This dissertation is an attempt to describe the characteristics of Thomas Heywood's dramatic style. The study is divided into three parts. The first deals with the playwright's theatrical career and discusses how his practical experience as actor and sharer might have affected his technique as a dramatic writer. The second part defines the scope of the investigation and contains the bulk of the analysis of Heywood's plays. My approach to the mechanics of playwriting is both practical and theoretical. I have attempted to come to an understanding of the technicalities of Heywood's craftsmanship by studying the changes he made in Sir Thomas Moore and in the sources he used for his plays. At the same time, I have tried to comprehend the aesthetic framework within which he worked by referring to the critical ideas of the period and especially to opinions expressed by Heywood himself in An Apology for Actors and elsewhere. The third part of the thesis is an application of the findings of Part Two to the problems of authorship in Fortune by Land and Sea. The thesis shows Heywood's emphasis on essentially theatrical qualities such as visual effects and effects which can be obtained by controlling the relationship of the actor to the audience. It also illustrates his rejection of "Aristotelian" principles of dramatic construction in favour of "rules" derived from the native morality and romance traditions'., and shaped by contemporary theatrical conditions. It concludes that Heywood is essentially a didactic artist but one interested in technical experimentation and audience response.

Two opposing philosophical outlooks can be discerned in the thought of the men discussed in this dissertation.. The humanist view, associated with Archer and Barker, sees life as centred solely on man; the religious thinkers, Yeats and Craig, are concerned with man's relationship with a power beyond himself. Shaw is unique in his advocacy of contradictory elements from both philosophies. The humanist thinkers are concerned in art with the communication of information about man; those of the religious party value an indescribable experience communicated by artistic symbols. These two kinds of communication can perhaps be seen in the English theatre of the nineteenth century; the theatre of the early part of the century made use of a traditional language of theatrical symbols, while the later theatres of Irving and the Bancrofts abandoned tradition in favour of new "realistic" portrayals of society and human psychology. Archer illustrates the humanist approach to art in his concern for the moral and psychological information conveyed by the play. In his humanist guise, Shaw emphasizes the need for drama to convey new social and philosophical ideas. For Barker, drama conveys, through the medium of the actor, a special kind of "subjective" truth. Each of the religious theorists seeks symbolic value in a different facet of the theatrical performance;, for Yeats, the religious communication is achieved by the traditional symbols of poetry; for Shaw, in his religious guise, the performer is the prime source of symbolic value; for Craig, purely visual symbols of natural process provide a glimpse of a world untainted by man's egotism. The theories are open to criticism. The humanist theories seem to deny the value of artistic form, while the religious theories seem to seek form without content. All the theories seem to show insufficient respect for the laws of audience psychology.

The imagery of the plays of John Webster and John Ford is not only verbal: in staging as well as language these dramas display strongly imagistic, symbolic elements. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the seven extant tragedies of Webster and Ford from the point of view of their total dramatic nature - to examine the staging, costumes, hand and large properties, movement and gestures as well as the verbal imagery, and the interplay of these verbal and visual elements. The original appearance, of these plays in their contemporary theatre, and the dramatist's intentions for performance, can only be surmised. The original stage directions are examined for hints of the original presentation: these stage directions may not always be authorial, but, especially in the case of Ford, they seem to reveal the playwright's hand. The dialogue, too, frequently implies particular gestures, grouping or stage placement. The visual imagery, it is here suggested, is created by the dramatist for several purposes: a moral or ironical point may be silently established; a chain of related visual motifs may bind various actions and characters into an organic union; a visualization may appeal outward to other works of art or theatrical or non-dramatic conventions, enlarging the immediate significance by this shorthand reference; visual ceremonies may make concrete the more ephemeral words and feelings of the characters. Each of the tragedies is studied in a separate chapter, in the following order: Webster's The White Devil, The Duchess of Malfi, and Appius and Virginia (the authorship of which is disputed); John Ford's The Broken Heart, Love's Sacrifice, 'Tis Pity She's a Whore, and Perkin Warbeck. A conclusion indicates the differences between Webster's more overtly theatrical visualizations and Ford's quiet tableaux. The thesis is accompanied by illustrations which are either explanatory or comparative.