A new chronology forShakespearersquos plays
Douglas Bruster and Genevieve Smith
University of Texas at Austin
AbstractIt is widely recognized that Shakespearersquos verse lines grew progressively longer as
his career unfolded Scholars have traditionally used this fact among others to
date the plays Drawing on the existing and original data relating to their verbal
arrangements this essay constructs a new chronology for 42 dramatic texts andparts of texts by Shakespeare This chronology is based on a constrained corres-
pondence analysis of the playsrsquo internal pauses qualified in relation to a principal
component analysis of other verbal features and the recorded closings of the
London playhouses owing to plague The result is a more specific ordering of
the Shakespeare canon than has previously been available
1 Introduction
It is a commonplace that Shakespearersquos lines became
longer throughout his career Nearly as familiar to
scholars is how this aspect of his verse particularly
his linesrsquo internal pauses as marked by punctuation
sheds light on his worksrsquo chronology Together with
external evidence (such as publication or records
attesting to performance or the availability of a
manuscript for printing) changes to Shakespearersquos
habits in versification have helped establish our
timeline of his works Major chronologies of the
plays and poems including those of EK
Chambers (1930) G Blakemore Evans (Evans
1974 rev 1996) and Gary Taylor (1987) have
drawn on what we know about the patterns of
Shakespearersquos prosody to order his works These
three chronologies agree on the general shape of
his literary output placing Julius Caesar and
Henry V at the midpoint of 38 plays so evaluated
They disagree however as to which year or years
various works were written as well as which came
before or after others in the canon
The present study offers a new chronology for
Shakespearersquos plays based on an analysis of the
most extensive data available concerning the
structure of Shakespearersquos verse lines the pause
counts collected by Ants Oras (1960) We revise
some of Orasrsquos numbers in light of new findings
concerning attribution narrowing Shakespearersquos
portion of particular plays (Titus Andronicus 1
Henry VI Timon of Athens) and adding to our
data set parts of four other texts (Arden of
Faversham Edward III Sir Thomas More and the
Additional Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy)
This enhanced data set is then subjected to a con-
strained correspondence analysis (CCA) with vari-
ous methodological modifications The latter
includes setting a range for Shakespearersquos literary
output and fixing selected lsquoanchorrsquo texts for the de-
termination of dates for the remaining plays These
dates are then compared with the predictions from a
principal component analysis (PCA) of new data
concerning various linguistic features in
Shakespearersquos verse (Tarlinskaja 2014) We
employ a bootstrapping procedure to establish a
likely range for the composition of each work
Finally in light of a theory advanced by J Leeds
Barroll (1991) we construct our timeline of
Shakespearersquos plays by coordinating the CCArsquos
date predictions with periods when the playhouses
of Shakespearersquos time were open for business
Correspondence
Douglas Bruster
Department of English
208 W 21st St Stop B5000
Austin TX 78712-1040
USA
brusteraustinutexasedu
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities The Author 2014 Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of EADHAll rights reserved For Permissions please email journalspermissionsoupcom
1 of 20
doi101093llcfqu068
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities Advance Access published December 8 2014
2 Chronology Background
Orasrsquos aim was to demonstrate historical and au-
thorial patterns in iambic pentameter by tabulating
where punctuated pauses fall within its first nine
syllables (punctuation after the 10th syllable is not
counted) Pauses can be counted in three different
ways in Orasrsquos tabulation he labels these A B and C
pauses A pauses are those signaled by punctuation
of any kind within a pentameter line (Oras counts
short lines but not their terminal punctuation) B
pauses a subgroup of the A pause are so-called
lsquostrongrsquo pauses within the line those signaled by
any punctuation mark other than a comma includ-
ing periods question marks colons semi-colons
and dashes C pauses are composed of punctuation
marks dividing lsquosplit-rsquo or lsquosharedrsquo lines Oras
counted A B and C pauses for 38 Shakespeare
plays adding the A and B pauses as well for Venus
and Adonis The Rape of Lucrece and the SonnetsOras presented his counts both in tables and in
line graphs that display the percentages of pauses in
the first nine syllabic positions of Shakespearersquos pen-
tameter line Because Shakespearersquos verse is iambic
typically with an unstressed syllable followed by a
stressed one pauses tend to come after the even
syllables making these graphs a virtual study in
peaks and valleys The changes across plays that
they reveal have a clear significance for the study
of chronology For example the changing pause
patternsmdashthe averages for each of the nine pause
positionsmdashin groups of plays traditionally identi-
fied with successive phases of Shakespearersquos career
are strikingly different (Fig 1) In works identified
with the beginning of his activities as playwright in
the early and mid-1590s pauses cluster heavily after
the fourth syllable (Fig 1 left panel) As his career
progresses however the distribution balances
between the fourth and the sixth positions (Fig 1
center panel) Toward the end of his time as a
dramatist the most significant proportion of
pauses shifts toward to the sixth position with a
greater number in the second half of the line than
the first (Fig 1 right panel)
The relevance of such data for chronologies of
Shakespearersquos work has long been recognized
(Bathurst 1857) Because it is so comprehensive
Orasrsquos research was used for what we will call the
Fig 1 Pauses in Shakespearersquos plays from three periods early middle and late Average percentage of pauses at each
position is indicated by the black line gray shading indicates 95 confidence intervals Left panel Titus Shrew 1 Henry
VI 2 Henry VI 3 Henry VI Richard III and Two Gentlemen Center panel Much Ado As You Like It Julius Caesar
Hamlet Henry V and Twelfth Night Right panel Coriolanus Tempest Winterrsquos Tale Cymbeline Henry VIII and Two
Noble Kinsmen
D Bruster and G Smith
2 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
lsquoOxford chronologyrsquo (Taylor in Wells and Taylor
1987 pp 69ndash144) which reproduces Orasrsquos A B
and C pauses in separate columns opposite an
ordered list of plays In its discussion of various
plays the Oxford chronology refers to Orasrsquos data
for confirmation of an estimated date or range Yet
there is some divergence between the order implied
by Orasrsquos counts and the order of the Oxford chron-
ology That is 9 of the 38 plays ordered in the
Oxford chronology share an exact position with
the sequence that Orasrsquos A pauses suggest Shrew
3 Henry VI Richard III King John Julius Caesar
Timon Lear Macbeth and Kinsmen Fifteen fall
within two slots of each other in the Oras A order
and Oxford chronology 1 Henry VI Errors Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Richard II Romeo Dream Merry
Wives 2 Henry IV Much Ado As You Like It
Measure Othello Pericles Winterrsquos Tale and
Cymbeline
Yet almost as many plays 14 are separated by
three or more places in the two lists Two Gentlemen
of Verona 2 Henry VI Titus AndronicusMerchant 1
Henry IV Henry V Hamlet Twelfth Night Troilus
Allrsquos Well Antony Coriolanus Tempest and Henry
VIII Of course no test of any single linguistic fea-
turemdashwhether run on lines feminine endings or
colloquialism in versemdashshould be expected to
produce comprehensively satisfying results This is
particularly the case because so many factors extrin-
sic and intrinsic alike can affect the makeup of a
literary text At the same time however it seems
significant that the Oxford chronology and the
Oras data disagree to this extent Some of the
plays are quite divergent in their places Orasrsquos
counts for lsquofirst halfrsquo pauses for instance would
have us put Troilus seven places earlier than
Oxford locates it and Merchant seven places later
Titus and Antony are by this measure six places
later in Oras and both Two Gentlemen and
Coriolanus four places later than in the Oxford
chronology Added to this puzzle is the extremely
unlikely positioning in the Oras data of 2 Henry IV
before 1 Henry IV and of The Tempest before
Periclesmdashchronological placements with which few
if any scholars would be likely to agree
The Oxford chronologyrsquos use of the Oras data
formed the basis of the most sustained examination
to date of the relation between syntax and temporal
ordering in Shakespeare MacDonald P Jacksonrsquos
lsquoPause Patterns in Shakespearersquos Verse Canon and
Chronologyrsquo (Jackson 2002) There Jackson de-
scribes Orasrsquos methodology and findings before sub-
mitting his A-pause counts to statistical analysis
Jackson compared A pauses among all plays produ-
cing 1640 Pearson product moment correlation co-
efficients to indicate how close each text is in terms
of its pause patterning to all the others Listing each
play separately Jackson provides its five closest cor-
relations in descending order and notes that the
results tend to confirm the accuracy of the Oxford
chronology and support our traditional understand-
ing of Shakespearersquos development
Because his methodology emphasizes relation
and proximity among plays Jackson does not seek
to establish new dates for them Yet he acknow-
ledges that his analysis produced correlations that
diverge significantly from what the Oxford chron-
ology would predict Six plays come in for particular
mention The Merchant of Venice (which his results
would place later than Oxford) Merry Wives (later
than Oxford) 2 Henry IV (varied but on the whole
earlier than Oxford) Troilus (earlier than Oxford)
Othello (earlier than Oxford) and Allrsquos Well (later
than Oxford) These differences seem important
not least because such divergence also characterizes
Orasrsquos relation to the 1930 chronology of Chambers
the most authoritative chronology of the time That
is Oras employed Chambersrsquos chronology but did
not revise it even though his own graphs and num-
bers challenged its order in numerous instances The
reluctance is understandable for chronologies by
definition have many working parts Like received
narratives generally chronologies can be lsquostickyrsquo
phenomena something fixed through custom and
hard to dislodge (Kuhn 1962)
3 Correspondence Analysis andPCA
To address the differing number of pauses in vari-
ous texts Oras quite understandably made them
equal by converting pauses to percentages But the
plays (and parts of plays) vary greatly in the amount
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 3 of 20
of data they offer Thus treating the shortest
Shakespeare text in our sample (in this case his
contributions to the lightly punctuated Sir Thomas
More with a scant 32 pauses) as statistically equiva-
lent to his most pause-heavy text (Cymbeline with
2735 pauses) emphasizes the former at the expense
of the latter Making their pause data equal 1 that
is imposes a statistical constraint on them both and
implies equal confidence in how representative their
information is Thus the element of the Oxford
chronology that looks to Oras for confirmation as
well as other studies based on percentages (Gray
1931 Wentersdorf 1951 Jackson 1995) rely on
artificially constrained evidence How then to ac-
knowledge the differential weight of the Oras-type
data
A valuable method for comparing compositional
datamdashamong other types of multivariate datamdashis
correspondence analysis (or CA) (Hirschfeld 1935
Benzecri 1973 Hill 1974 Greenacre 2007) At its
most basic CA is a statistical methodology that
takes categorical information and looks for associ-
ations and strength of associations in the relations
of rows to columns in a contingency table (also
known as a cross tabulation table which contains
frequencies of occurrence) Correspondence analysis
first attempts to identify and then rank the most
statistically significant variation in that data Thus
the first CA axis will account for the largest amount
of variation in the original data the second axis will
account for the next largest portion and so on By
identifying the most crucial of these variables re-
searchers can visualize and interpret the bulk of the
variability in any original data
Germane to our purposes here is the extensive
and sophisticated use of CA in seriation studies
(Greenacre 2007 van de Velden et al 2009
Peeples and Schachner 2012) Seriation or simply
lsquoputting things in orderrsquo is usually an exercise in
relative dating employed when an absolute dating
method may be unavailable In the field of arche-
ology for example researchers are often confronted
