summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/22397-8.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to '22397-8.txt')
-rw-r--r--22397-8.txt16341
1 files changed, 16341 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/22397-8.txt b/22397-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bb7c75f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22397-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,16341 @@
+The Project Gutenberg eBook, Shakespearean Playhouses, by Joseph Quincy
+Adams
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+
+
+
+Title: Shakespearean Playhouses
+ A History of English Theatres from the Beginnings to the Restoration
+
+
+Author: Joseph Quincy Adams
+
+
+
+Release Date: August 25, 2007 [eBook #22397]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SHAKESPEAREAN PLAYHOUSES***
+
+
+E-text prepared by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Linda Cantoni, and the
+Project Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team
+(https://www.pgdp.net)
+
+
+
+Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
+ file which includes the many original illustrations.
+ See 22397-h.htm or 22397-h.zip:
+ (https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/2/3/9/22397/22397-h/22397-h.htm)
+ or
+ (https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/2/3/9/22397/22397-h.zip)
+
+
+Transcriber's Notes:
+
+ The original book cites Holland's _Her[Greek: ô]ologia_ in several
+ places, but consistently misspells it _Hero[Greek: ô]logia_. This
+ has been corrected based on the image of the original title page
+ of _Her[Greek: ô]ologia_ at the Library of Congress, www.loc.gov.
+
+ The original book occasionally uses a numeral or letter enclosed
+ in square brackets. In this e-book, these have been changed to
+ curly brackets to avoid confusion with footnote markers.
+
+
+
+
+SHAKESPEAREAN PLAYHOUSES
+
+A History of English Theatres from the Beginnings to the Restoration
+
+by
+
+JOSEPH QUINCY ADAMS
+Cornell University
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+[Illustration]
+
+Gloucester, Mass.
+Peter Smith
+1960
+
+Copyright, 1917, by
+Joseph Quincy Adams
+
+Reprinted, 1960,
+by Permission of
+Houghton Mifflin Co.
+
+
+[Illustration: MAP OF LONDON SHOWING THE PLAYHOUSES
+
+BLACKFRIARS, (FIRST) 1576-1584.
+BLACKFRIARS, (SECOND) 1596-1655.
+CURTAIN, 1577-after 1627.
+FORTUNE, (FIRST) 1600-1621.
+FORTUNE, (SECOND) 1623-1661.
+GLOBE, (FIRST) 1599-1613.
+GLOBE, (SECOND) 1614-1645.
+HOPE, 1613-after 1682.
+PHOENIX OR COCKPIT, 1617-after 1664.
+RED BULL, about 1605-after 1663.
+ROSE, 1587-1605.
+SALISBURY COURT, 1629-1666.
+SWAN, 1595-after 1632.
+THEATRE, 1576-1598.
+WHITEFRIARS, about 1605-1614(?).]
+
+
+
+
+TO
+
+LANE COOPER
+
+IN GRATITUDE AND ESTEEM
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The method of dramatic representation in the time of Shakespeare has
+long received close study. Among those who have more recently devoted
+their energies to the subject may be mentioned W.J. Lawrence, T.S.
+Graves, G.F. Reynolds, V.E. Albright, A.H. Thorndike, and B.
+Neuendorff, each of whom has embodied the results of his
+investigations in one or more noteworthy volumes. But the history of
+the playhouses themselves, a topic equally important, has not hitherto
+been attempted. If we omit the brief notices of the theatres in Edmond
+Malone's _The Plays and Poems of William Shakespeare_ (1790) and John
+Payne Collier's _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1831), the
+sole book dealing even in part with the topic is T.F. Ordish's _The
+Early London Theatres in the Fields_. This book, however, though good
+for its time, was written a quarter of a century ago, before most of
+the documents relating to early theatrical history were discovered,
+and it discusses only six playhouses. The present volume takes
+advantage of all the materials made available by the industry of later
+scholars, and records the history of seventeen regular, and five
+temporary or projected, theatres. The book is throughout the result of
+a first-hand examination of original sources, and represents an
+independent interpretation of the historical evidences. As a
+consequence of this, as well as of a comparison (now for the first
+time possible) of the detailed records of the several playhouses, many
+conclusions long held by scholars have been set aside. I have made no
+systematic attempt to point out the cases in which I depart from
+previously accepted opinions, for the scholar will discover them for
+himself; but I believe I have never thus departed without being aware
+of it, and without having carefully weighed the entire evidence.
