Book chapter

Evolución de los criterios ecdóticos en las ediciones modernas del teatro de Shakespeare

Jesús Tronch
University of València, Spain - ORCID: 0000-0003-3950-0005

ABOUT THIS CHAPTER

Editorial criteria in critical editions of Shakespeare’s plays have evolved from a 18th-century arbitrary eclecticism into one restricted by the editor’s knowledge of the nature and transmission of the early texts, a knowledge developed by the 20th-century New Bibliography that specially informs paleographical and bibliographical criteria. Roughly from the 21st century, these criteria have evolved into a conservatism influenced by a social view of texts, which stands on a par with the primordial criterion of reconstructing the text intended by the author. This textualism is nourished by a skepticism about the certainty the New Bibliography inspired in what editors know about the texts’ transmission.
Read more

Keywords: ecdotics, Shakespeare, conservative editing, eclectic editing, copy-text

Firenze University Press Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

Formats

PDF

Pages: 147-173

Published by: Firenze University Press

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-224-9.07

Download PDF

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0

XML

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-224-9.07

Download XML

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0

References

  1. Alexander P. (ed.) (1951), The Complete Works of Shakespeare, Collins, London.
  2. Alexander P. (1952), Restoring Shakespeare: The Modern Editor’s Task, «Shakespeare Survey», 5: 1-19.
  3. Bate J. (ed.) (1995), William Shakespeare: Titus Andronicus, The Arden Shakespeare, Routledge, London.
  4. Bate J. (2007), The Case for the Folio. Royal Shakespeare Company, <https://cdn2.rsc.org.uk/sitefinity/Play-resources/case_for_the_folio.pdf?sfvrsn=63c35521_2>
  5. Bate J., Rasmussen E. (eds.) (2007), William Shakespeare: Complete Works, The RSC Shakespeare, The Royal Shakespeare / Macmillan / Random House, London-New York.
  6. Bédier J. (ed.) (1913), «Le Lai du l’ombre» par Jean Renart, 2ª ed., Didot, Paris.
  7. Bédier J. (1928), La tradition manuscrite de Lai du l’ombre: Réflexions sur l’art d’éditer les anciens texte, «Romania», 54: 161-196, 321-356.
  8. Bevington D. (1987), Determining the Indeterminate: The Oxford Shakespeare, «Shakespeare Quarterly», 38: 501-519. 10.2307/2870430
  9. Bevington D. (ed.) (1992), The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 4th ed., Harper Collins, New York.
  10. Bevington D. (ed.) (1997), The Complete Works of Shakespeare, updated 4th ed., Longman, New York.
  11. Bevington D. (ed.) (1998), William Shakespeare: Troilus and Cressida, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Walton-on-Thames.
  12. Blayney P. (1982), The Texts of «King Lear» and their Origins, I: Nicholas Oakes and the First Quarto of «King Lear», Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  13. Bowers F. (1955), On Editing Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Dramatists, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
  14. Bowers F. (1978), Greg’s “Rationale of Copy-Text” Revisited, «Studies in Bibliography», 31: 90-161.
  15. Brockbank P. (ed.) (1979), The New Cambridge Shakespeare Editorial Guide and Specimen Pages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  16. Brooke N. (ed.) (1990), William Shakespeare: Macbeth, The Oxford Shakespeare, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  17. Capell E. (ed.) (1767), Mr William Shakespeare His Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies, J. & R. Tonson, London.
  18. Cartelli T. (ed.) (2016), Richard III, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition: Later Plays and Poems, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 564-647.
  19. Clark W. G., Wright W. A. (eds.) (1863-1866), William Shakespeare. The Works: The Cambridge Shakespeare, Macmillan and Co., London-Cambridge.
  20. Clark W. G., Wright W. A. (eds.) (1864), The Works of William Shakespeare: The Globe Edition, Macmillan and Co., London-Cambridge.
  21. de Grazia M. (1988), The Essential Shakespeare and the Material Book, «Textual Practice», 2: 69-86.
  22. de Grazia M., Stallybrass P. (1993), The Materiality of Shakespeare’s Text, «Shakespeare Quarterly», 44: 255-283.
  23. Del Vecchio D., Hammond A. (eds.) (1998), William Shakespeare: Pericles, Prince of Tyre, The New Cambridge Shakespeare, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  24. Dawson A. B. (ed.) (2016), Hamlet, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition: Later Plays and Poems, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 121-223.