with artifacts that only occasionally have informa-
tion regarding production or use attached to them
When carbon dating or information relating to say
tree rings or chemical composition is unavailable
archaeologists have refined the statistical bases of
CA to help them order and thus date (however
approximately) things of uncertain origin By com-
paring the known composition of pottery remains
for instance archeologists may place certain assem-
blages closer together in time based on how similar
they are to one another
Shakespearersquos plays may not strike one as arti-
facts of course but the procedures of CA as refined
for seriation nevertheless provide a statistically
rigorous methodology for examining their material
components On the basis of such an examination
in fact we can offer a provisional chronology that
responds to the differential distribution of fea-
turesmdashin this case pauses as recorded in the verse
of early textsmdashthroughout the canon and various
plays with sections attributed to Shakespeare This
chronology should be understood as a provisional
timeline of when the iambic pentameter in the play
texts under examination was mainly composed By
emphasizing this last phrase we mean to call imme-
diate attention to two things First Orasrsquos prose data
come from the pentameter verse in plays that are
sometimes made up heavily of prose (This is par-
ticularly the case in the late 1590s) Pause pattern
analysis is therefore limited by the amount of verse
in each play Second there is a strong likelihood
that a number of Shakespearersquos plays were written
at one time (even over various times) and revised at
another or others A play title thus need not con-
note an event but may sometimes have been mul-
tiple events or even a process The fixity of any
ordering then needs to be qualified in the context
of diachronic composition
Like Taylor and Jackson we focus on Orasrsquo A
pauses though after deliberation have subtracted
values for shared lines (his C pauses) Our rationale
for this comes from the uneven distribution of
shared lines across the canon and our sense that
this different kind of writingmdashwith a line-ending
full stop built into its very structuremdashneeds to be
measured separately (Reinhold 1942) We have also
performed original tabulations of A (minus C)
pauses for various texts and parts of texts not
included or not disaggregated in Oras These in-
clude parts of the collaborative plays Titus
Andronicus 1 Henry VI Edward III Timon of
Athens Arden of Faversham (scene 8) Sir Thomas
D Bruster and G Smith
4 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
More (the Hand D passages) and the Additional
Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy These
counts appear in Appendix 1 below with informa-
tion regarding the source texts and passages ana-
lyzed in Appendix 2We first performed two statistical procedures on
our resulting data set These are respectively a PCA
and a CA We would note that these procedures
draw on distinct data for the PCA we used propor-
tional values of pause abundance (so for each play
the total proportion of the nine types sums to 1) for
reasons already mentioned (and discussed further
below) we used raw counts for the CA We per-
formed these and all subsequent analyses in R
(R Core Team 2014) using the ca package
(Nenadic and Greenacre 2007) (Note that all of
the code used to produce the analyses and graphs
in this manuscript is available from httpsgithub
comgenevievekathleensmithshakespeare-chronord
ination)
The first Principal Component (PC 1) captured
623 of the total variation in pause composition
among plays mostly capturing variation in the 4th
6th 7th and 8th position pauses (Fig 2a looking at
how far each arrow travels left-rightmdashthat is along
PC 1mdashthose arrows reach the farthest) For its part
PC 2 accounted for another 181 of the total vari-
ation mainly reflecting variation in the 4th 7th
2nd and 8th positions again one may notice far
up or down each arrow goes to gauge its contribu-
tion (Fig 2a) The patterns are broadly similar in
the CA The first CA axis comprised 774 of the
total variation in pause counts among plays and CA
2 accounted for a further 89 Yet now most of the
arrows are more closely aligned with the horizontal
plane (Fig 2b) This means that changes in pauses
among plays are more well represented by a single
axis in the CA rather than in the PCA We can
additionally map the PCA and CA results onto the
same dimensions to compare how they are distrib-
uted relative to one another (Fig 2c and d) The
circles in Figures 2c and d have been scaled to reflect
the relative weights of the data in each analysis In
PCA each play contributes equally to determine the
major axes of variation while in CA plays with low
total pause counts (those that appear as slightly
smaller circles) contribute less to the analysis than
those with more pauses (which appear as larger cir-
cles) This is one advantage of CA as opposed to
PCA it allows one to recognize differences in the
amount of data contributed One can interpret the
positions of the play points by looking back at the
axes of variation in Figures 2a and b Texts are pos-
itioned in relation to where pauses occur in their
pentameter lines and in what proportion For ex-
ample plays like Romeo and Juliet and Richard III
have relatively more pauses early on in lines (ie 1st
through 5th position) while plays like Macbeth and
Tempest have more late-position pauses (6th
through 9th)
4 Bootstrap Methodology
On their own our pause counts cannot give us any
estimate of how certain (or uncertain) we are of the
relative ordering obtained by our CA To under-
stand how small differences in our observed data
may influence the outcome of our analysis we
employ a lsquobootstraprsquo method This is commonly
used across a variety of disciplines including in
archeological studies (Ringrose 1992) The boot-
strapping procedure is a method of resampling In
our case that means taking random samples of
pauses from each play and rerunning our CA
using the new values (Lockyear 2012 Peeples and
Schachner 2012) Because we sample with replace-
ment (meaning some pauses from the original data
will be sampled more than once and others not at
all) the new counts of each pause type will vary
slightly from the original counts We repeat this
resampling 1000 times repeating the CA with
each new set of counts This affords us some meas-
ure of uncertainty for our CA scores and allows us
to estimate 95 confidence intervals for the results
in two dimensions (Fig 3) The resulting confidence
intervals produce a polygon for each play and trace
a gradual arc up and to the right We have called out
five canonical textsndashRichard III Romeo and Juliet
Hamlet Macbeth and The Tempestmdashto show how
these data reveal the chronological progression of
Shakespearersquos works
This lsquoarcrsquo of Shakespearersquos verse pauses also pro-
vides a basic template for understanding the
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 5 of 20
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
2 Chronology Background
Orasrsquos aim was to demonstrate historical and au-
thorial patterns in iambic pentameter by tabulating
where punctuated pauses fall within its first nine
syllables (punctuation after the 10th syllable is not
counted) Pauses can be counted in three different
ways in Orasrsquos tabulation he labels these A B and C
pauses A pauses are those signaled by punctuation
of any kind within a pentameter line (Oras counts
short lines but not their terminal punctuation) B
pauses a subgroup of the A pause are so-called
lsquostrongrsquo pauses within the line those signaled by
any punctuation mark other than a comma includ-
ing periods question marks colons semi-colons
and dashes C pauses are composed of punctuation
marks dividing lsquosplit-rsquo or lsquosharedrsquo lines Oras
counted A B and C pauses for 38 Shakespeare
plays adding the A and B pauses as well for Venus
and Adonis The Rape of Lucrece and the SonnetsOras presented his counts both in tables and in
line graphs that display the percentages of pauses in
the first nine syllabic positions of Shakespearersquos pen-
tameter line Because Shakespearersquos verse is iambic
typically with an unstressed syllable followed by a
stressed one pauses tend to come after the even
syllables making these graphs a virtual study in
peaks and valleys The changes across plays that
they reveal have a clear significance for the study
of chronology For example the changing pause
patternsmdashthe averages for each of the nine pause
positionsmdashin groups of plays traditionally identi-
fied with successive phases of Shakespearersquos career
are strikingly different (Fig 1) In works identified
with the beginning of his activities as playwright in
the early and mid-1590s pauses cluster heavily after
the fourth syllable (Fig 1 left panel) As his career
progresses however the distribution balances
between the fourth and the sixth positions (Fig 1
center panel) Toward the end of his time as a
dramatist the most significant proportion of
pauses shifts toward to the sixth position with a
greater number in the second half of the line than
the first (Fig 1 right panel)
The relevance of such data for chronologies of
Shakespearersquos work has long been recognized
(Bathurst 1857) Because it is so comprehensive
Orasrsquos research was used for what we will call the
Fig 1 Pauses in Shakespearersquos plays from three periods early middle and late Average percentage of pauses at each
position is indicated by the black line gray shading indicates 95 confidence intervals Left panel Titus Shrew 1 Henry
VI 2 Henry VI 3 Henry VI Richard III and Two Gentlemen Center panel Much Ado As You Like It Julius Caesar
Hamlet Henry V and Twelfth Night Right panel Coriolanus Tempest Winterrsquos Tale Cymbeline Henry VIII and Two
Noble Kinsmen
D Bruster and G Smith
2 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
lsquoOxford chronologyrsquo (Taylor in Wells and Taylor
1987 pp 69ndash144) which reproduces Orasrsquos A B
and C pauses in separate columns opposite an
ordered list of plays In its discussion of various
plays the Oxford chronology refers to Orasrsquos data
for confirmation of an estimated date or range Yet
there is some divergence between the order implied
by Orasrsquos counts and the order of the Oxford chron-
ology That is 9 of the 38 plays ordered in the
Oxford chronology share an exact position with
the sequence that Orasrsquos A pauses suggest Shrew
3 Henry VI Richard III King John Julius Caesar
Timon Lear Macbeth and Kinsmen Fifteen fall
within two slots of each other in the Oras A order
and Oxford chronology 1 Henry VI Errors Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Richard II Romeo Dream Merry
Wives 2 Henry IV Much Ado As You Like It
Measure Othello Pericles Winterrsquos Tale and
Cymbeline
Yet almost as many plays 14 are separated by
three or more places in the two lists Two Gentlemen
of Verona 2 Henry VI Titus AndronicusMerchant 1
Henry IV Henry V Hamlet Twelfth Night Troilus
Allrsquos Well Antony Coriolanus Tempest and Henry
VIII Of course no test of any single linguistic fea-
turemdashwhether run on lines feminine endings or
colloquialism in versemdashshould be expected to
produce comprehensively satisfying results This is
particularly the case because so many factors extrin-
sic and intrinsic alike can affect the makeup of a
literary text At the same time however it seems
significant that the Oxford chronology and the
Oras data disagree to this extent Some of the
plays are quite divergent in their places Orasrsquos
counts for lsquofirst halfrsquo pauses for instance would
have us put Troilus seven places earlier than
Oxford locates it and Merchant seven places later
Titus and Antony are by this measure six places
later in Oras and both Two Gentlemen and
Coriolanus four places later than in the Oxford
chronology Added to this puzzle is the extremely
unlikely positioning in the Oras data of 2 Henry IV
before 1 Henry IV and of The Tempest before
Periclesmdashchronological placements with which few
if any scholars would be likely to agree
The Oxford chronologyrsquos use of the Oras data
formed the basis of the most sustained examination
to date of the relation between syntax and temporal
ordering in Shakespeare MacDonald P Jacksonrsquos
lsquoPause Patterns in Shakespearersquos Verse Canon and
Chronologyrsquo (Jackson 2002) There Jackson de-
scribes Orasrsquos methodology and findings before sub-
mitting his A-pause counts to statistical analysis
Jackson compared A pauses among all plays produ-
cing 1640 Pearson product moment correlation co-
efficients to indicate how close each text is in terms
of its pause patterning to all the others Listing each
play separately Jackson provides its five closest cor-
relations in descending order and notes that the
results tend to confirm the accuracy of the Oxford
chronology and support our traditional understand-
ing of Shakespearersquos development
Because his methodology emphasizes relation
and proximity among plays Jackson does not seek
to establish new dates for them Yet he acknow-