+Sometimes the evidence has been too voluminous or complex for detailed
+presentation; in these instances I have had to content myself with
+reference by footnotes to the more significant documents bearing on
+the point.
+
+In a task involving so many details I cannot hope to have escaped
+errors--errors due not only to oversight, but also to the limitations
+of my knowledge or to mistaken interpretation. For such I can offer no
+excuse, though I may request from my readers the same degree of
+tolerance which I have tried to show other laborers in the field. In
+reproducing old documents I have as a rule modernized the spelling and
+the punctuation, for in a work of this character there seems to be no
+advantage in preserving the accidents and perversities of early
+scribes and printers. I have also consistently altered the dates when
+the Old Style conflicted with our present usage.
+
+I desire especially to record my indebtedness to the researches of
+Professor C.W. Wallace, the extent of whose services to the study of
+the Tudor-Stuart drama has not yet been generally realized, and has
+sometimes been grudgingly acknowledged; and to the labors of Mr. E.K.
+Chambers and Mr. W.W. Greg, who, in the _Collections_ of The Malone
+Society, and elsewhere, have rendered accessible a wealth of important
+material dealing with the early history of the stage.
+
+Finally, I desire to express my gratitude to Mr. Hamilton Bell and the
+editor of _The Architectural Record_ for permission to reproduce the
+illustration and description of Inigo Jones's plan of the Cockpit; to
+the Governors of Dulwich College for permission to reproduce three
+portraits from the Dulwich Picture Gallery, one of which, that of Joan
+Alleyn, has not previously been reproduced; to Mr. C.W. Redwood,
+formerly technical artist at Cornell University, for expert assistance
+in making the large map of London showing the sites of the playhouses,
+and for other help generously rendered; and to my colleagues,
+Professor Lane Cooper and Professor Clark S. Northup, for their
+kindness in reading the proofs.
+
+JOSEPH QUINCY ADAMS
+
+ITHACA, NEW YORK
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+ I. THE INN-YARDS 1
+
+ II. THE HOSTILITY OF THE CITY 18
+
+ III. THE THEATRE 27
+
+ IV. THE CURTAIN 75
+
+ V. THE FIRST BLACKFRIARS 91
+
+ VI. ST. PAUL'S 111
+
+ VII. THE BANKSIDE AND THE BEAR GARDEN 119
+
+ VIII. NEWINGTON BUTTS 134
+
+ IX. THE ROSE 142
+
+ X. THE SWAN 161
+
+ XI. THE SECOND BLACKFRIARS 182
+
+ XII. THE GLOBE 234
+
+ XIII. THE FORTUNE 267
+
+ XIV. THE RED BULL 294
+
+ XV. WHITEFRIARS 310
+
+ XVI. THE HOPE 324
+
+ XVII. ROSSETER'S BLACKFRIARS, OR PORTER'S HALL 342
+
+XVIII. THE PHOENIX, OR COCKPIT IN DRURY LANE 348
+
+ XIX. SALISBURY COURT 368
+
+ XX. THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT, OR THEATRE ROYAL AT WHITEHALL 384
+
+ XXI. MISCELLANEOUS: WOLF'S THEATRE IN NIGHTINGALE LANE;
+ THE PROJECTED "AMPHITHEATRE"; OGILBY'S DUBLIN THEATRE;
+ THE FRENCH PLAYERS' TEMPORARY THEATRE IN DRURY LANE;
+ DAVENANT'S PROJECTED THEATRE IN FLEET STREET 410
+
+ BIBLIOGRAPHY 433
+
+ MAPS AND VIEWS OF LONDON 457
+
+ INDEX 461
+
+
+
+
+ILLUSTRATIONS
+
+
+MAP OF LONDON SHOWING THE PLAYHOUSES _Frontispiece_
+
+AN INN-YARD 4
+
+MAP OF LONDON SHOWING THE INN-PLAYHOUSES 9
