1
Chaucer G, Cawley AC. Canterbury tales. London: Dent 1958.
2
Shakespeare W, Brooks HF. A Midsummer Night’s Dream. [New ed.]. [London]: Routledge 1989.
3
Shakespeare W, Honigmann EAJ. Othello. London: Arden Shakespeare 2002.
4
Shakespeare W, Gossett S. Pericles. London: Arden Shakespeare 2004.
5
Margaret Aston. Corpus Christi and Corpus Regni: Heresy and the Peasants’ Revolt. Past & Present. 1994;3–47.
6
Alcuin Blamires. Chaucer the Reactionary: Ideology and the General Prologue to The Canterbury Tales. The Review of English Studies. 2000;51:523–39.
7
Farrell TJ. Privacy and the Boundaries of Fabliau in The Miller’s Tale. ELH. 1989;56. doi: 10.2307/2873159
8
Ellis DS. Chaucer’s Devilish Reeve. The Chaucer Review. 1992;27.
9
Howard JE. Crossdressing, The Theatre, and Gender Struggle in Early Modern England. Shakespeare Quarterly. 1988;39. doi: 10.2307/2870706
10
Hunt M. The Reclamation of Language in ‘Much Ado about Nothing’. Studies in Philology. 2000;97.
11
Montrose LA. ‘Shaping Fantasies’: Figurations of Gender and Power in Elizabethan Culture. Representations. 1983;61–94. doi: 10.2307/2928384
12
What’s Wrong with the Pardoner? Complexion Theory, the Phlegmatic Man, and Effeminacy. The Chaucer Review. 2011;45. doi: 10.5325/chaucerrev.45.4.0357
13
Chaucer’s Pardoner on the Couch: Psyche and Clio in Medieval Literary Studies. Speculum. 2001;76:638–80. doi: 10.2307/2903882
14
Robert Matz. Slander, Renaissance Discourses of Sodomy, and Othello. ELH. 1999;66:261–76.
15
Stanley Cavell. Epistemology and Tragedy: A Reading of Othello. Daedalus. 1979;108:27–43.
16
Maurice Hunt. Syncretistic Religion in Shakespeare’s Late Romances. South Central Review. 2011;28:57–79.