ledges that his analysis produced correlations that
diverge significantly from what the Oxford chron-
ology would predict Six plays come in for particular
mention The Merchant of Venice (which his results
would place later than Oxford) Merry Wives (later
than Oxford) 2 Henry IV (varied but on the whole
earlier than Oxford) Troilus (earlier than Oxford)
Othello (earlier than Oxford) and Allrsquos Well (later
than Oxford) These differences seem important
not least because such divergence also characterizes
Orasrsquos relation to the 1930 chronology of Chambers
the most authoritative chronology of the time That
is Oras employed Chambersrsquos chronology but did
not revise it even though his own graphs and num-
bers challenged its order in numerous instances The
reluctance is understandable for chronologies by
definition have many working parts Like received
narratives generally chronologies can be lsquostickyrsquo
phenomena something fixed through custom and
hard to dislodge (Kuhn 1962)
3 Correspondence Analysis andPCA
To address the differing number of pauses in vari-
ous texts Oras quite understandably made them
equal by converting pauses to percentages But the
plays (and parts of plays) vary greatly in the amount
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 3 of 20
of data they offer Thus treating the shortest
Shakespeare text in our sample (in this case his
contributions to the lightly punctuated Sir Thomas
More with a scant 32 pauses) as statistically equiva-
lent to his most pause-heavy text (Cymbeline with
2735 pauses) emphasizes the former at the expense
of the latter Making their pause data equal 1 that
is imposes a statistical constraint on them both and
implies equal confidence in how representative their
information is Thus the element of the Oxford
chronology that looks to Oras for confirmation as
well as other studies based on percentages (Gray
1931 Wentersdorf 1951 Jackson 1995) rely on
artificially constrained evidence How then to ac-
knowledge the differential weight of the Oras-type
data
A valuable method for comparing compositional
datamdashamong other types of multivariate datamdashis
correspondence analysis (or CA) (Hirschfeld 1935
Benzecri 1973 Hill 1974 Greenacre 2007) At its
most basic CA is a statistical methodology that
takes categorical information and looks for associ-
ations and strength of associations in the relations
of rows to columns in a contingency table (also
known as a cross tabulation table which contains
frequencies of occurrence) Correspondence analysis
first attempts to identify and then rank the most
statistically significant variation in that data Thus
the first CA axis will account for the largest amount
of variation in the original data the second axis will
account for the next largest portion and so on By
identifying the most crucial of these variables re-
searchers can visualize and interpret the bulk of the
variability in any original data
Germane to our purposes here is the extensive
and sophisticated use of CA in seriation studies
(Greenacre 2007 van de Velden et al 2009
Peeples and Schachner 2012) Seriation or simply
lsquoputting things in orderrsquo is usually an exercise in
relative dating employed when an absolute dating
method may be unavailable In the field of arche-
ology for example researchers are often confronted
with artifacts that only occasionally have informa-
tion regarding production or use attached to them
When carbon dating or information relating to say
tree rings or chemical composition is unavailable
archaeologists have refined the statistical bases of
CA to help them order and thus date (however
approximately) things of uncertain origin By com-
paring the known composition of pottery remains
for instance archeologists may place certain assem-
blages closer together in time based on how similar
they are to one another
Shakespearersquos plays may not strike one as arti-
facts of course but the procedures of CA as refined
for seriation nevertheless provide a statistically
rigorous methodology for examining their material
components On the basis of such an examination
in fact we can offer a provisional chronology that
responds to the differential distribution of fea-
turesmdashin this case pauses as recorded in the verse
of early textsmdashthroughout the canon and various
plays with sections attributed to Shakespeare This
chronology should be understood as a provisional
timeline of when the iambic pentameter in the play
texts under examination was mainly composed By
emphasizing this last phrase we mean to call imme-
diate attention to two things First Orasrsquos prose data
come from the pentameter verse in plays that are
sometimes made up heavily of prose (This is par-
ticularly the case in the late 1590s) Pause pattern
analysis is therefore limited by the amount of verse
in each play Second there is a strong likelihood
that a number of Shakespearersquos plays were written
at one time (even over various times) and revised at
another or others A play title thus need not con-
note an event but may sometimes have been mul-
tiple events or even a process The fixity of any
ordering then needs to be qualified in the context
of diachronic composition
Like Taylor and Jackson we focus on Orasrsquo A
pauses though after deliberation have subtracted
values for shared lines (his C pauses) Our rationale
for this comes from the uneven distribution of
shared lines across the canon and our sense that
this different kind of writingmdashwith a line-ending
full stop built into its very structuremdashneeds to be
measured separately (Reinhold 1942) We have also
performed original tabulations of A (minus C)
pauses for various texts and parts of texts not
included or not disaggregated in Oras These in-
clude parts of the collaborative plays Titus
Andronicus 1 Henry VI Edward III Timon of
Athens Arden of Faversham (scene 8) Sir Thomas
D Bruster and G Smith
4 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
More (the Hand D passages) and the Additional
Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy These
counts appear in Appendix 1 below with informa-
tion regarding the source texts and passages ana-
lyzed in Appendix 2We first performed two statistical procedures on
our resulting data set These are respectively a PCA
and a CA We would note that these procedures
draw on distinct data for the PCA we used propor-
tional values of pause abundance (so for each play
the total proportion of the nine types sums to 1) for
reasons already mentioned (and discussed further
below) we used raw counts for the CA We per-
formed these and all subsequent analyses in R
(R Core Team 2014) using the ca package
(Nenadic and Greenacre 2007) (Note that all of
the code used to produce the analyses and graphs
in this manuscript is available from httpsgithub
comgenevievekathleensmithshakespeare-chronord
ination)
The first Principal Component (PC 1) captured
623 of the total variation in pause composition
among plays mostly capturing variation in the 4th
6th 7th and 8th position pauses (Fig 2a looking at
how far each arrow travels left-rightmdashthat is along
PC 1mdashthose arrows reach the farthest) For its part
PC 2 accounted for another 181 of the total vari-
ation mainly reflecting variation in the 4th 7th
2nd and 8th positions again one may notice far
up or down each arrow goes to gauge its contribu-
tion (Fig 2a) The patterns are broadly similar in
the CA The first CA axis comprised 774 of the
total variation in pause counts among plays and CA
2 accounted for a further 89 Yet now most of the
arrows are more closely aligned with the horizontal
plane (Fig 2b) This means that changes in pauses
among plays are more well represented by a single
axis in the CA rather than in the PCA We can
additionally map the PCA and CA results onto the
same dimensions to compare how they are distrib-
uted relative to one another (Fig 2c and d) The
circles in Figures 2c and d have been scaled to reflect
the relative weights of the data in each analysis In
PCA each play contributes equally to determine the
major axes of variation while in CA plays with low
total pause counts (those that appear as slightly
smaller circles) contribute less to the analysis than
those with more pauses (which appear as larger cir-
cles) This is one advantage of CA as opposed to
PCA it allows one to recognize differences in the
amount of data contributed One can interpret the
positions of the play points by looking back at the
axes of variation in Figures 2a and b Texts are pos-
itioned in relation to where pauses occur in their
pentameter lines and in what proportion For ex-
ample plays like Romeo and Juliet and Richard III
have relatively more pauses early on in lines (ie 1st
through 5th position) while plays like Macbeth and
Tempest have more late-position pauses (6th
through 9th)
4 Bootstrap Methodology
On their own our pause counts cannot give us any
estimate of how certain (or uncertain) we are of the
relative ordering obtained by our CA To under-
stand how small differences in our observed data
may influence the outcome of our analysis we
employ a lsquobootstraprsquo method This is commonly
used across a variety of disciplines including in
archeological studies (Ringrose 1992) The boot-
strapping procedure is a method of resampling In
our case that means taking random samples of
pauses from each play and rerunning our CA
using the new values (Lockyear 2012 Peeples and
Schachner 2012) Because we sample with replace-
ment (meaning some pauses from the original data
will be sampled more than once and others not at
all) the new counts of each pause type will vary
slightly from the original counts We repeat this
resampling 1000 times repeating the CA with
each new set of counts This affords us some meas-
ure of uncertainty for our CA scores and allows us
to estimate 95 confidence intervals for the results
in two dimensions (Fig 3) The resulting confidence
intervals produce a polygon for each play and trace
a gradual arc up and to the right We have called out
five canonical textsndashRichard III Romeo and Juliet
Hamlet Macbeth and The Tempestmdashto show how
these data reveal the chronological progression of
Shakespearersquos works
This lsquoarcrsquo of Shakespearersquos verse pauses also pro-
vides a basic template for understanding the
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 5 of 20
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
lsquoOxford chronologyrsquo (Taylor in Wells and Taylor
1987 pp 69ndash144) which reproduces Orasrsquos A B
and C pauses in separate columns opposite an
ordered list of plays In its discussion of various
plays the Oxford chronology refers to Orasrsquos data
for confirmation of an estimated date or range Yet
there is some divergence between the order implied
by Orasrsquos counts and the order of the Oxford chron-
ology That is 9 of the 38 plays ordered in the
Oxford chronology share an exact position with
the sequence that Orasrsquos A pauses suggest Shrew
3 Henry VI Richard III King John Julius Caesar
Timon Lear Macbeth and Kinsmen Fifteen fall
within two slots of each other in the Oras A order
and Oxford chronology 1 Henry VI Errors Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Richard II Romeo Dream Merry
Wives 2 Henry IV Much Ado As You Like It
Measure Othello Pericles Winterrsquos Tale and
Cymbeline
Yet almost as many plays 14 are separated by
three or more places in the two lists Two Gentlemen
of Verona 2 Henry VI Titus AndronicusMerchant 1
Henry IV Henry V Hamlet Twelfth Night Troilus
Allrsquos Well Antony Coriolanus Tempest and Henry
VIII Of course no test of any single linguistic fea-
turemdashwhether run on lines feminine endings or
colloquialism in versemdashshould be expected to
produce comprehensively satisfying results This is
particularly the case because so many factors extrin-
sic and intrinsic alike can affect the makeup of a
literary text At the same time however it seems
significant that the Oxford chronology and the
Oras data disagree to this extent Some of the
plays are quite divergent in their places Orasrsquos
counts for lsquofirst halfrsquo pauses for instance would
have us put Troilus seven places earlier than
Oxford locates it and Merchant seven places later
Titus and Antony are by this measure six places
later in Oras and both Two Gentlemen and
Coriolanus four places later than in the Oxford
chronology Added to this puzzle is the extremely
unlikely positioning in the Oras data of 2 Henry IV
before 1 Henry IV and of The Tempest before
Periclesmdashchronological placements with which few
if any scholars would be likely to agree
The Oxford chronologyrsquos use of the Oras data
formed the basis of the most sustained examination
to date of the relation between syntax and temporal
ordering in Shakespeare MacDonald P Jacksonrsquos
lsquoPause Patterns in Shakespearersquos Verse Canon and
Chronologyrsquo (Jackson 2002) There Jackson de-
scribes Orasrsquos methodology and findings before sub-
mitting his A-pause counts to statistical analysis
Jackson compared A pauses among all plays produ-
cing 1640 Pearson product moment correlation co-