+
+THE SITE OF THE FIRST PLAYHOUSES 27
+
+THE SITE OF THE FIRST PLAYHOUSES 31
+
+A PLAN OF BURBAGE'S HOLYWELL PROPERTY 33
+
+THE SITE OF THE CURTAIN PLAYHOUSE 79
+
+BLACKFRIARS MONASTERY 93
+
+THE SITE OF THE TWO BLACKFRIARS PLAYHOUSES 94
+
+A PLAN OF FARRANT'S PLAYHOUSE 97
+
+THE BANKSIDE 120
+
+THE BANKSIDE 121
+
+THE BEAR- AND BULL-BAITING RINGS 123
+
+THE BEAR GARDEN 127
+
+THE BEAR GARDEN AND THE ROSE 147
+
+THE BEAR GARDEN AND THE ROSE 149
+
+JOAN WOODWARD ALLEYN 152
+
+THE MANOR OF PARIS GARDEN AND THE SWAN PLAYHOUSE 163
+
+THE SWAN PLAYHOUSE 165
+
+THE INTERIOR OF THE SWAN PLAYHOUSE 169
+
+PLAN ILLUSTRATING THE SECOND BLACKFRIARS PLAYHOUSE 187
+
+REMAINS OF BLACKFRIARS 196
+
+RICHARD BURBAGE 234
+
+WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE 238
+
+A PLAN OF THE GLOBE PROPERTY 242
+
+THE BEAR GARDEN, THE ROSE, AND THE FIRST GLOBE 245
+
+THE BEAR GARDEN, THE ROSE, AND THE FIRST GLOBE 246
+
+THE FIRST GLOBE 248
+
+THE FIRST GLOBE 253
+
+MERIAN'S VIEW OF LONDON 256
+
+THE SECOND GLOBE 260
+
+THE TRADITIONAL SITE OF THE GLOBE 262
+
+THE SITE OF THE FORTUNE PLAYHOUSE 270
+
+THE FORTUNE PLAYHOUSE? 278
+
+EDWARD ALLEYN 282
+
+THE SITE OF THE RED BULL PLAYHOUSE 294
+
+A PLAN OF WHITEFRIARS 312
+
+MICHAEL DRAYTON 314
+
+THE SITES OF THE WHITEFRIARS AND THE SALISBURY COURT PLAYHOUSES 318
+
+THE HOPE PLAYHOUSE, OR SECOND BEAR GARDEN 326
+
+THE HOPE PLAYHOUSE, OR SECOND BEAR GARDEN 331
+
+THE SITE OF THE COCKPIT IN DRURY LANE 350
+
+A PLAN OF THE SALISBURY COURT PROPERTY 371
+
+THE COCKPIT AT WHITEHALL 390
+
+INIGO JONES'S PLANS FOR THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT 396
+
+FISHER'S SURVEY OF WHITEHALL SHOWING THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT 398
+
+THE THEATRO OLYMPICO AT VICENZA 399
+
+THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT 407
+
+
+
+
+SHAKESPEAREAN PLAYHOUSES
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE INN-YARDS
+
+
+Before the building of regular playhouses the itinerant troupes of
+actors were accustomed, except when received into private homes, to
+give their performances in any place that chance provided, such as
+open street-squares, barns, town-halls, moot-courts, schoolhouses,
+churches, and--most frequently of all, perhaps--the yards of inns.
+These yards, especially those of carriers' inns, were admirably suited
+to dramatic representations, consisting as they did of a large open
+court surrounded by two or more galleries. Many examples of such
+inn-yards are still to be seen in various parts of England; a picture
+of the famous White Hart, in Southwark, is given opposite page 4 by
+way of illustration. In the yard a temporary platform--a few boards,
+it may be, set on barrel-heads[1]--could be erected for a stage; in
+the adjacent stables a dressing-room could be provided for the actors;
+the rabble--always the larger and more enthusiastic part of the
+audience--could be accommodated with standing-room about the stage;
+while the more aristocratic members of the audience could be
+comfortably seated in the galleries overhead. Thus a ready-made and
+very serviceable theatre was always at the command of the players; and
+it seems to have been frequently made use of from the very beginning
+of professionalism in acting.
