some others, Ford seems to have thought Richard had been spared. He conveyed this to the reader by using numerous but fairly unobtrusive accidentals.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.