  25. Edwards P. (ed.) (1985), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The New Cambridge Shakespeare, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  26. EEBO-TCP: Early Books Online – Text Creation Partnership, 2014, Text Creation Partnership.
  27. Egan G. (2010), The Struggle for Shakespeare’s Text: Twentieth-Century Editorial Theory and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  28. Egan G. (2011), Precision, Consistency and Completeness in Early-Modern Playbook Manuscripts: The Evidence from Thomas of Woodstock and John a Kent and John a Cumber, «The Library», 12: 376-391. <https://doi.org/doi:10.1093/library/12.4.376> (08/19)
  29. Egan G. (2013), The Presentist Threat to Editions of Shakespeare, en DiPietro C., Grady H. (eds.), Shakespeare and the Urgency of Now: Criticism and Theory in the Twenty-First Century, Palgrave Shakespeare Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke: 38-59.
  30. Evans G. B. (ed.) (1974), The Riverside Shakespeare, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
  31. Evans G. B. (1976), “Shakespeare Restored” – Once Again!, en Lancashire A. (ed.), Editing Renaissance Dramatic Texts English, Italian, and Spanish, Garland Publishing, New York: 39-56.
  32. Evans G. B. (ed.) (1997), The Riverside Shakespeare, 2nd ed., Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
  33. Farmer A. B. (2002), Shakespeare and the New Textualism, en Elton W. R., Mucciolo J. M. (eds.), The Shakespearean International Yearbook 2. Ashgate, Aldershot: 158-179.
  34. Foakes R. A. (ed.) (1997), William Shakespeare: King Lear, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomas Nelson and Sons, Walton-on-Thames.
  35. Gossett S. (ed.) (2004), William Shakespeare: Pericles, Prince of Tyre, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Learning, London.
  36. Gossett S. (ed.) (2016), All’s Well That Ends Well, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition: Later Plays and Poems, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 938-1003.
  37. Gossett S., McMullan G. (2016), General Textual Introduction, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 75-92.
  38. Greenblatt S. (ed.) (1997), The Norton Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford edition, W. W. Norton & Company, New York.
  39. Greenblatt S. (ed.) (2016), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition, W. W. Norton & Company, New York.
  40. Greg W.W. (1910a), The Hamlet Quartos, 1603, 1604, «Modern Language Review», 5: 196-197.
  41. Greg W.W. (ed.) (1910b), Shakespeare’s Merry Wives of Windsor 1602, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  42. Greg W.W. (1928), Principles of Emendation in Shakespeare, Annual Shakespeare Lecture of the British Academy, Humphrey Milford, London.
  43. Greg W.W. (1931), Dramatic Documents from the Elizabethan Playhouses: Stage Plots; Actors’ Parts; Prompt Books, Clarendon, Oxford.
  44. Greg W.W. (1942), The Editorial Problem in Shakespeare, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  45. Greg W.W. (1950-1951), The Rationale of Copy-Text, «Studies in Bibliography», 3: 19-36.
  46. Greg W.W. (1955), Shakespeare’s First Folio: Its Bibliographical and Textual History, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  47. Halio J. (ed.) (1992), William Shakespeare: The Tragedy of King Lear, The New Cambridge Shakespeare, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  48. Halio J. (ed.) (1996), The First Quarto of King Lear, The New Cambridge Shakespeare The Early Quartos, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  49. Hanmer T. (ed.) (1743), The Works of William Shakespear, Printed at the Theatre, Oxford.
  50. Hibbard G. R. (ed.) (1987), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The Oxford Shakespeare, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  51. Hinman C. (1963), The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  52. Hinman C. (ed.) (1968), The First Folio of Shakespeare : Norton Facsimile, W. W. Norton / Hamlyn, New-York-London.
  53. Honigmann E. A. J. (ed.) (1996), William Shakespeare: Othello, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Nelson, London.
  54. Housman Alfred A. (1988), The Editing of Manilius (ed. Orig. 1903), en Ricks C. (ed.), Collected Poems and Selected Prose, Lane-Penguin, London: 372-387.