+
+[Footnote 1: "Thou shalt not need to travel with thy pumps full of
+gravel any more, after a blind jade and a hamper, and stalk upon
+boards and barrel-heads." (_Poetaster_, III, i.)]
+
+One of the earliest extant moralities, _Mankind_, acted by strollers
+in the latter half of the fifteenth century, gives us an interesting
+glimpse of an inn-yard performance. The opening speech makes distinct
+reference to the two classes of the audience described above as
+occupying the galleries and the yard:
+
+ O ye sovereigns that sit, and ye brothers that stand right
+ up.
+
+The "brothers," indeed, seem to have stood up so closely about the
+stage that the actors had great difficulty in passing to and from
+their dressing-room. Thus, Nowadays leaves the stage with the request:
+
+ Make space, sirs, let me go out!
+
+New Gyse enters with the threat:
+
+ Out of my way, sirs, for dread of a beating!
+
+While Nought, with even less respect, shouts:
+
+ Avaunt, knaves! Let me go by!
+
+Language such as this would hardly be appropriate if addressed to the
+"sovereigns" who sat in the galleries above; but, as addressed to the
+"brothers," it probably served to create a general feeling of good
+nature. And a feeling of good nature was desirable, for the actors
+were facing the difficult problem of inducing the audience to pay for
+its entertainment.
+
+This problem they met by taking advantage of the most thrilling moment
+of the plot. The Vice and his wicked though jolly companions, having
+wholly failed to overcome the hero, Mankind, decide to call to their
+assistance no less a person than the great Devil himself; and
+accordingly they summon him with a "Walsingham wystyle." Immediately
+he roars in the dressing-room, and shouts:
+
+ I come, with my legs under me!
+
+There is a flash of powder, and an explosion of fireworks, while the
+eager spectators crane their necks to view the entrance of this
+"abhomynabull" personage. But nothing appears; and in the expectant
+silence that follows the actors calmly announce a collection of money,
+facetiously making the appearance of the Devil dependent on the
+liberality of the audience:
+
+ _New Gyse._ Now ghostly to our purpose, worshipful sovereigns,
+ We intend to gather money, if it please your negligence.
+ For a man with a head that of great omnipotence--
+
+ _Nowadays_ [_interrupting_]. Keep your tale, in goodness, I
+ pray you, good brother!
+
+ [_Addressing the audience, and pointing towards the
+ dressing-room, where the Devil roars again._]
+
+ He is a worshipful man, sirs, saving your reverence.
+ He loveth no groats, nor pence, or two-pence;
+ Give us red royals, if ye will see his abominable presence.
+
+ _New Gyse._ Not so! Ye that may not pay the one, pay the other.
+
+And with such phrases as "God bless you, master," "Ye will not say
+nay," "Let us go by," "Do them all pay," "Well mote ye fare," they
+pass through the audience gathering their groats, pence, and twopence;
+after which they remount the stage, fetch in the Devil, and continue
+their play without further interruption.
+
+[Illustration: AN INN-YARD
+
+The famous White Hart, in Southwark. The ground-plan shows the
+arrangement of a carriers' inn with the stabling below; the guest
+rooms were on the upper floors.]
+
+In the smaller towns the itinerant players might, through a letter of
+recommendation from their noble patron, or through the good-will of
+some local dignitary, secure the use of the town-hall, of the
+schoolhouse, or even of the village church. In such buildings, of
+course, they could give their performances more advantageously, for
+they could place money-takers at the doors, and exact adequate payment
+from all who entered. In the great city of London, however, the
+players were necessarily forced to make use almost entirely of public
+inn-yards--an arrangement which, we may well believe, they found far
+from satisfactory. Not being masters of the inns, they were merely
+tolerated; they had to content themselves with hastily provided and
+inadequate stage facilities; and, worst of all, for their recompense
+they had to trust to a hat collection, at best a poor means of
+securing money. Often too, no doubt, they could not get the use of a
+given inn-yard when they most needed it, as on holidays and festive
+occasions; and at all times they had to leave the public in
+uncertainty as to where or when plays were to be seen. Their street
+parade, with the noise of trumpets and drums, might gather a motley
+crowd for the yard, but in so large a place as London it was
+inadequate for advertisement among the better classes. And as the
+troupes of the city increased in wealth and dignity, and as the
+playgoing public grew in size and importance, the old makeshift
+arrangement became more and more unsatisfactory.
