The Shakespeare plays that we have are due to their being included in the First Folio. We know that they represent only about half of Shakespeare’s plays. The rest have been lost. We know that there was a play, Love’s Labours Won but we know very little about it.
How we know that Love’s Labours Won existed?
There are two key historical references to a play called Love’s Labour’s Won:
- Francis Meres’ List (1598)
In his Palladis Tamia: Wit’s Treasury, Francis Meres listed twelve of Shakespeare’s plays, including “Love’s Labour’s Won.” He names it alongside known plays like Love’s Labour’s Lost, The Merchant of Venice, and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, suggesting it was already well known at the time. - Stationers’ Register (1603)
A bookseller named Christopher Hunt listed “Love’s Labour’s Won” in a 1603 inventory of books for sale. This list was rediscovered in 1953, providing a second independent confirmation that the play once existed in published form.
What might Love’s Labour’s Won have been?
Scholars have proposed three main theories:
1. A Lost Sequel to Love’s Labour’s Lost
Thematically, this is attractive: Love’s Labour’s Lost ends unusually, with the couples parting rather than marrying, and an air of deferral. A sequel could have resolved the plot, turning the “labour” into a “win.” This would be unique in Shakespeare’s comedies — essentially a two-part romantic arc.
But no known play survives that obviously fits this bill.
2. An alternative title for a known play
Some scholars argue Love’s Labour’s Won was simply an alternate name for a surviving Shakespeare play, possibly:
- Much Ado About Nothing (most popular theory)
The tone, characters, and wit resemble Love’s Labour’s Lost, and the title could be interpreted as ironic (the effort of love is ‘won’ — but only after trials). - All’s Well That Ends Well
A late romantic comedy in which a seemingly lost romantic pursuit is ultimately successful. - The Taming of the Shrew
Another early comedy, with a central theme of “winning” love.
However, Much Ado About Nothing was already known under that title by 1600, which complicates the identification.
3. A Truly Lost Play
It may simply be a play that Shakespeare wrote and which has not survived in any manuscript or printed edition — not unknown for Elizabethan drama. Dozens of other plays from the period are lost, including others known from titles or mentions alone.
Why was it lost?
There are several possible reasons:
- No publication: Many plays were never printed; if it was only performed, not printed, it would have been more vulnerable to loss.
- Low popularity: It may not have been a hit and therefore not preserved.
- Manuscript loss or destruction: The original playbooks could have been lost in accidents, fires, or during political censorship.
What might the play might have been like?
We know almost nothing definite about the plot and characters of Love’s Labour’s Won. It survives only as a title. However, scholars have speculated based on context, inference, and comparison with Love’s Labour’s Lost.
If it was a sequel, here’s a summary of what can be reasonably suggested or hypothesized:
Love’s Labour’s Lost ends unusually for a Shakespearean comedy: the couples do not end up married, and the tone is bittersweet. The four noblemen — Ferdinand of Navarre, Berowne, Longaville, and Dumaine — have fallen for the Princess of France and her ladies, but their courtship is interrupted by news of the Princess’s father’s death. The women ask the men to spend a year proving the sincerity of their love before any vows are exchanged.
This deferral creates a clear setup for a sequel. Anything one may say about it is pure speculation but based on what we know about Shakespeare as a playwright:
A play about maturity, love proved through constancy, and love’s eventual reward — the “labour” is “won.”
The men return after a year to fulfill their vows and win back the women.
Witty repartee resumes, culminating in mutual recognition, resolution of past follies, and eventual marriages.
Comedic subplots involving the lower-class characters, perhaps with mistaken identities or court satire.