efficients to indicate how close each text is in terms
of its pause patterning to all the others Listing each
play separately Jackson provides its five closest cor-
relations in descending order and notes that the
results tend to confirm the accuracy of the Oxford
chronology and support our traditional understand-
ing of Shakespearersquos development
Because his methodology emphasizes relation
and proximity among plays Jackson does not seek
to establish new dates for them Yet he acknow-
ledges that his analysis produced correlations that
diverge significantly from what the Oxford chron-
ology would predict Six plays come in for particular
mention The Merchant of Venice (which his results
would place later than Oxford) Merry Wives (later
than Oxford) 2 Henry IV (varied but on the whole
earlier than Oxford) Troilus (earlier than Oxford)
Othello (earlier than Oxford) and Allrsquos Well (later
than Oxford) These differences seem important
not least because such divergence also characterizes
Orasrsquos relation to the 1930 chronology of Chambers
the most authoritative chronology of the time That
is Oras employed Chambersrsquos chronology but did
not revise it even though his own graphs and num-
bers challenged its order in numerous instances The
reluctance is understandable for chronologies by
definition have many working parts Like received
narratives generally chronologies can be lsquostickyrsquo
phenomena something fixed through custom and
hard to dislodge (Kuhn 1962)
3 Correspondence Analysis andPCA
To address the differing number of pauses in vari-
ous texts Oras quite understandably made them
equal by converting pauses to percentages But the
plays (and parts of plays) vary greatly in the amount
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 3 of 20
of data they offer Thus treating the shortest
Shakespeare text in our sample (in this case his
contributions to the lightly punctuated Sir Thomas
More with a scant 32 pauses) as statistically equiva-
lent to his most pause-heavy text (Cymbeline with
2735 pauses) emphasizes the former at the expense
of the latter Making their pause data equal 1 that
is imposes a statistical constraint on them both and
implies equal confidence in how representative their
information is Thus the element of the Oxford
chronology that looks to Oras for confirmation as
well as other studies based on percentages (Gray
1931 Wentersdorf 1951 Jackson 1995) rely on
artificially constrained evidence How then to ac-
knowledge the differential weight of the Oras-type
data
A valuable method for comparing compositional
datamdashamong other types of multivariate datamdashis
correspondence analysis (or CA) (Hirschfeld 1935
Benzecri 1973 Hill 1974 Greenacre 2007) At its
most basic CA is a statistical methodology that
takes categorical information and looks for associ-
ations and strength of associations in the relations
of rows to columns in a contingency table (also
known as a cross tabulation table which contains
frequencies of occurrence) Correspondence analysis
first attempts to identify and then rank the most
statistically significant variation in that data Thus
the first CA axis will account for the largest amount
of variation in the original data the second axis will
account for the next largest portion and so on By
identifying the most crucial of these variables re-
searchers can visualize and interpret the bulk of the
variability in any original data
Germane to our purposes here is the extensive
and sophisticated use of CA in seriation studies
(Greenacre 2007 van de Velden et al 2009
Peeples and Schachner 2012) Seriation or simply
lsquoputting things in orderrsquo is usually an exercise in
relative dating employed when an absolute dating
method may be unavailable In the field of arche-
ology for example researchers are often confronted
with artifacts that only occasionally have informa-
tion regarding production or use attached to them
When carbon dating or information relating to say
tree rings or chemical composition is unavailable
archaeologists have refined the statistical bases of
CA to help them order and thus date (however
approximately) things of uncertain origin By com-
paring the known composition of pottery remains
for instance archeologists may place certain assem-
blages closer together in time based on how similar
they are to one another
Shakespearersquos plays may not strike one as arti-
facts of course but the procedures of CA as refined
for seriation nevertheless provide a statistically
rigorous methodology for examining their material
components On the basis of such an examination
in fact we can offer a provisional chronology that
responds to the differential distribution of fea-
turesmdashin this case pauses as recorded in the verse
of early textsmdashthroughout the canon and various
plays with sections attributed to Shakespeare This
chronology should be understood as a provisional
timeline of when the iambic pentameter in the play
texts under examination was mainly composed By
emphasizing this last phrase we mean to call imme-
diate attention to two things First Orasrsquos prose data
come from the pentameter verse in plays that are
sometimes made up heavily of prose (This is par-
ticularly the case in the late 1590s) Pause pattern
analysis is therefore limited by the amount of verse
in each play Second there is a strong likelihood
that a number of Shakespearersquos plays were written
at one time (even over various times) and revised at
another or others A play title thus need not con-
note an event but may sometimes have been mul-
tiple events or even a process The fixity of any
ordering then needs to be qualified in the context
of diachronic composition
Like Taylor and Jackson we focus on Orasrsquo A
pauses though after deliberation have subtracted
values for shared lines (his C pauses) Our rationale
for this comes from the uneven distribution of
shared lines across the canon and our sense that
this different kind of writingmdashwith a line-ending
full stop built into its very structuremdashneeds to be
measured separately (Reinhold 1942) We have also
performed original tabulations of A (minus C)
pauses for various texts and parts of texts not
included or not disaggregated in Oras These in-
clude parts of the collaborative plays Titus
Andronicus 1 Henry VI Edward III Timon of
Athens Arden of Faversham (scene 8) Sir Thomas
D Bruster and G Smith
4 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
More (the Hand D passages) and the Additional
Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy These
counts appear in Appendix 1 below with informa-
tion regarding the source texts and passages ana-
lyzed in Appendix 2We first performed two statistical procedures on
our resulting data set These are respectively a PCA
and a CA We would note that these procedures
draw on distinct data for the PCA we used propor-
tional values of pause abundance (so for each play
the total proportion of the nine types sums to 1) for
reasons already mentioned (and discussed further
below) we used raw counts for the CA We per-
formed these and all subsequent analyses in R
(R Core Team 2014) using the ca package
(Nenadic and Greenacre 2007) (Note that all of
the code used to produce the analyses and graphs
in this manuscript is available from httpsgithub
comgenevievekathleensmithshakespeare-chronord
ination)
The first Principal Component (PC 1) captured
623 of the total variation in pause composition
among plays mostly capturing variation in the 4th
6th 7th and 8th position pauses (Fig 2a looking at
how far each arrow travels left-rightmdashthat is along
PC 1mdashthose arrows reach the farthest) For its part
PC 2 accounted for another 181 of the total vari-
ation mainly reflecting variation in the 4th 7th
2nd and 8th positions again one may notice far
up or down each arrow goes to gauge its contribu-
tion (Fig 2a) The patterns are broadly similar in
the CA The first CA axis comprised 774 of the
total variation in pause counts among plays and CA
2 accounted for a further 89 Yet now most of the
arrows are more closely aligned with the horizontal
plane (Fig 2b) This means that changes in pauses
among plays are more well represented by a single
axis in the CA rather than in the PCA We can
additionally map the PCA and CA results onto the
same dimensions to compare how they are distrib-
uted relative to one another (Fig 2c and d) The
circles in Figures 2c and d have been scaled to reflect
the relative weights of the data in each analysis In
PCA each play contributes equally to determine the
major axes of variation while in CA plays with low
total pause counts (those that appear as slightly
smaller circles) contribute less to the analysis than
those with more pauses (which appear as larger cir-
cles) This is one advantage of CA as opposed to
PCA it allows one to recognize differences in the
amount of data contributed One can interpret the
positions of the play points by looking back at the
axes of variation in Figures 2a and b Texts are pos-
itioned in relation to where pauses occur in their
pentameter lines and in what proportion For ex-
ample plays like Romeo and Juliet and Richard III
have relatively more pauses early on in lines (ie 1st
through 5th position) while plays like Macbeth and
Tempest have more late-position pauses (6th
through 9th)
4 Bootstrap Methodology
On their own our pause counts cannot give us any
estimate of how certain (or uncertain) we are of the
relative ordering obtained by our CA To under-
stand how small differences in our observed data
may influence the outcome of our analysis we
employ a lsquobootstraprsquo method This is commonly
used across a variety of disciplines including in
archeological studies (Ringrose 1992) The boot-
strapping procedure is a method of resampling In
our case that means taking random samples of
pauses from each play and rerunning our CA
using the new values (Lockyear 2012 Peeples and
Schachner 2012) Because we sample with replace-
ment (meaning some pauses from the original data
will be sampled more than once and others not at
all) the new counts of each pause type will vary
slightly from the original counts We repeat this
resampling 1000 times repeating the CA with
each new set of counts This affords us some meas-
ure of uncertainty for our CA scores and allows us
to estimate 95 confidence intervals for the results
in two dimensions (Fig 3) The resulting confidence
intervals produce a polygon for each play and trace
a gradual arc up and to the right We have called out
five canonical textsndashRichard III Romeo and Juliet
Hamlet Macbeth and The Tempestmdashto show how
these data reveal the chronological progression of
Shakespearersquos works
This lsquoarcrsquo of Shakespearersquos verse pauses also pro-
vides a basic template for understanding the
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 5 of 20
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
of data they offer Thus treating the shortest
Shakespeare text in our sample (in this case his
contributions to the lightly punctuated Sir Thomas
More with a scant 32 pauses) as statistically equiva-
lent to his most pause-heavy text (Cymbeline with
2735 pauses) emphasizes the former at the expense
of the latter Making their pause data equal 1 that
is imposes a statistical constraint on them both and
implies equal confidence in how representative their
information is Thus the element of the Oxford
chronology that looks to Oras for confirmation as
well as other studies based on percentages (Gray
1931 Wentersdorf 1951 Jackson 1995) rely on
artificially constrained evidence How then to ac-
knowledge the differential weight of the Oras-type
data
A valuable method for comparing compositional
datamdashamong other types of multivariate datamdashis
correspondence analysis (or CA) (Hirschfeld 1935
Benzecri 1973 Hill 1974 Greenacre 2007) At its
most basic CA is a statistical methodology that
takes categorical information and looks for associ-
ations and strength of associations in the relations
of rows to columns in a contingency table (also
known as a cross tabulation table which contains
frequencies of occurrence) Correspondence analysis
first attempts to identify and then rank the most
statistically significant variation in that data Thus
the first CA axis will account for the largest amount
of variation in the original data the second axis will
account for the next largest portion and so on By
identifying the most crucial of these variables re-
searchers can visualize and interpret the bulk of the
variability in any original data
Germane to our purposes here is the extensive
and sophisticated use of CA in seriation studies
(Greenacre 2007 van de Velden et al 2009
Peeples and Schachner 2012) Seriation or simply
lsquoputting things in orderrsquo is usually an exercise in
relative dating employed when an absolute dating
method may be unavailable In the field of arche-
ology for example researchers are often confronted
with artifacts that only occasionally have informa-
tion regarding production or use attached to them
When carbon dating or information relating to say
tree rings or chemical composition is unavailable