+
+At last the unsatisfactory situation was relieved by the specific
+dedication of certain large inns to dramatic purposes; that is, the
+proprietors of certain inns found it to their advantage to subordinate
+their ordinary business to the urgent demands of the actors and the
+playgoing public. Accordingly they erected in their yards permanent
+stages adequately equipped for dramatic representations, constructed
+in their galleries wooden benches to accommodate as many spectators as
+possible, and were ready to let the use of their buildings to the
+actors on an agreement by which the proprietor shared with the troupe
+in the "takings" at the door. Thus there came into existence a number
+of inn-playhouses, where the actors, as masters of the place, could
+make themselves quite at home, and where the public without special
+notification could be sure of always finding dramatic entertainment.
+
+Richard Flecknoe, in his _Discourse of the English Stage_ (1664), goes
+so far as to dignify these reconstructed inns with the name
+"theatres." At first, says he, the players acted "without any certain
+theatres or set companions, till about the beginning of Queen
+Elizabeth's reign they began here to assemble into companies, and set
+up theatres, first in the city (as in the inn-yards of the Cross Keys
+and Bull in Grace and Bishop's Gate Street at this day to be seen),
+till that fanatic spirit [i.e., Puritanism], which then began with the
+stage and after ended with the throne, banished them thence into the
+suburbs"--that is, into Shoreditch and the Bankside, where, outside
+the jurisdiction of the puritanical city fathers, they erected their
+first regular playhouses.
+
+The "banishment" referred to by Flecknoe was the Order of the Common
+Council issued on December 6, 1574. This famous document described
+public acting as then taking place "in great inns, having chambers and
+secret places adjoining to their open stages and galleries"; and it
+ordered that henceforth "no inn-keeper, tavern-keeper, nor other
+person whatsoever within the liberties of this city shall openly
+show, or play, nor cause or suffer to be openly showed or played
+within the house yard or any other place within the liberties of this
+city, any play," etc.
+
+How many inns were let on special occasions for dramatic purposes we
+cannot say; but there were five "great inns," more famous than the
+rest, which were regularly used by the best London troupes. Thus
+Howes, in his continuation of Stow's _Annals_ (p. 1004), in attempting
+to give a list of the playhouses which had been erected "within London
+and the suburbs," begins with the statement, "Five inns, or common
+osteryes, turned to playhouses." These five were the Bell and the
+Cross Keys, hard by each other in Gracechurch Street, the Bull, in
+Bishopsgate Street, the Bell Savage, on Ludgate Hill, and the Boar's
+Head, in Whitechapel Street without Aldgate.[2]
+
+[Footnote 2: All historians of the drama have confused this great
+carriers' inn with the Boar's Head in Eastcheap made famous by
+Falstaff. The error seems to have come from the _Analytical Index of
+the Remembrancia_, which (p. 355) incorrectly catalogues the letter of
+March 31, 1602, as referring to the "Boar's Head in Eastcheap." The
+letter itself, however, when examined, gives no indication whatever of
+Eastcheap, and other evidence shows conclusively that the inn was
+situated in Whitechapel just outside of Aldgate.]
+
+Although Flecknoe referred to the Order of the Common Council as a
+"banishment," it did not actually drive the players from the city.
+They were able, through the intervention of the Privy Council, and on
+the old excuse of rehearsing plays for the Queen's entertainment, to
+occupy the inns for a large part of each year.[3] John Stockwood, in a
+sermon preached at Paul's Cross, August 24, 1578, bitterly complains
+of the "eight ordinary places" used regularly for plays, referring, it
+seems, to the five inns and the three playhouses--the Theatre,
+Curtain, and Blackfriars--recently opened to the public.
