A metatheatric consideration in "Epicoene" and their implications on Jonson as a writer

In concealing and then revealing the masculine identity of "Epicoene", Dauphine certainly does -- within the world of the play -- emerge as a social and commercial "wit". But abandoning for the moment this fictive world and considering the text as an early modern dramaturgical blueprint, isn't Dauphine's moment of triumph more a mark of metatheatric foresight on the character's part, rather than simply commercial or social wiles? After all, if we presume an early modern theatrical audience for this text -- an audience for whom men in women's roles are the ideological and dramaturgical norm -- isn't the logical remark upon the "discovery" of the gender of "Epicoene" not "My goodness, it's a woman!" but, rather, "But aren't ALL the women men?" The confusion for the early modern audience, upon the revelation of "Epicoene's" gender, must have been far more than we -- as a modern audience -- can possibly imagine.

Jonson may have desired ardently that his text be received as a written work, but it is emergent from a dramatic milieu in which transgendered representation of women is considered normative. In this respect, then, how can the wo/man "Epicoene" be considered spectacular? And if we do accept such a proposition, are we merely further divorcing Jonson from the theatrical reality of his period? In other words, is the play Epicoene actually an attempt by the playwright to further establish his oeuvre as a published, and not performed, writer?