  55. Howard-Hill T. H. (1995), English Renaissance: Non-Shakespearean Drama, en Greetham D. C. (ed.), Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research, Modern Language Association of America, New York: 231-252.
  56. Ioppolo G. (1991), Revising Shakespeare, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  57. Ioppolo G. (ed.) (2016), King Lear, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition: Late Plays and Poems, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 623-866.
  58. Irace K. O. (ed.) (1998), The First Quarto of «Hamlet», The New Cambridge Shakespeare The Early Quartos, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  59. Jenkins H. (ed.) (1982), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The Arden Shakespeare, Methuen, London.
  60. Johnson S. (ed.) (1765), The Plays of William Shakespeare, Tonson-Corbet, London.
  61. Jowett J. (ed.) (2000), William Shakespeare: Richard III, The Oxford Shakespeare, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  62. Jowett J. (2006), Editing Shakespeare’s Plays in the Twentieth Century, «Shakespeare Survey», 59: 1-19.
  63. Jowett J. (2007), Shakespeare and Text, Oxford Shakespeare Topics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  64. Jowett J. (ed.) (2011), Sir Thomas More, The Arden Shakespeare, Methuen A & C Black Publishers, London.
  65. Jowett J. (ed.) (2016), Hamlet, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Modern Critical Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1993-2099.
  66. Jowett J. (ed.) (2017a), Hamlet, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1114-1228.
  67. Jowett J. (ed.) (2017b), King Lear, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.)., The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 1223-1338.
  68. Jowett J. (2017c), Shakespeare and the Kingdom of Error, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare, The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: xlix-lxiii.
  69. Jowett J. (2017d), Shakespeare, Early Modern Textual Culutres, and This Edition: An Introduction, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare, The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition Oxford University Press, Oxfor
  70. Kastan D. S. (ed.) (2002), William Shakespeare: Henry IV Part One, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Learning, London.
  71. Lancashire I. (ed.) (2006), Lexicons of Early Modern English, University of Toronto Press.
  72. Levenson J. (ed.) (2000), William Shakespeare: Romeo and Juliet, The Oxford Shakespeare, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  73. Long W. B. (1985), Stage directions: a misinterpreted factor in determining textual provenance, «Text», 2: 121-137.
  74. Loughnane R. (ed.) (2016), All’s Well That Ends Well, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Modern Critical Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2271-2346.
  75. Maguire L. E. (1996), Shakespearean Suspect Texts: The ‘Bad’ Quartos and Their Contexts, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  76. Marcus L. S. (1996), Unediting the Renaissance: Shakespeare, Marlowe, Milton, Routledge, London.
  77. Marcus L. S. (2007), Textual Scholarship, en Nicholl D. G. (ed.), Introduction to Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures, Modern Language Association of America, New York 145-159.
  78. Martínez Luciano J. V. (1984), Shakespeare en la crítica bibliotextual, Instituto Shakespeare de la Universidad de Valencia, Valencia.
  79. Massai S. (2007), Shakespeare and the Rise of the Editor, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  80. McGann J. (1983), A Critique of Modern Textual Criticism, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  81. McKenzie D. F. (1969), Printers of the Mind: Some Notes on Bibliographical Theories and Printing-House Practices, «Studies in Bibliography», 22: 1-76.
  82. McKenzie D. F. (1986), Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts, British Library, London.
  83. McKerrow R. B. (ed.) (1904), The Works of Thomas Nashe, A. H. Bullen, London.
  84. McKerrow R. B. (1931), The Elizabethan Printer and Dramatic Manuscripts, «The Library», 12: 253-275.
  85. McKerrow R. B. (1933), The Treatment of Shakespeare’s Text by his Earliest Editors, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  86. McKerrow R. B. (1935), A Suggestion Regarding Shakespeare’s Manuscripts, «Review of English Studies», 11, 459-465.
  87. McKerrow R. B. (1939), Prolegomena for the Oxford Shakespeare: A study in editorial method, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  88. McLaverty J. (1984), The Concept of Authorial Intention in Textual Criticism, «The Library», 6: 121-138.
