Stephen Spector

‘One of the chief puzzles of our early dramatic literature’

Well, I’ve read it once and quite casually, but I’ve got the keyboard. My theory is that it’s the unfinished end result of some chap’s hobby. He’s taken a cycle play and then added into it plays from other sources to try and create the perfect cycle. He’s worked with three other scribes as his eyes have failed him and then abandoned the task when he’s either died, or his wife has let him come in from the shed.

It may show more not be a great work of literature, but there are some vistas of outstanding natural beauty. The poetry is skilled, working verse, if you know what I mean. The quality’s a little uneven because the interpolated sections are often much better written than the base cycle. It’s also not the most accessible work. It’s worth having a look at Beadle’s Cambridge Companion to Medieval English Theatre, particularly Meg Twycross’s essay which should make it a bit clearer how the text would have been used.

Particularly impressive is the technicality of what the editor, Spector, has achieved. Such a complex manuscript, and he managed to bring it into a form where I can read it while still noting every jot and tittle. There’s are two earlier editions. I’ve not seen them, but it’s worth noting that EETS isn’t doing this for the money and they don’t bring out a new edition unless it’s needed.

Perhaps the plays are more interesting than good, but there’s a charming naïvety to them that makes them an enjoyable read (if you can stomach the rampant anti-Semitism and Islamophobia). show less

This has some particularly useful essays on the cycle. Worth getting for that alone. Also a very good notes section and a glossary. You’re going to need it. The cycle’s written in the East Anglian dialect and the scribes CANNOT spell.