archaeologists have refined the statistical bases of
CA to help them order and thus date (however
approximately) things of uncertain origin By com-
paring the known composition of pottery remains
for instance archeologists may place certain assem-
blages closer together in time based on how similar
they are to one another
Shakespearersquos plays may not strike one as arti-
facts of course but the procedures of CA as refined
for seriation nevertheless provide a statistically
rigorous methodology for examining their material
components On the basis of such an examination
in fact we can offer a provisional chronology that
responds to the differential distribution of fea-
turesmdashin this case pauses as recorded in the verse
of early textsmdashthroughout the canon and various
plays with sections attributed to Shakespeare This
chronology should be understood as a provisional
timeline of when the iambic pentameter in the play
texts under examination was mainly composed By
emphasizing this last phrase we mean to call imme-
diate attention to two things First Orasrsquos prose data
come from the pentameter verse in plays that are
sometimes made up heavily of prose (This is par-
ticularly the case in the late 1590s) Pause pattern
analysis is therefore limited by the amount of verse
in each play Second there is a strong likelihood
that a number of Shakespearersquos plays were written
at one time (even over various times) and revised at
another or others A play title thus need not con-
note an event but may sometimes have been mul-
tiple events or even a process The fixity of any
ordering then needs to be qualified in the context
of diachronic composition
Like Taylor and Jackson we focus on Orasrsquo A
pauses though after deliberation have subtracted
values for shared lines (his C pauses) Our rationale
for this comes from the uneven distribution of
shared lines across the canon and our sense that
this different kind of writingmdashwith a line-ending
full stop built into its very structuremdashneeds to be
measured separately (Reinhold 1942) We have also
performed original tabulations of A (minus C)
pauses for various texts and parts of texts not
included or not disaggregated in Oras These in-
clude parts of the collaborative plays Titus
Andronicus 1 Henry VI Edward III Timon of
Athens Arden of Faversham (scene 8) Sir Thomas
D Bruster and G Smith
4 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
More (the Hand D passages) and the Additional
Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy These
counts appear in Appendix 1 below with informa-
tion regarding the source texts and passages ana-
lyzed in Appendix 2We first performed two statistical procedures on
our resulting data set These are respectively a PCA
and a CA We would note that these procedures
draw on distinct data for the PCA we used propor-
tional values of pause abundance (so for each play
the total proportion of the nine types sums to 1) for
reasons already mentioned (and discussed further
below) we used raw counts for the CA We per-
formed these and all subsequent analyses in R
(R Core Team 2014) using the ca package
(Nenadic and Greenacre 2007) (Note that all of
the code used to produce the analyses and graphs
in this manuscript is available from httpsgithub
comgenevievekathleensmithshakespeare-chronord
ination)
The first Principal Component (PC 1) captured
623 of the total variation in pause composition
among plays mostly capturing variation in the 4th
6th 7th and 8th position pauses (Fig 2a looking at
how far each arrow travels left-rightmdashthat is along
PC 1mdashthose arrows reach the farthest) For its part
PC 2 accounted for another 181 of the total vari-
ation mainly reflecting variation in the 4th 7th
2nd and 8th positions again one may notice far
up or down each arrow goes to gauge its contribu-
tion (Fig 2a) The patterns are broadly similar in
the CA The first CA axis comprised 774 of the
total variation in pause counts among plays and CA
2 accounted for a further 89 Yet now most of the
arrows are more closely aligned with the horizontal
plane (Fig 2b) This means that changes in pauses
among plays are more well represented by a single
axis in the CA rather than in the PCA We can
additionally map the PCA and CA results onto the
same dimensions to compare how they are distrib-
uted relative to one another (Fig 2c and d) The
circles in Figures 2c and d have been scaled to reflect
the relative weights of the data in each analysis In
PCA each play contributes equally to determine the
major axes of variation while in CA plays with low
total pause counts (those that appear as slightly
smaller circles) contribute less to the analysis than
those with more pauses (which appear as larger cir-
cles) This is one advantage of CA as opposed to
PCA it allows one to recognize differences in the
amount of data contributed One can interpret the
positions of the play points by looking back at the
axes of variation in Figures 2a and b Texts are pos-
itioned in relation to where pauses occur in their
pentameter lines and in what proportion For ex-
ample plays like Romeo and Juliet and Richard III
have relatively more pauses early on in lines (ie 1st
through 5th position) while plays like Macbeth and
Tempest have more late-position pauses (6th
through 9th)
4 Bootstrap Methodology
On their own our pause counts cannot give us any
estimate of how certain (or uncertain) we are of the
relative ordering obtained by our CA To under-
stand how small differences in our observed data
may influence the outcome of our analysis we
employ a lsquobootstraprsquo method This is commonly
used across a variety of disciplines including in
archeological studies (Ringrose 1992) The boot-
strapping procedure is a method of resampling In
our case that means taking random samples of
pauses from each play and rerunning our CA
using the new values (Lockyear 2012 Peeples and
Schachner 2012) Because we sample with replace-
ment (meaning some pauses from the original data
will be sampled more than once and others not at
all) the new counts of each pause type will vary
slightly from the original counts We repeat this
resampling 1000 times repeating the CA with
each new set of counts This affords us some meas-
ure of uncertainty for our CA scores and allows us
to estimate 95 confidence intervals for the results
in two dimensions (Fig 3) The resulting confidence
intervals produce a polygon for each play and trace
a gradual arc up and to the right We have called out
five canonical textsndashRichard III Romeo and Juliet
Hamlet Macbeth and The Tempestmdashto show how
these data reveal the chronological progression of
Shakespearersquos works
This lsquoarcrsquo of Shakespearersquos verse pauses also pro-
vides a basic template for understanding the
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 5 of 20
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
More (the Hand D passages) and the Additional
Passages to the 1602 Spanish Tragedy These
counts appear in Appendix 1 below with informa-
tion regarding the source texts and passages ana-
lyzed in Appendix 2We first performed two statistical procedures on
our resulting data set These are respectively a PCA
and a CA We would note that these procedures
draw on distinct data for the PCA we used propor-
tional values of pause abundance (so for each play
the total proportion of the nine types sums to 1) for
reasons already mentioned (and discussed further
below) we used raw counts for the CA We per-
formed these and all subsequent analyses in R
(R Core Team 2014) using the ca package
(Nenadic and Greenacre 2007) (Note that all of
the code used to produce the analyses and graphs
in this manuscript is available from httpsgithub
comgenevievekathleensmithshakespeare-chronord
ination)
The first Principal Component (PC 1) captured
623 of the total variation in pause composition
among plays mostly capturing variation in the 4th
6th 7th and 8th position pauses (Fig 2a looking at
how far each arrow travels left-rightmdashthat is along
PC 1mdashthose arrows reach the farthest) For its part
PC 2 accounted for another 181 of the total vari-
ation mainly reflecting variation in the 4th 7th
2nd and 8th positions again one may notice far
up or down each arrow goes to gauge its contribu-
tion (Fig 2a) The patterns are broadly similar in
the CA The first CA axis comprised 774 of the
total variation in pause counts among plays and CA
2 accounted for a further 89 Yet now most of the
arrows are more closely aligned with the horizontal
plane (Fig 2b) This means that changes in pauses
among plays are more well represented by a single
axis in the CA rather than in the PCA We can
additionally map the PCA and CA results onto the
same dimensions to compare how they are distrib-
uted relative to one another (Fig 2c and d) The
circles in Figures 2c and d have been scaled to reflect
the relative weights of the data in each analysis In
PCA each play contributes equally to determine the
major axes of variation while in CA plays with low
total pause counts (those that appear as slightly
smaller circles) contribute less to the analysis than
those with more pauses (which appear as larger cir-
cles) This is one advantage of CA as opposed to
PCA it allows one to recognize differences in the
amount of data contributed One can interpret the
positions of the play points by looking back at the
axes of variation in Figures 2a and b Texts are pos-
itioned in relation to where pauses occur in their
pentameter lines and in what proportion For ex-
ample plays like Romeo and Juliet and Richard III
have relatively more pauses early on in lines (ie 1st
through 5th position) while plays like Macbeth and
Tempest have more late-position pauses (6th
through 9th)
4 Bootstrap Methodology
On their own our pause counts cannot give us any
estimate of how certain (or uncertain) we are of the
relative ordering obtained by our CA To under-
stand how small differences in our observed data
may influence the outcome of our analysis we
employ a lsquobootstraprsquo method This is commonly
used across a variety of disciplines including in
archeological studies (Ringrose 1992) The boot-
strapping procedure is a method of resampling In
our case that means taking random samples of
pauses from each play and rerunning our CA
using the new values (Lockyear 2012 Peeples and
Schachner 2012) Because we sample with replace-
ment (meaning some pauses from the original data
will be sampled more than once and others not at
all) the new counts of each pause type will vary
slightly from the original counts We repeat this
resampling 1000 times repeating the CA with
each new set of counts This affords us some meas-
ure of uncertainty for our CA scores and allows us
to estimate 95 confidence intervals for the results
in two dimensions (Fig 3) The resulting confidence
intervals produce a polygon for each play and trace
a gradual arc up and to the right We have called out
five canonical textsndashRichard III Romeo and Juliet
Hamlet Macbeth and The Tempestmdashto show how
these data reveal the chronological progression of
Shakespearersquos works
This lsquoarcrsquo of Shakespearersquos verse pauses also pro-
vides a basic template for understanding the
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 5 of 20
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
syntactical development of his contemporariesrsquo
iambic pentameter Plotting the pause profiles of
six contemporary playwrights over and against
those of Shakespearersquos works (reproduced from
Fig 3 shaded light gray) to compare their pause
content we can see their plays tracing the general
movement plotted by his verse from Kyd and
Marlowe through Fletcher Jonsonrsquos less iambic
practice (Fig 4 bottom row center) identifies him
as an exception We should note that Marstonrsquos
polygons fall almost entirely within Shakespearersquos
a result that is not surprising given the fact that
Fig 2 Results of PCA and CA as applied to pause variation in Shakespearersquos plays (a) The contribution of each pause
type to PC Axis 1 and PC Axis 2 (b) The contribution of each pause type to CA Axis 1 and CA Axis 2 Arrow direction
indicates whether each pause typersquos contribution is positive or negative and arrow length indicates strength of each
pause typersquos contribution to that axis (c) The projection of each play on PC Axis 1 and 2 (d) The projection of each
play on CA Axis 1 and 2 The size of each point represents the weighting assigned to each text in the analysis The same
five titles have been highlighted in each plot See Table 1 for the full list of titles included in these analyses
D Bruster and G Smith
6 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Marston began and ended his career as a playwright
while Shakespeare was still working and appears to
have fashioned his plays (including the Antonio
plays and The Malcontent) strongly in response to
the senior playwrightrsquos (Cathcart 1997)
5 CCA and ShakespearersquosChronology
Correspondence analysis we should point out pro-
vides relative ordering object X most likely comes
before or follows object Y at Z distance Not being
content with a relative chronological order we were