  89. McLeod R. (1982), UnEditing Shak-speare, «Sub-stance», 33/34: 28-55.
  90. McManus C. (ed.) (2016), Othello, en Greenblatt S. (ed.), The Norton Shakespeare: Third Edition: Later Plays and Poems, W. W. Norton & Company, New York: 377-454.
  91. Mowat B. A., Werstine P. (eds.) (1992), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The New Folger Library Shakespeare, Simon & Schuster, New York.
  92. Mowat B. A., Werstine P. (eds.) (1993a), William Shakespeare: Othello, The New Folger Library Shakespeare, Simon & Schuster, New York.
  93. Mowat B. A., Werstine P. (eds.) (1993b), William Shakespeare: King Lear, The New Folger Library Shakespeare, Simon & Schuster, New York.
  94. Murphy A. (2003), Shakespeare in Print: A History and Chronology of Shakespeare Publishing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  95. Murphy A. (2011), W. W. Greg (9 July 1875 - 4 March 1959), en DiPietro C. (ed.), Bradley, Greg, Folger: Great Shakespearians, vol. IX, Continuum,London and New York.
  96. Orgel S. (1996), What is an editor?, «Shakespeare Studies», 14: 23-29, 75-78.
  97. Parrott T. M., Craig H. (eds.) (1938), The Tragedy of ‘Hamlet’: A Critical Edition of the Second Quarto, 1604, Princeton University Press / Oxford University Press, Londres.
  98. Paul G. (2006), A Brief History of the Edited Shakespearean Text, «Literature Compass», 3: 182-194. 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2006.00305.x
  99. Pollard A.W. (1917), Shakespeare’s Fight with the Pirates, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  100. Pollard A. W., Wilson J. D. (1920), What Follows If Some Good Quarto Editions of Shakespeare’s Plays Were Printed from His Autograph, «Transactions of the Bibliographical Society», 15: 136-139.
  101. Pope A. (ed.) (1723), The Works of Mr. William Shakespear, Jacob Tonson, London.
  102. Pope A. (ed.) (1729), The Works of Shakespear, Jacob Tonson, London.
  103. Proudfoot R. (2001), Shakespeare: Text, Stage and Canon, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Learning, London.
  104. Proudfoot R. (2002), New Conservatism and the Theatrical Text, «Shakespeare International Yearbook», 2: 127-142.
  105. Proudfoot R., Thompson A., Kastan D. S. (2004), The Arden Shakespeare Third Series Editorial Guidelines, Bloomsbury, London-Oxford.
  106. Rasmussen E. (2007), Editions and Textual Studies, «Shakespeare Survey», 60: 361-369.
  107. Reiman D. H. (1987), Versioning: The Presentation of Multiple Texts, en Romantic Texts and Contexts University of Missouri Press, Columbia: 167-180.
  108. Reiman D. H. (1995), Nineteenth-century British Poetry and Prose, en Greetham D. C. (ed.), Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research, Modern Language Association of America, New York: 308-330.
  109. Rowe N. (ed.) (1709), The Works of Mr. William Shakespear, Jacob Tonson, London.
  110. Smith D. N. (1928), Shakespeare in the Eighteenth Century, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  111. Stillinger J. (1994), Coleridge and Textual Instability: The Multiple Versions of the Major Poems, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  112. Tanselle G. T. (1995), The Varieties of Scholarly Editing, en Greetham D. C. (ed.), Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research, Modern Language Association of America, New York: 9-32.
  113. Taylor G. (1987a), General Introduction, en Wells S., Taylor G. (eds.), Willian Shakespeare. A Textual Companion, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 1-161.
  114. Taylor G. (1987b), Hamlet, en Wells S., Taylor G. (eds.), Willian Shakespeare. A Textual Companion, Clarendon Press, Oxford: 396-420.
  115. Taylor G. (ed.) (2017), Othello, en Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 3137-3250.
  116. Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.) (2016), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Modern Critical Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  117. Taylor G., Jowett J., Bourus T., Egan G. (eds.) (2017), The New Oxford Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Critical Reference Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  118. Taylor G., Warren M. (eds.) (1983), The Division of the Kingdoms: Shakespeare’s Two Versions of King Lear, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  119. Theobald L. (ed.) (1726), Shakespeare Restored or, A Specimen of the Many Erros, as Well Committed, as Unamended, by Mr. Pope in his late Edition of this Poet, R. Franklin, London.