+
+[Footnote 3: See especially _The Acts of the Privy Council_ and _The
+Remembrancia_ of the City of London.]
+
+Richard Reulidge, in _A Monster Lately Found Out and Discovered_
+(1628), writes that "soon after 1580" the authorities of London
+received permission from Queen Elizabeth and her Privy Council "to
+thrust the players out of the city, and to pull down all playhouses
+and dicing-houses within their liberties: which accordingly was
+effected; and the playhouses in Gracious Street [i.e., the Bell and
+the Cross Keys], Bishopsgate Street [i.e., the Bull], that nigh Paul's
+[i.e., Paul's singing school?], that on Ludgate Hill [i.e., the Bell
+Savage], and the Whitefriars[4] were quite put down and suppressed by
+the care of these religious senators."
+
+[Footnote 4: There is some error here. The city had no jurisdiction
+over Whitefriars, or Blackfriars either; but there was a playhouse in
+Blackfriars at the time, and it was suppressed in 1584, though not by
+the city authorities. Possibly Reulidge should have written
+"Whitechapel."]
+
+[Illustration: MAP OF LONDON SHOWING THE INN-PLAYHOUSES
+
+1. The Bell Savage; 2. The Cross Keys; 3. The Bell; 4. The Bull; 5.
+The Boar's Head.]
+
+Yet, in spite of what Reulidge says, these five inns continued to be
+used by the players for many years.[5] No doubt they were often used
+surreptitiously. In _Martin's Month's Mind_ (1589), we read that a
+person "for a penie may have farre better [entertainment] by oddes at
+the Theatre and Curtaine, and _any blind playing house_ everie
+day."[6] But the more important troupes were commonly able, through
+the interference of the Privy Council, to get official permission to
+use the inns during a large part of each year.
+
+[Footnote 5: _The Remembrancia_ shows that the inn-playhouses remained
+for many years as sharp thorns in the side of the puritanical city
+fathers.]
+
+[Footnote 6: Grosart, _Nash_, I, 179.]
+
+There is not enough material about these early inn-playhouses to
+enable one to write their separate histories. Below, however, I have
+recorded in chronological order the more important references to them
+which have come under my observation.
+
+1557. On September 5 the Privy Council instructed the Lord Mayor of
+London "that some of his officers do forthwith repair to the Boar's
+Head without Aldgate, where, the Lords are informed, a lewd play
+called _A Sackful of News_ shall be played this day," to arrest the
+players, and send their playbook to the Council.[7]
+
+[Footnote 7: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, VI, 168.]
+
+1573. During this year there were various fencing contests held at the
+Bull in Bishopsgate.[8]
+
+[Footnote 8: W. Rendle, _The Inns of Old Southwark_, p. 235.]
+
+1577. In February the Office of the Revels made a payment of 10_d._
+"ffor the cariadge of the parts of ye well counterfeit from the Bell
+in gracious strete to St. Johns, to be performed for the play of
+_Cutwell_."[9]
+
+[Footnote 9: A. Feuillerat, _Documents Relating to the Office of the
+Revels in the Time of Queen Elizabeth_, p. 277.]
+
+1579. On June 23 James Burbage was arrested for the sum of £5 13_d._
+"as he came down Gracious Street towards the Cross Keys there to a
+play." The name of the proprietor of this inn-playhouse is preserved
+in one of the interrogatories connected with the case: "Item. Whether
+did you, John Hynde, about xiii years past, in _anno_ 1579, the xxiii
+of June, about two of the clock in the afternoon, send the sheriff's
+officer unto the Cross Keys in Gratious Street, being then the
+dwelling house of Richard Ibotson, citizen and brewer of London,"
+etc.[10] Nothing more, I believe, is known of this person.
+
+[Footnote 10: Burbage _v._ Brayne, printed in C.W. Wallace, _The First
+London Theatre_, pp. 82, 90. Whether Burbage was going to the Cross
+Keys as a spectator or as an actor is not indicated; but the
+presumption is that he was then playing at the inn, although he was
+proprietor of the Theatre.]
