[304] The story in the romance is very different.  Erona, after many adventures, marries her lover.  Both episodes are related in Book II, chapters xiii and following (ed. 1590).  They are epitomized by Dyce, whose edition I have of course used.

[305] Here, again, the catastrophe of the play bears no resemblance to the romance.

[306] See III. v.  According to Chetwood (British Theatre, 1752, p. 47), the play was revived in 1671, with a prologue attributing it to Shirley.  This is, of course, possible, but it requires more than Chetwood’s unsupported authority to render it probable.  Fleay suggests that the author is the same as the J. S. of Phillis of Scyros, namely, as I have shown, Jonathan Sidnam.  This seems to me highly improbable.  The play is printed in Hazlitt’s Dodsley, vol. xiv, whence I quote, with necessary corrections.

[307] Bk.  I. chaps. v-viii, Bk.  III. chap. xii, in the edition of 1590.

[308] Quotations are taken, with corrections, from Pearson’s reprint of Glapthorne’s works (1874).

[309] K. Deighton’s emendation, undoubtedly correct, for ‘Love’ of the original. (Conjectural Readings, second series, Calcutta, 1898, p. 136.)

[310] I have been unable to trace this work beyond a reference to Heber’s sale given in Hazlitt’s Handbook.  The original story will be found in Albion’s England, Book IV, chap. xx, of the first Part, published in 1586.  As Dr. Ward points out, it is a variant of the old romance of Havelok.  Edel, with a view to disinheriting his niece Argentile, heir to Diria (?Deira), of which he is regent, seeks to marry her to a base scullion.  This menial, however, is really Curan, prince of Danske, who has sought the court in disguise, in the hope of obtaining the love of the princess, who is mewed up from intercourse with the world.  Of this Argentile is ignorant, and when she hears of her uncle’s purpose, she contrives to escape from court and lives disguised as a shepherdess.  After her flight Curan also leaves the court and assumes a shepherd’s garb, and meeting Argentile by chance again falls in love with her without knowing who she is.  After a while he reveals his identity, and she hers; they are married, and he conquers back her kingdom from the usurping Edel.

[311] So far as I am aware, A. B. Grosart was the first to point this out. (Spenser, iii. p. lxx.)

[312] It is printed in Hazlitt’s Webster, vol. iv.  Fleay, with characteristic assurance, identifies the Thracian Wonder with a lost play of Heywood’s, known only from Henslowe’s Diary, and there called ’War without blows and love without suit.’  He argues:  ’in i. 2, “You never shall again renew your suit;” but the love is given at the end without any suit; and in iii. 2, “Here was a happy war finished without blows."’ The identification, however, will not bear examination.  No battle, it is true, is fought at Sicily’s first appearance, but the