  120. Theobald L. (ed.) (1733), The Works of Shakespeare, A. Bettesworth, London.
  121. Thompson A., Taylor N. (1997), O That This Too Too XXXXXX Text Would Melt: Hamlet and the Indecisions of Modern Editors and Publishers, «TEXT: An Interdisciplinary Annual of Textual Studies», 10: 221-236.
  122. Thompson A., Taylor N. (eds.) (2006a), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Learning, London.
  123. Thompson A., Taylor N. (eds.) (2006b), William Shakespeare: Hamlet: The Texts of 1603 and 1623, The Arden Shakespeare, Thomson Learning, London.
  124. Tronch Pérez J. (2006), Editing (and Revering) National Authors: Shakespeare and Cervantes, en González J.M. (ed.), Spanish Studies in Shakespeare and His Contemporaries, University of Delaware Press, Newark: 43-60.
  125. Urkowitz S. (1980), Shakespeare’s Revision of King Lear, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
  126. Warburton W. (ed.) (1747), The Works of William Shakespeare, A. Bettesworth, London.
  127. Warren M. (1978), Quarto and Folio King Lear: an Interpretation of Albany and Edgar, en Bevington D., Halio J. (eds.), Shakespeare, Pattern of Excelling Nature, University of Delaware Press, Newark NJ: 95-107.
  128. Wells S. (1985), Nuevas ediciones shakespearianas, «Cuadernos de Traducción e Interpretación», 5-6: 11-36.
  129. Wells S. (ed.) (2000), William Shakespeare: King Lear, The Oxford Shakespeare, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  130. Wells S., Taylor G. (eds.) (1987), Willian Shakespeare. A Textual Companion, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  131. Wells S., Taylor G. (1990), The Oxford Shakespeare Re-viewed, «Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography», 4: 6-20.
  132. Wells S., Taylor G., Jowett J., Montgomery W. (eds.) (1986a), William Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Clarendon, Oxford.
  133. Wells S., Taylor G., Jowett J., Montgomery W. (eds.) (1986b), William Shakespeare: The Complete Works: Original Spelling Edition, Clarendon, Oxford.
  134. Werstine P. (1988a), McKerrow’s “Suggestion” and Twentieth-Century Shakespeare Textual Criticism, «Renaissance Drama», 19: 149-173.
  135. Werstine P. (1988b), The Textual Mystery of Hamlet, «Shakespeare Quarterly», 39: 1-26.
  136. Werstine P. (1990a), A Century of “Bad” Shakespeare Quartos, «Shakespeare Quarterly», 50: 310-333.
  137. Werstine P. (1990b), Narratives About Printed Shakespeare Texts: “Foul Papers” and “Bad” Quartos, «Shakespeare Quarterly», 41: 65-86.
  138. Werstine P. (1995), Shakespeare, en Greetham D. C. (ed.), Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research, Modern Language Association of America, New York: 253-282.
  139. Werstine P. (2004), Housmania: Episodes in Twentieth-century “Critical” Editing of Shakespeare, en Erne L., Kidnie M. J. (eds.), Textual Performances: The Modern Reproduction of Shakespeare’s Drama, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 49-62.
  140. West III J. L. W. (1994), Fair Copy, Authorial Intention, and “Versioning”, «TEXT: An Interdisciplinary Annual of Textual Studies», 6: 81-89.
  141. Williams G. W., Evans G. (eds.) (1974), The History of King Henry the Fourth, as revised by Sir Edward Dering, University of Virginia Press, for the Folger Shakespeare Library, Charlottesville, VA.
  142. Wilson F. P. (1970), Shakespeare and the New Bibliography, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  143. Wilson J. D. (1923), Bibliographic Links between the Three Pages and the Good Quartos, en Pollard A. W. (eds.), Shakespeare’s Hand in the Play of Sir Thomas More, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 113-141.
  144. Wilson J. D. (ed.) (1934a), William Shakespeare: Hamlet, The New Shakespeare, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  145. Wilson J. D. (1934b), The Manuscript of Shakespeare’s Hamlet and the Problems of Its Transmission: An Essay in Critical Bibliography, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  146. Zeller H. (1975), New Approach to the Critical Constitution of Literary Texts, «Studies in Bibliography», 28: 231-263.
La edición del diálogo teatral (siglos XVI-XVII)

This chapter is part of

La edición del diálogo teatral (siglos XVI-XVII)

Edited by: Giuliani, L.; Pineda, V.

Export citation

Selected format

Usage statistics policy
  • 9Chapter Downloads

Cita come:
Tronch, J.; 2021; Evolución de los criterios ecdóticos en las ediciones modernas del teatro de Shakespeare. Firenze, Firenze University Press.

Distributori

Indici e aggregatori bibliometrici