In the following essay, Jowett examines the evidence for the claim that Chettle authored Greene's Groatsworth of Wit before establishing a context for his authorship and confronting those critics who reject the idea that he forged the work.

In the following essay, Burnett offers a detailed reading of Piers Plainness' Seven Years' Apprenticeship, arguing that the work has a densely allusive design, explores important topical questions about master-servant relations, and should be read in relation to an Elizabethan apprentice culture.

In the following essay, Erne denies claims that Chettle apologized to Shakespeare for Greene's attacks.

In the following essay, Kahan disputes the claim made by other scholars that Chettle was the editor of the 1597 edition of Romeo and Juliet.

In the following essay, Jowett discusses Chettle's contribution to the play Sir Thomas More, his involvement in Romeo and Juliet, the plays he wrote in collaboration with others, his work on The Tragedy of Hoffman, his debts, and his death.

In the following essay, Jowett collates and consolidates critical work done on Chettle after 1934 to present a sketch of the man and his work, discussing his early writings, his relationship with John Danter, his authorship of Greene's Groatsworth of Wit, and his attack on bawdy ballads.

In the following essay, the anonymous critic analyzes the evidence that Greene's Groatsworth of Wit is a forgery perpetrated by Chettle.

In the following essay, Austin offers linguistic evidence for the hypothesis that Chettle forged Greene's Groatsworth of Wit.