<p>This essay considers the 1613 Wells Cordwainers’ pageant of SS Crispin and Crispianus through an exploration of hagiographical appropriation in two other contemporary iterations of the St Crispin legend and the conditions of English occasional pageantry. A comparison with the prose tale <em>The Gentle Craft</em> by Thomas Deloney and the stage play <em>A Shoemaker, A Gentleman </em>by William Rowley<em> </em>indicates that the Cordwainers improvised on a popular Jacobean version of their patron saints as romance heroes instead of holy martyrs. </p>

This article considers the narrative and theatrical strategies used by Thomas Heywood to sanctify Elizabeth I as a virgin martyr saint in the remarkable, yet understudied, Reformation history play If You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, Part I, or the Troubles of Queen Elizabeth (ca. 1605). I examine how Heywood reads against Foxe even as he draws on the history of the English Reformation from the Book of Martyrs to create a narrative of virgin martyrdom; I discuss how the play's miraculous theatricality reforms past iterations of religious knowledge in drama, and show that the play recovers hagiography for English Protestantism. I conclude by suggesting that Heywood invented the Stuart saint play. Cet article se penche sur la narration et sur les stratégies théâtrales qu'utilise Thomas Heywood afin de sanctifier Elisabeth I ère en tant que vierge martyre et sainte, dans sa pièce If You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, Part I, or the Troubles of Queen Elizabeth (c. 1605). Cette pièce porte sur l'histoire de la Réforme et, bien que peu étudiée, constitue une oeuvre remarquable. L'article examine comment Heywood va à l'encontre de Foxe, même lorsqu'il emprunte à l'histoire de la Réforme anglaise prise du Book of Martyrs afin de produire le récit du martyre d'une vierge. On y discute de quelle façon la théâtralité miraculeuse de la pièce dramatise des connaissances d'histoire religieuse passée, et on montre que la pièce regénère une hagiographie pour le protestantisme anglais. On propose en conclusion que le théâtre hagiographique stuartien est une invention de Heywood. Q ueen Elizabeth I died in early 1603 and reappeared shortly thereafter at the Red Bull theatre in a play produced by the newly formed Queen Anne's Men. If You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, Part 1, or the Troubles of Queen Elizabeth (ca. 1605) dramatizes the struggles and imprisonment of Elizabeth during the Roman Catholic regime of her predecessor and half-sister, Queen Mary. Although the play has received little attention in scholarship, it proved to be one of the most popular plays of the Stuart era, enjoying eight printings between 1605 and 1639. 1 The play, like its companion If You Know Not

No abstract

to the scholarship of early performance but also-and especially-to our field at large. In their brief introduction, Butterworth and Normington note that Medieval Theatre Performance emerged out of a particular challenge: the problem of addressing not the contexts of past performances but "performance itself" (1). This challenge will be recognizable to scholars of performance across divisions of geography, culture, and time. What "performance" means in this collection is various, and the editors observe that "the separation of the disciplines of theatre/ dance/puppetry/automata is a fabricated one" (3). Only a quarter of the chapters focus on theatricality within dramatic forms; the rest consider primarily genres that involve dance, built spectacle, puppetry, automata, or some other form of bodily representation or presentation that confounds definition. The essays incorporate innovative methodologies and respond to theories of theatre and performance from Richard Schechner to Carrie Noland. Furthermore, the performances examined are not likely to be well known to most readers. Some highlights include an account of the late medieval frenzy of continental dance epidemics, a collective silent and naked miming of the Crucifixion in a Welsh monastery, and a semiautomaton Christ who/that can move his/its lips and eyes, perhaps while the parish priest speaks next to him/it. Many of the essays contemplate problems of archive and repertoire. The late Claire Sponsler, to whom the collection is dedicated, revisits material from her 2014 monograph and reformulates it into a stand-alone essay, "From Archive to Repertoire: The Disguising at Hertford and Performance Practices." Though focused on a particular English court performance, Sponsler considers broadly "the impact of both the problem of evidence and the problem of methodology"

No abstract