interested in using external evidence to suggest
more specific determinations for the plays An ex-
tension of CA called lsquoconstrained correspondence
analysisrsquo (CCA) allows us to do just that
(Groenen and Poblome 2003 van de Velden
et al 2009) By incorporating such information as
interval constraints for Shakespearersquos career as well
as hypothesized dates for some plays and upper and
lower limits for others we can constrain the
calculation of the CA scores (van de Velden et al
2009) As we saw earlier CA produces only a single
score for each play The same is true of CCA We
opted therefore to employ a bootstrapping proced-
ure again which allowed us not only to estimate
exact dates for each play but also to generate con-
fidence intervals around those estimates (Peeples
and Schachner 2012) In this manner we were able
to produce a revised chronology of Shakespearersquos
plays using only interval constraints a few dates
and the pause-position data itself For this proced-
ure we modified MATLAB code (MATLAB 2011)
from van de Velden (2008) and wrote additional
procedures to implement the bootstrapping (again
available from httpsgithubcomgenevievekathlee
nsmithshakespeare-chronordination)
To constrain our correspondence estimates we
assigned numerical values to three plays for which
plausible dates could be advanced 3 Henry VI last
quarter of 1591 (frac14 159175) Henry V middle of
1599 (frac14 15995) Pericles first quarter of 1607
(frac14 160725) and fixed Tempest as after 1611
(gt16110) Scholars could argue over these designa-
tions of course and other plays and dates could
have been employed these seemed among the
more reasonable of our options In addition we
set upper and lower bounds on the extent of
Shakespearersquos writing career demarcating it from
15895 to 16140 While these boundaries are also
open to debate it seemed to us that they are defens-
ible so long as they are understood to be judgments
rather than facts
In CCA the relative positioning of an object (in
this case a text) is made concrete through the add-
ition of specific information regarding other objects
in the timeline (Fig 5) Thus Macbeth is assigned a
date of 16062 or March of 1606 as a manifestation
of its statistical distance from all the other plays
using 3 Henry VI Henry V and Pericles to orient
the chronology in time As mentioned we con-
strained the composition of The Tempest placing
it no earlier than 1611 Obviously the accuracy of
such a lsquoforcingrsquo method depends in part on the
soundness of these anchors (van de Velden et al
2009) yet the procedure has the advantage of pro-
viding a specific date rather than relative position
for each play
Fig 3 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Each polygon indicates the 95 con-
fidence bounds calculated from 1000 randomized boot-
straps Note that we have reversed the sign of the CA Axis
1 scores for the purpose of maintaining a left-to-right
chronological sequence Since the sign of the values is
arbitrary this does not affect our timeline predictions
The same five titles have been highlighted as in Figure 2
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 7 of 20
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 4 Bootstrapped Correspondence Analysis for Shakespeare and six contemporaries Each polygon indicates the 95 confidence bounds calculated from
1000 randomized bootstraps In each panel Shakespearersquos plays are indicated in light gray while the corresponding author is illustrated in dark gray See
Appendix 1 for titles and data
DBruster
andGSmith
8of20
Digital
Scholarsh
ipin
theHumanities
2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
By bootstrapping this CCA we were able to es-
timate confidence intervals for each playrsquos predicted
date of composition using the 0025th and 0975th
quantile of the bootstraps (Fig 6) For some plays
our prediction falls earlier than the Oxford date (eg
Troilus and Cressida As You Like It) in other cases it
is later (eg Coriolanus The Winterrsquos Tale)
6 Adjusted CCA Chronology
To use our CCA results to produce a hypothesized
timeline we further wanted to consider historical
data available on the disposition of the Elizabethan
playhouses (Chambers 1930 Harrison 1941 1955
Barroll 1991) J Leeds Barroll has posited that
Shakespeare would have reduced his dramatic writ-
ing or ceased writing new plays altogether when the
playhouses were closed largely owing to the plague
(Barroll 1991) Such occasioned the years 1592ndash94
when it is commonly thought Shakespeare penned
Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece while the
public amphitheaters were closed for business
Because a noticeable spread in the data appears
after 3 Henry VI (as well as prior to The Merry
Wives) we have elected to adjust our estimates for
the dates of composition on the assumption that
Shakespeare turned his energies to his two narrative
poems during the closure of the playhouses (Fig 6)
During the drafting of this essay we gained
access to new data the metrical and linguistic
tables of Marina Tarlinskajarsquos recent monograph
(Tarlinskaja 2014) There Tarlinskaja provides a
massive tabulation of original prosodic data for nu-
merous playwrights including Shakespeare The
Shakespeare data however do not include various
prose-heavy plays (such as Merry Wives Much Ado
As You Like It and Twelfth Night) or two collab-
orative works (Sir Thomas More Timon) Further
Tarlinskaja offers only partial data for Edward III so
we chose to omit it leaving a total of 34 texts with
over 1500 pieces of data regarding 45 stylistic and
structural categories These categories include data
on strong and weak syllabic positions respectively
word boundaries (total and after positions) strong
syntactic breaks run on lines proclitic and enclitic
Fig 5 Illustration of CCA approach redrawn (with modifications) from van de Velden et al 2009 Macbeth is dated
using three lsquoanchorrsquo plays (indicated along the diagonal) as constraints We also have illustrated the lower limit placed
on the possible dates for Tempest The relationship between CCA score and time is used to predict dates for the
remaining plays
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 9 of 20
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 6 Predicted dates of composition resulting from CCA of pause counts in Shakespearersquos plays Filled circles rep-
resent the average predicted date over 1000 bootstraps horizontal black bars indicate 95 confidence intervals
Vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed Shifts made to
our predictions in light of these closings are indicated with open circles
D Bruster and G Smith
10 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
stresses syllabic -ed and -eth disyllabic -ion gram-
matical inversion meter-sense syntactical run ons
feminine endings (total) feminine endings built by
simple and compound constructions respectively
and alliterative lines Because Tarlinskajarsquos data are
rendered largely in percentages we could not apply
a CA or CCA Thus with Tarlinskajarsquos permission
we ran a PCA on these new data and used PC 1
to estimate approximate dates of composition
(Table 1)
We wish to emphasize that the results are purely
our own rather than Tarlinskajarsquos who should not
be assumed to endorse any of the datings we adduce
from analyzing her data Further our analysis of her
data assumes the same intervals for Shakespearersquos
career (15895 to 16140) as in the CCA These esti-
mated dates are provided in Table 1 below in add-
ition to dates from the Oxford chronology the
Riverside chronology Brainerdrsquos multivariate
chronology (Brainerd 1980) the dates predicted
by our CCA (averaged across 1000 bootstraps)
and our final predictions which adjust the CCA
dates in relation to playhouse closures and exigen-
cies of composition By the latter we refer to ad-
justments that assume a working distance among
Shakespearersquos textsmdasheven though it is quite possible
he may have composed various works simultan-
eously The asterisks in the final two columns flag
the anchor dates we provided (for 3 Henry VI Julius
Caesar and Pericles respectively) to distinguish
these from predictions generated from analysis
7 Dates and Discussion
The following discussion of our results begins with
title hypothesized date and bootstrap range In
addition to the chronologies and tests outlined in
Table 1 our discussion alludes to Langworthyrsquos
tabulations of verse-sentence data (Langworthy
1931) Reinholdrsquos research on shared lines
(Reinhold 1942) Wallerrsquos dothdoes and hathhas
ratios (Waller 1966) Slaterrsquos tables regarding link
words between Shakespearersquos plays (Slater 1988)
and Ilsemannrsquos data regarding speech word-length
(Ilsemann 2008) We have also consulted
McManaway 1950 Uhlig 1968 and Schabert 2000
Titus Andronicusndash15907 (15897ndash15917) As with
other works our adjusted CCA treats only the
portion currently ascribed to Shakespeare (see
Appendix 2 for breakdowns) Early dating concurs
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data as well as with
Slaterrsquos order and initiates a group that concludes
with Edward IIIArden of Faversham (Sc 8)mdash15909
(15895ndash15939) Paucity of data makes dating dif-
ficult PCA of Tarlinskaja places this before Titus
as Shakespearersquos first surviving writing
The Taming of the Shrewndash1591 (1590ndash15922) Our
adjusted CCA concurs with Oxford and Brainerd
We believe this play was written before the closing
of the theaters and preceded A Shrew Wallerrsquos
dothdoes and hathhas ratios place Shrew alone
among the early plays in the second half of the
canon
1 Henry VIndash15912 (15895ndash15933) Issues of col-
laboration complicate dating Our CCA treats 24
42ndash45 CCA of the complete text places it only
marginally later at 15919
3 Henry VIndash159175 (159175) Our adjusted
CCArsquos first anchor fixed at a position supported
by Oxford Riverside Brainerd the Tarlinskaja
PCA and Ilsemann
Edward IIIndash1592 (15905ndash15932) Our adjusted
CCA treats 12 21 22 45ndash49 (Elliott and
Valenza 2010) Probably written before the clos-
ing of the theaters but Slaterrsquos rare-word linkage
with Lucrece could suggest the hiatus or immedi-
ately after the reopening CCA places 12 21 22
and 44 at 159182 Henry VIndash15938 (15918ndash15938) Stylistically 2
Henry VI postdates 3 Henry VI most likely owing
to revision at a much later date (We see such
signs most obviously in 211-41147 and 511-
end though there are indications of revision
throughout) Its position here likely averages writ-
ing from earlier and later in Shakespearersquos career
Placement after 3 Henry VI is replicated in
Brainerd the Tarlinskaja PCA Langworthy
Reinhold and Ilsemann First in a group running
through Richard II
The Two Gentlemen of Veronandash15942 (15917ndash
15943) Our adjusted CCA (adjusted to recognize
the availability of the theaters) is close to
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 11 of 20
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Table 1 Dates from received (Taylor 1987 Evans 1996 Brainerd 1980) and original chronologies (PCA of Tarlinskaja
data BrusterndashSmith bootstrap mean and BrusterndashSmith final) compared Key to abbreviations following
Play Oxford
date
Riverside
date
Brainerd
date
Date predicted
by PCA of
Tarlinskaja data
BrusterndashSmith
bootstrap mean
date prediction
BrusterndashSmith
final prediction
SHR 1590ndash1 1593ndash4 15914 159583 159108 1591
TGV 1590ndash1 1594 15929 159661 159308 15942
3H6 1591 1590ndash1 15910 159343 15918 15918
2H6 1591 1590ndash1 15912 159422 159283 15938
ARD na na na 15895 159105 15909
TA 1592 1593ndash4 15926 159236 159073 15907
1H6 1592 1589ndash90 15927 159409 159126 15912
R3 1592ndash3 1592ndash3 15961 159692 159416 1595
E3 na 1592ndash5 na na 159188 1592
ERR 1594 1592ndash4 15948 159527 159345 15944
LLL 1594ndash5 1594ndash5 16017 159505 159383 15948
ROM 1595 1595ndash6 15963 159444 159373 15946
MND 1595 1595ndash6 15959 159452 15943 15953
R2 1595 1595 15959 159622 159477 15955
JN 1596 1594ndash6 15992 159469 159544 15961
MV 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15983 159967 159659 15972
1H4 1596ndash7 1596ndash7 15967 159573 159673 15975
2H4 1597ndash8 1598 15995 159919 159721 15978
WIV 1597ndash8 1597 15961 na 159878 1599
SPT na na na 160007 159357 15945
ADO 1598 1598ndash9 15969 na 159669 159735
H5 1598ndash9 1599 15980 159989 15995 15995
JC 1599 1599 15988 160077 159729 15982
AYL 1599ndash00 1599 16003 na 159611 1597
HAM 1600ndash1 1600ndash1 16047 160349 159893 159925
TN 1601 1601ndash2 16014 na 160053 16008
TRO 1602 1601ndash2 16008 160243 159739 15984
MM 1603 1604 16047 160544 160149 16022
OTH 1603ndash4 1604 16033 160449 160077 1601
STM 1603ndash4 1594ndash5 na na 160256 16028
AWW 1604ndash5 1602ndash3 16072 160737 160388 16043
TIM 1605 1607ndash8 16047 na 160567 16061
LR 1605ndash6 1605 16062 160791 160467 1605
MAC 1606 1606 16061 160828 160588 16063
ANT 1606 1606ndash7 16079 160902 161053 16105
PER 1607 1607ndash8 16042 160692 16072 16072
COR 1608 1607ndash8 16048 161060 161157 16116