+
+1579. Stephen Gosson, in _The Schoole of Abuse_, writes favorably of
+"the two prose books played at the Bell Savage, where you shall find
+never a word without wit, never a line without pith, never a letter
+placed in vain; the _Jew_ and _Ptolome_, shown at the Bull ... neither
+with amorous gesture wounding the eye, nor with slovenly talk hurting
+the ears of the chast hearers."[11]
+
+[Footnote 11: Arber's _English Reprints_, p. 40.]
+
+1582. On July 1 the Earl of Warwick wrote to the Lord Mayor requesting
+the city authorities to "give license to my servant, John David, this
+bearer, to play his profest prizes in his science and profession of
+defence at the Bull in Bishopsgate, or some other convenient place to
+be assigned within the liberties of London." The Lord Mayor refused to
+allow David to give his fencing contest "in an inn, which was somewhat
+too close for infection, and appointed him to play in an open place of
+the Leaden Hall," which, it may be added, was near the Bull.[12]
+
+[Footnote 12: See The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 55-57.]
+
+1583. William Rendle, in _The Inns of Old Southwark_, p. 235, states
+that in this year "Tarleton, Wilson, and others note the stay of the
+plague, and ask leave to play at the Bull in Bishopsgate, or the Bell
+in Gracechurch Street," citing as his authority merely "City MS." The
+Privy Council on November 26, 1583, addressed to the Lord Mayor a
+letter requesting "that Her Majesty's Players [i.e., Tarleton, Wilson,
+etc.] may be suffered to play within the liberties as heretofore they
+have done."[13] And on November 28 the Lord Mayor issued to them a
+license to play "at the sign of the Bull in Bishopsgate Street, and
+the sign of the Bell in Gracious Street, and nowhere else within this
+City."[14]
+
+[Footnote 13: See _The Remembrancia_, in The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 66.]
+
+[Footnote 14: C.W. Wallace, _The First London Theatre_, p. 11.]
+
+1587. "James Cranydge played his master's prize the 21 of November,
+1587, at the Bellsavage without Ludgate, at iiij sundry kinds of
+weapons.... There played with him nine masters."[15]
+
+[Footnote 15: _MS. Sloane_, 2530, f. 6-7, quoted by J.O. Halliwell in
+his edition of _Tarlton's Jests_, p. xi. The Bell Savage seems to have
+been especially patronized by fencers. George Silver, in his _Paradoxe
+of Defence_ (1599), tells how he and his brother once challenged two
+Italian fencers to a contest "to be played at the Bell Savage upon the
+scaffold, when he that went in his fight faster back than he ought,
+should be in danger to break his neck off the scaffold."]
+
+Before 1588. In _Tarlton's Jests_[16] we find a number of references
+to that famous actor's pleasantries in the London inns used by the
+Queen's Players. It is impossible to date these exactly, but Tarleton
+became a member of the Queen's Players in 1583, and he died in 1588.
+
+[Footnote 16: First printed in 1611; reprinted by J.O. Halliwell for
+The Shakespeare Society in 1844.]
+
+ At the Bull in Bishops-gate-street, where the Queen's
+ Players oftentimes played, Tarleton coming on the stage, one
+ from the gallery threw a pippin at him.
+
+ There was one Banks, in the time of Tarleton, who served the
+ Earl of Essex, and had a horse of strange qualities; and
+ being at the Cross Keys in Gracious Street getting money
+ with him, as he was mightily resorted to. Tarleton then,
+ with his fellows playing at the Bell by, came into the Cross
+ Keys, amongst many people, to see fashions.
+
+ At the Bull at Bishops-gate was a play of Henry the Fifth.
+
+The several "jests" which follow these introductory sentences indicate
+that the inn-yards differed in no essential way from the early public
+playhouses.