WT 1609 1610ndash11 16094 161297 161329 16133
CYM 1610 1609ndash10 16089 161143 161352 16135
TMP 1611 1611 16100 1614 1611 1611
H8 1613 1612ndash3 16074 161322 161309 16131
TNK 1613ndash4 1613 16055 161326 161188 16119
Notes 1H4 1 Henry IV 1H6 1 Henry VI 2H4 2 Henry IV 2H6 2 Henry VI 3H6 3 Henry VI ADO Much Ado About Nothing ANT
Antony and Cleopatra ARD Arden of Faversham AWW Allrsquos Well That Ends Well AYL As You Like It COR Coriolanus CYM
Cymbeline E3 Edward III HAM Hamlet H5 Henry V H8 Henry VIII JC Julius Caesar JN King John LLL Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost LR
King Lear MAC Macbeth MM Measure for Measure MND Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream MV Merchant of Venice OTH Othello PER
Pericles R2 Richard II R3 Richard III ROM Romeo and Juliet SHR Taming of the Shrew SPT Spanish Tragedy (Additional Passages)
STM Sir Thomas More (Hand D) TA Titus Andronicus TGV Two Gentlemen of Verona TIM Timon of Athens TMP Tempest TN
Twelfth Night TNK Two Noble Kinsmen TRO Troilus and Cressida WIV Merry Wives of Windsor WT Winterrsquos Tale
D Bruster and G Smith
12 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Riverside Slaterrsquos rare-word list ranks it 7th of the
plays Reinholdrsquos data 9thndashjust prior to Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lostmdashand Ilsemannrsquos just after Loversquos
Laborrsquos Lost Langworthy supports Oxford in
seeing it as a very early play
The Comedy of Errorsndash15944 (15921ndash15947) Our
adjusted CCA matches well with Oxford
Riverside and Brainerd and anticipates the re-
corded performance at Grayrsquos Inn 28 December
1594 Cross-genre rare-word links (Slater) suggest
proximity to Richard III as does Ilsemannrsquos data
The Additional Passages to The Spanish Tragedy
(1602)ndash15945 (15895ndash1598) Paucity of data
here reflected in the bootstrap range lessens our
confidence in this dating PCA of the Tarlinskaja
data puts them much later as would Ilsemannrsquos
data (after Henry V)
Romeo and Julietndash15946 (15927ndash15948) This first
of the lyric plays perhaps finishes earlier owing to
its formal amatory verse (our unadjusted CCA
places it in mid-1593) Our adjusted CCA squares
with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lostndash15948 (15926ndash1595) Our ad-
justed CCA squares with Oxford Riverside and
the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
Richard IIIndash1595 (15932ndash15951) Our adjusted
CCA agrees with the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos data
and with Brainerd in positing a later date for
this text than Oxford or RiversideA Midsummer Nightrsquos Dreamndash15953 (1593ndash
15956) Our adjusted CCA agrees with Oxford
Riverside Brainerd and the PCA of Tarlinskajarsquos
data
Richard IIndash15955 (15937ndash15958) Dated 1595 in
four of the chronologies with the PCA of
Tarlinskajarsquos data only a year later
King Johnndash15961 (15943ndash15966) Crucial since
Honigmannrsquos argument for an extremely early
composition (Honigmann 2000) Our position-
ing agrees with Oxford and Riverside Brainerd
has a later date PCA of the Tarlinskaja data an
earlier one though after Romeo and Dream
Langworthy locates immediately after Richard II
As You Like Itndash1597 (15948ndash15975) This first of
the prose-heavy plays (with fewer pauses for ana-
lysis) suggests a much earlier date than is conven-
tionally accepted Brainerd (16003) better accords
with Oxford and Riverside Tarlinskaja has no
data for it Shares unexpected extra-generic rare-
word links with Richard III and Romeo in add-
ition to Henry V For arguments concerning a date
before 1599 see Knowles 1977 pp 340-49 365-
67 Stylistically first in a group running through
TroilusThe Merchant of Venicendash15972 (15955ndash15977)
Both Brainerd and PCA of the Tarlinskaja data
locate it in 1598 Barely distinguishable statistic-
ally from Much Ado it finishes slightly earlier
than that text on the bootstrap procedureMuch Ado About Nothingndash159735 (1595ndash15985)
Our positioning is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside
1 Henry IVndash159750 (15955ndash1598) Our dating ac-
cords closely with Oxford Riverside and
Brainerd
2 Henry IVndash15978 (15958ndash15985) We believe this
play immediately followed 1 Henry IV Our dating
accords closely with Oxford and Riverside
Julius Caesarndash15982 (15962ndash15983) Seen by
Platter in September of 1599 Brainerd has it at
the end of 1598 PCA of the Tarlinskaja data in
late 1600 Shares rare-word links with 2 Henry IV
Troilus and Hamlet
Troilus and Cressidandash15984 (15962ndash15985)
Typically dated some 2- to 4 years later
Composition in 1598 would locate it near the
completion and publication of Chapmanrsquos
Homer but prior to the War of the Theaters
Gilbertrsquos De Magnete and Nashersquos Summerrsquos Last
Will and Testament which are sometimes seen as
implicated in its language Brainerd and the
Tarlinskaja PCA would place it near Oxford and
Riverside Langworthy with Henry V and before
Hamlet the Reinhold data after Twelfth Night but
before Othello and HamletThe Merry Wives of Windsorndash1599 (15954ndash
16027) Our dating comes later than Riverside
Brainerd and Langworthy As is evident in the
wide bootstrap range scant pause data makes
placement less certain Groups stylistically with
Hamlet and Henry V
Hamletndash159925 (15979ndash1600) Statistically close to
Henry V this playrsquos references to Julius Caesar
suggest that it followed the Roman tragedy
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 13 of 20
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Our dating is slightly earlier than Oxford and
Riverside both Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja
PCA have it later than those authorities Several
passages in the Folio text hint at revision during
the early 1600s
Henry Vndash15995 (15995) Second of our anchor
texts Choruses almost certainly composed prior
to Essexrsquos disastrous return from Ireland on
September 28 A date in late summer would just
enable it to inspire certain passages in 1 Sir John
Oldcastle completed by 16 October Shifting this
anchor a year later would retain the order of the
middle plays but bring them closer to conven-
tional dating
Twelfth Nightndash16008 (15989ndash16023) Close match
with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd Attaches to
Othello stylistically
Othellondash1601 (15995ndash1602) Our CCA locates
Othello earlier than Oxford Riverside Brainerd
and the Tarlinskaja PCA Echoes in Q1 Hamlet
indicate that it was already extent even familiar
by 1602 (Honigmann 1993) Langworthy has it
before Henry V
Measure for Measurendash16022 (16002ndash16029)
Like As You Like It and Troilus Measure fin-
ished earlier in the CCA than in all other chron-
ologies Commonly thought of as a Jacobean
play owing to various of its themes Measure
features very little that dates it certainly
Pushing it into 1603ndash04 might imply correspond-
ingly later dates for texts immediately prior and
following Revisions by Middleton may skew the
results here
Sir Thomas More Additionsndash16028 (1596ndash16103)
This dating squares with Oxford a seventeenth-
century date has been argued as well by Jackson
(Jackson 1978 2006 2007)
Allrsquos Well That Ends Wellndash16043 (16025ndash16054)
Our CCA squares with Oxford but is later than
Riverside Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA sug-
gest a later date (16072 and 160737 respectively)
as does Reinhold and Langworthyrsquos data both of
which put this play after Lear and before Macbeth
Jackson argues for 16065 or later (Jackson 2001)
King Learndash1605 (16034ndash1606) Oxford suggests
1605ndash06 Riverside 1605 Brainerd 16062 and
the Tarlinskaja PCA 160791 Our location has it
preceding the second edition of King Lear (May of
1605)
Timon of Athensndash16061 (16043ndash1607) This col-
laboration with Thomas Middleton is obviously
connected to King Lear with which it has the
highest number of rare-word links (Slater) Our
CCA of the parts attributed to Shakespeare puts it
in the year after Lear attaching stylistically to
Macbeth
Macbethndash16063 (16045ndash16074) Our CCA agrees
closely with Oxford Riverside and Brainerd The
Tarlinskaja PCA places it two years later
Periclesndash160725 (160725) The third of our three
anchor texts The date provided here comes prior
to its entry in the Stationersrsquo Register (20 May
1608) The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it
just before 1607 in a cluster with Allrsquos Well
Lear and Macbeth
Antony and Cleopatrandash16105 (16092ndash16119)
Entered in the Stationersrsquo Register 20 May 1608
This later CCA date may indicate revision
Brainerd and the Tarlinskaja PCA place it in
1608 and 1609 respectively Slaterrsquos rare-word
catalog links it not only with Macbeth and
Coriolanus but also Cymbeline Winterrsquos Tale
and Tempest Groups stylistically with Tempest
Coriolanus and Kinsmen
The Tempestndash1611 (gt1611) Last in Brainerdrsquos
ordering later and also last in the Tarlinskaja
PCA (1614) and Slaterrsquos rare-word ranking
(Slater p 99) Our dating coincides with Oxford
and Riverside
Coriolanusndash16116 (1610ndash16129) As with the
other late plays our CCA produces a later-than-
conventional date The Tarlinskaja PCA suggests
16106 Slaterrsquos rare-word index links it most
tightly with Cymbeline and Winterrsquos Tale
Langworthy places it after AntonyThe Two Noble Kinsmenndash16119 (16099ndash16139)
This dating is at least a year earlier than Oxford
(1613ndash14) and Riverside (1613) Brainerd (who
does not separate according to collaboration)
has it much earlier (16055)Henry VIIIndash16131 (16112ndash1614) According to our
CCA this play follows Kinsmen but precedes two
of the romances Certainly composed prior to late
June 1613 when it was performed at the Globe
D Bruster and G Smith
14 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Fig 7 Comparison of proposed BrusterndashSmith chronology with standard dates (eg Oxford et al) Open circles indicate
standard previously-held date arrows the shifts proposed to the timeline Arrows pointing right indicate plays for which
later dates are proposed arrows to the left indicate ones for which an earlier date of composition is suggested As in
Figure 6 vertical gray shading indicates periods when Londonrsquos playhouses are thought to have been closed
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 15 of 20
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
The PCA of the Tarlinskaja data puts it at 161322
Of the late plays it has statistically significant
rare-word links with only Winterrsquos Tale Attaches
stylistically to Winterrsquos Tale and Cymbeline
Winterrsquos Talendash16133 (16117ndash1614) Seen by
Forman May 1611 Brainerdrsquos 16094 accords
with Oxford and just precedes Riverside The
PCA of the Tarlinskaja data places this play at
the end of 1612 Langworthy has Winterrsquos Tale
and Cymbeline as two of his last three texts
(with Henry VIII)
Cymbelinendash16135 (16121ndash1614) Seen by Forman
in 1611 The Tarlinskaja PCA has this text around
the middle of 1611 Slaterrsquos rare-word links group
it with Winterrsquos Tale Tempest and Coriolanus
Our CCA suggests it is Shakespearersquos final surviv-
ing writing
8 Conclusion
The preceding chronology suggests a timeline for
the composition of the pentameter verse in
Shakespearersquos plays as represented in the First
Folio of 1623 and various early printed editions
(Fig 7) In doing so it makes at least four assump-
tions first that Orasrsquos counts accurately record the
pauses in the Folio texts it takes up (this was spot-
checked and confirmed in multiple instances)
second that Shakespearersquos verse line developed in
one direction and regularly without significant de-
viation third that on the basis of pause data a
CCA may accurately order the plays and fourth
that the dates for the three textual lsquoanchorsrsquo have
validity (van de Velden et al 2009) The soundness
as well as particulars of our chronology could be
called into question by refuting or qualifying any
of these assumptions and we welcome research
that does so in the service of expanding information
about Shakespearersquos compositional practice Prior
to such interventions however we would point
out the general agreement between our ordering
and the established timeline of the plays as well as
its confirmation of various independent challenges
to the conventional chronology Further although
we advance much earlier dates for several texts
(including As You Like It and Troilus and
Cressida) and later dates for many of the plays fol-
lowing Pericles in no instance does our adjusted
CCA locate a title chronologically after its appear-
ance in print
Our ordering is closer to the OxfordRiverside
chronologies than are Brainerd or the PCA of the
Tarlinskaja data yet we differ from Oxford
Riverside on a number of plays in addition to
those mentioned above For example our adjusted
CCA places Two Gentlemen significantly later than
Oxford Richard III later than both chronologies the
Sir Thomas More passages much later than
Riverside and Julius Caesar Hamlet and Othello
earlier than their conventional datingmdashOthello sig-
nificantly so We have seen with 2 Henry VI that a
text may date differently from a performance owing
to revision It is important to keep in mind that the
chronology offered here concerns the time when the
pentameter in these texts was largely composed If
we are correct in situating various of the plays that
follow Pericles later than the conventional dating it
would suggest that Shakespeare was actively elabor-
ating their scripts immediately prior to or during his
retirement from writing for the theater
ReferencesBarroll L (1991) Politics Plague and Shakespearersquos
Theater The Stuart Years Ithaca NY Cornell
University Press
Bathurst C (1857) Remarks on the Differences in
Shakespearersquos Versification in Different Periods of his
Life and on the Like Points of Differences in Poetry
Generally London John W Parker and Son
Benzecri J P (1973) LrsquoAnalyse des Donnees LrsquoAnalyse
des Correspondences Paris Dunod
Brainerd B (1980) The Chronology of Shakespearersquos
Plays A Statistical Study Computers and the
Humanities 14(4) 221ndash30
Cathcart C (1997) John Marston and the Professional
Drama 1598-1608 PhD Thesis Department of
English and American Studies University of
Manchester
Chambers E K (1930) William Shakespeare A Study of
Facts and Problems vol 2 Oxford Clarendon Press
Elliott W E Y and Valenza R J (2010) Two tough
nuts to crack did shakespeare write the lsquoShakespearersquo
D Bruster and G Smith
16 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
portions of Sir Thomas More and Edward III Linguistic
and Literary Computing 25(1ndash2) 67ndash83 165ndash77
Evans G B (1974 rev 2nd edn 1996) The Riverside
Shakespeare Boston Houghton Mifflin
Gray H D (1931) Chronology of Shakespearersquos Plays
Modern Language Notes 46(3) 147ndash50
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence Analysis in Practice
2nd edn London Chapman amp HallCRC
Groenen P J F and Poblome J (2003) Constrained
correspondence analysis for seriation in archaeology
applied to Sagalassos ceramic tablewares In
Schwaiger M and Opitz O (eds) Exploratory Data
Analysis in Empirical Research Berlin Springer
pp 90ndash7
Harrison G B (1941) A Jacobean Journal Being a Record
of Those Things Most Talked of During the Years 1603-
1606 New York Macmillan
Harrison G B (1955) The Elizabethan Journals
Being a Record of Those Things Most Talked of During
the Years 1591-1603 Ann Arbor University of
Michigan
Hill M O (1974) Correspondence analysis a neglected
multivariate method Journal of the Royal Statistical
Society C (Applied Statistics) 23 340ndash54
Hirschfeld H O (1935) A connection between correl-
ation and contingency Mathematical Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philosophical Society 31 520ndash4
Honigmann E A J (1993) The first quarto of hamlet
and the date of Othello Review of English Studies 44
211ndash19
Honigmann E A J (2000) Shakespearersquos self-repetitions
and King John Shakespeare Survey 53 175ndash83
Ilsemann H (2008) More statistical observations on
speech lengths in Shakespearersquos plays Literary and
Linguistic Computing 23(4) 397ndash407
Jackson MacD P (1978) Linguistic evidence for the
date of Shakespearersquos addition to Sir Thomas More
Notes and Queries 25 154ndash6
Jackson MacD P (1995) Another metrical index for
Shakespearersquos plays Evidence for chronology and
authorship Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95(4)
453ndash7
Jackson MacD P (2001) Spurio and the date of Allrsquos
Well That Ends Well Notes and Queries 48 298ndash9
Jackson MacD P (2002) Pause patterns in
Shakespearersquos verse Canon and chronology Literary
and Linguistic Computing 17(1) 37ndash46
Jackson MacD P (2006) The date and authorship of
hand Drsquos contribution to Sir Thomas More Evidence
from literature online Shakespeare Survey 59 69ndash78
Jackson MacD P (2007) A new chronological indicator
for Shakespearersquos plays and for hand D of Sir Thomas
More Notes and Queries 54 304ndash7
Knowles R (1977) As You Like It New York Modern
Language Association of America
Kuhn T (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chicago University of Chicago Press
Langworthy C A (1931) A verse-sentence analysis of
Shakespearersquos plays Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America 46 738ndash51
Lockyear K (2012) Applying bootstrapped correspond-
ence analysis to archaeological data Journal of
Archaeological Science xx 1ndash10
McManaway J (1950) Recent studies in Shakespearersquos
chronology Shakespeare Survey 3 22ndash33
MATLAB (2011) Version 7130 The MathWorks Inc
Natick Massachusetts USA
Nenadic O and Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence
analysis in R with two- and three-dimensional graph-
ics The ca package Journal of Statistical Software 20
1ndash13
Oras A (1960) Pause Patterns in Elizabethan and
Jacobean Drama Gainesville FL University of Florida
Press
Peeples M A and Schachner G (2012) Refining cor-
respondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of re-
gional data sets Journal of Archaeological Science
39(8) 2818ndash27
R Core Team (2014) R A language and environment for
statistical computing R Foundation for Statistical
Computing Vienna Austria httpwwwR-projectorg
Reinhold H (1942) Die metrische Verzahnung als
Kriterium fur Fragen der Chronologie und
Authentizitat im Drama Shakespeares und einiger
seiner Zeitgenossen und Nachfolger Archiv fur das
Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 182
83ndash96
Ringrose T J (1992) Bootstrapping and correspondence
analysis in archaeology Journal of Archaeological
Science 19 615ndash629
Schabert I (ed) (2000) Shakespeare-Handbuch
Stuttgart Kroner
Slater E (1988) The Problem of lsquoThe Reign of King
Edward IIIrsquo A Statistical Approach Cambridge
Cambridge University Press
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 17 of 20
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Tarlinskaja M (2014) Shakespeare and the Versification
of English Drama 1561-1642 Burlington VT Ashgate
Taylor G (1987) The Canon and Chronology of
Shakespearersquos Plays In Wells and Taylor (1987)
pp 69ndash144
Uhlig C (1968) Zur Chronologie des Shakespeareschen
Fruhwerks Anglia 86(4) 437ndash62
van de Velden M (2008) Constrained Correspondence
Analysis Matlab Toolbox httppeoplefeweurnlvan
develdenConstrained20Correspondence20Analy
siszip
van de Velden M Groenen P J F and Poblome J
(2009) Seriation by constrained correspondence ana-
lysis A simulation study Computational Statistics and
Data Analysis 53 3129ndash3138
Vickers B (2002) Shakespeare Co-Author A Historical
Study of Five Collaborative Plays Oxford Clarendon Press
Vickers B (2007) Incomplete Shakespeare Or Denying
Coauthorship in 1 Henry VI Shakespeare Quarterly 58
311ndash52
Waller F O (1966) The Use of Linguistic Criteria in
Determining the Copy and Dates for Shakespearersquos
Plays In McNeir W F and Greenfield T N (eds)
Pacific Coast Studies in Shakespeare Eugene University
of Oregon pp 1ndash19
Wells S and G Taylor with J Jowett and W
Montgomery (1987) William Shakespeare A Textual
Companion Oxford Clarendon Press
Wentersdorf K (1951) Shakespearian Chronology and
the Metrical Tests In Fischer W and Wentersdorf K
(eds) Shakespeare-Studien Festschrift fur Heinrich
Mutschmann Marburg NG Elwert
D Bruster and G Smith
18 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 1 Pause DataPause data employed in this study A-C pauses from Oras (1960) and hand counts We have emended what
appears to be a typographical error in Allrsquos Well C-count position 8 from 23 to 3 (p 80)
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1 Tamburlaine Marlowe 26 59 40 194 119 80 26 19 4
2 Tamburlaine Marlowe 28 74 61 269 142 105 43 19 1
Jew of Malta Marlowe 132 118 93 339 212 157 97 37 14
Dr Faustus Marlowe 16 26 29 64 57 37 13 7 0
Edward II Marlowe 63 211 84 486 182 259 62 19 2
Spanish Tragedy Kyd 65 144 61 361 145 99 50 21 5
Soliman and Persida Kyd 27 61 36 276 128 95 19 13 1
Edward III Kyd 9 22 20 152 79 38 32 6 1
Cornelia Kyd 76 95 53 294 189 125 60 32 7
Edward I Peele 7 44 25 162 61 51 14 4 4
Titus Andronicus Peele 17 51 23 134 73 72 22 10 1
Antonio amp Mellida 1ndash2 Marston 156 235 102 582 414 464 162 136 53
Histriomastix Marston 43 57 32 146 114 108 63 19 5
Jack Drumrsquos Entertainment Marston 29 58 35 230 155 144 51 13 5
Dutch Courtesan Marston 9 28 8 92 49 76 41 24 3
Malcontent Marston 27 55 22 169 59 125 38 34 10
Parasitaster Marston 6 21 15 158 77 97 32 21 3
Sophonisba Marston 32 91 43 419 206 282 124 88 31
What You Will Marston 20 65 38 183 138 136 56 38 19
Insatiate Countess Marston 27 68 39 253 215 238 95 31 12
Tale of Tub Jonson 146 208 139 602 469 543 387 261 94
Case Is Altered Jonson 41 86 29 237 214 244 141 53 13
Every Man In Jonson 36 55 17 111 80 79 64 17 6
Every Man Out Jonson 43 59 22 100 80 110 92 38 13
Cynthiarsquos Revels Jonson 65 69 37 154 139 129 84 47 11
Poetaster Jonson 153 189 71 304 280 280 204 113 29
Sejanus Jonson 221 388 199 719 651 767 635 439 189
Volpone Jonson 300 415 231 754 752 832 694 593 301
Alchemist Jonson 336 437 266 837 823 838 726 672 322
Catiline Jonson 290 456 258 882 750 850 695 537 212
Henry 8 Fletcher 23 92 57 233 213 275 347 178 35
Two Noble Kinsmen Fletcher 29 52 60 241 216 306 303 159 43
Titus Andronicusa Shakespeare 45 88 52 281 148 165 45 11 3
Comedy of Errors Shakespeare 35 97 34 229 140 156 63 25 2
1 Henry 6a Shakespeare 16 20 7 61 41 30 18 3 1
1 Henry 6b Shakespeare 80 183 71 474 304 203 127 49 3
3 Henry 6 Shakespeare 138 205 143 706 309 347 148 71 3
Taming of the Shrew Shakespeare 63 117 51 400 221 196 55 31 7
Richard 3 Shakespeare 138 305 120 680 430 445 186 108 20
Two Gentlemen of Verona Shakespeare 97 138 76 308 172 222 76 39 12
Loversquos Laborrsquos Lost Shakespeare 42 69 30 273 154 166 54 30 8
Midsummer Nightrsquos Dream Shakespeare 35 88 43 300 229 172 83 33 12
Romeo and Juliet Shakespeare 44 157 65 567 323 319 96 59 19
Richard 2 Shakespeare 61 182 90 568 323 375 130 79 14
King John Shakespeare 79 146 57 441 315 287 133 65 24
Merchant of Venice Shakespeare 39 66 42 272 206 212 132 24 9
1 Henry 4 Shakespeare 51 90 42 248 187 204 122 31 13
2 Henry 4 Shakespeare 60 149 82 340 216 259 127 79 18
(continued)
A new chronology for Shakespearersquos plays
Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014 19 of 20
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Appendix 2 Source Texts and PlayBreakdowns
Because Orasrsquos counts are based on a facsimile of the
1623 First Folio our hand counts of Titus and
Timon used the Oxford Text Archiversquos versions of
those plays in Folio form We used EEBO texts for
Faversham (1592 STC 793) and Edward III (1596STC 7501) LION for the Additional Passages to the
Spanish Tragedy (1602 STC 15089) and the
Riverside Shakespeare for the Hand D material in
Sir Thomas More
Breakdowns for Shakespearean portions of the
hand-counted collaborative plays determined in
part by consulting Vickers 2002 2007 are as follows
Titus Andronicus 23ndash32 42ndash53 Arden of
Faversham scene 8 Edward III conventional
Shakespeare attribution 12 21 22 44 Edward
III per Elliott and Valenza 2010 12 21 22 45ndash
49 1 Henry VI 24 42ndash45 The Spanish Tragedy(1602) Additional Passages 1ndash5Timon of Athens
11 21ndash22 41 421ndash29 431ndash457 51ndash54
Continued
Play Author 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
Merry Wives Shakespeare 14 20 19 61 34 51 18 15 8
Much Ado Shakespeare 17 32 25 90 69 78 36 12 7
Henry 5 Shakespeare 28 83 50 284 198 242 146 51 14
Julius Caesar Shakespeare 77 114 102 376 311 366 165 61 21
As You Like It Shakespeare 18 37 35 165 111 149 48 21 3
Twelfth Night Shakespeare 8 37 26 136 100 138 60 39 5
Hamlet Shakespeare 43 116 63 397 225 405 171 66 16
Troilus and Cressida Shakespeare 61 122 66 439 213 336 134 78 19
Measure for Measure Shakespeare 41 88 34 243 156 317 120 76 14
Othello Shakespeare 79 178 82 542 238 483 208 153 42
Allrsquos Well Shakespeare 9 36 23 205 135 279 123 54 15
Timona Shakespeare 16 44 40 188 142 232 147 79 22
King Lear Shakespeare 40 103 55 354 143 448 183 125 40
Macbeth Shakespeare 36 82 46 270 159 403 142 135 34
Periclesa Shakespeare 5 25 16 80 51 132 66 41 21
Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare 39 105 68 360 293 554 299 255 107
Coriolanus Shakespeare 37 111 68 381 224 535 314 264 117
Cymbeline Shakespeare 61 158 102 432 332 641 401 421 187
Winterrsquos Tale Shakespeare 44 138 78 380 261 492 307 378 133
Tempest Shakespeare 38 83 49 266 187 333 196 167 85
Henry 8a Shakespeare 24 34 25 156 135 261 200 122 61
Two Noble Kinsmena Shakespeare 10 34 12 111 109 186 129 92 32
Edward 3a Shakespeare 8 24 13 133 63 58 25 4 3
Arden of Favershama Shakespeare 1 1 1 30 5 13 0 2 0
Spanish Tragedy Add Passagesa Shakespeare 20 28 12 33 32 30 14 8 2
Sir Thomas More Passagesa Shakespeare 0 0 0 9 6 8 9 0 0
aCollaborative works for which we provide counts for only Shakespearersquos portion(s) as listed in Appendix 2bIn the case of 1 Henry VI we have also included the total pause counts for the entire play
D Bruster and G Smith
20 of 20 Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 2014
Top Related