+
+1588. "John Mathews played his master's prize the 31 day of January,
+1588, at the Bell Savage without Ludgate."[17]
+
+[Footnote 17: _MS. Sloane_, 2530, f. 6-7, quoted by Halliwell in his
+edition of _Tarlton's Jests_, p. xi. There is some difficulty with the
+date. One of the "masters" before whom the prize was played was
+"Rycharde Tarlton," whom Halliwell takes to be the famous actor of
+that name; but Tarleton the actor died on September 3, 1588. Probably
+Halliwell in transcribing the manuscript silently modernized the date
+from the Old Style.]
+
+1589. In November Lord Burghley directed the Lord Mayor to "give order
+for the stay of all plays within the city." In reply the Lord Mayor
+wrote:
+
+ According to which your Lordship's good pleasure, I
+ presently sent for such players as I could hear of; so as
+ there appeared yesterday before me the Lord Strange's
+ Players, to whom I specially gave in charge and required
+ them in Her Majesty's name to forbear playing until further
+ order might be given for their allowance in that respect.
+ Whereupon the Lord Admiral's Players very dutifully obeyed;
+ but the others, in very contemptuous manner departing from
+ me, went to the Cross Keys and played that afternoon.[18]
+
+[Footnote 18: _Lansdowne MSS._ 60, quoted by Collier, _History of
+English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 265.]
+
+1594. On October 8, Henry, Lord Hunsdon, the Lord Chamberlain and the
+patron of Shakespeare's company, wrote to the Lord Mayor:
+
+ After my hearty commendations. Where my now company of
+ players have been accustomed for the better exercise of
+ their quality, and for the service of Her Majesty if need so
+ require, to play this winter time within the city at the
+ Cross Keys in Gracious Street, these are to require and pray
+ your Lordship (the time being such as, thanks to God, there
+ is now no danger of the sickness) to permit and suffer them
+ so to do.[19]
+
+[Footnote 19: _The Remembrancia_, The Malone Society's _Collections_,
+I, 73.]
+
+By such devices as this the players were usually able to secure
+permission to act "within the city" during the disagreeable months of
+the winter when the large playhouses in the suburbs were difficult of
+access.
+
+1594. Anthony Bacon, the elder brother of Francis, came to lodge in
+Bishopsgate Street. This fact very much disturbed his good mother, who
+feared lest his servants might be corrupted by the plays to be seen at
+the Bull near by.[20]
+
+[Footnote 20: See W. Rendle, _The Inns of Old Southwark_, p. 236.]
+
+1596. William Lambarde, in his _Perambulation of Kent_,[21] observes
+that none of those who go "to Paris Garden, the Bell Savage, or
+Theatre, to behold bear-baiting, interludes, or fence play, can
+account of any pleasant spectacle unless they first pay one penny at
+the gate, another at the entry of the scaffold, and the third for a
+quiet standing."
+
+[Footnote 21: The passage does not appear in the earlier edition of
+1576, though it was probably written shortly after the erection of the
+Theatre in the autumn of 1576.]
+
+1602. On March 31 the Privy Council wrote to the Lord Mayor that the
+players of the Earl of Oxford and of the Earl of Worcester had been
+"joined by agreement together in one company, to whom, upon notice of
+Her Majesty's pleasure, at the suit of the Earl of Oxford, toleration
+hath been thought meet to be granted." The letter concludes:
+
+ And as the other companies that are allowed, namely of me
+ the Lord Admiral, and the Lord Chamberlain, be appointed
+ their certain houses, and one and no more to each company,
+ so we do straightly require that this third company be
+ likewise [appointed] to one place. And because we are
+ informed the house called the Boar's Head is the place they
+ have especially used and do best like of, we do pray and
+ require you that the said house, namely the Boar's Head, may
+ be assigned unto them.[22]
+
+[Footnote 22: _The Remembrancia_, The Malone Society's _Collections_,
+I, 85.]
+
+That the strong Oxford-Worcester combination should prefer the Boar's
+Head to the Curtain or the Rose Playhouse,[23] indicates that the
+inn-yard was not only large, but also well-equipped for acting.
+
+[Footnote 23: They had to use the Rose nevertheless; see page 158.]
+
+1604. In a draft of a license to be issued to Queen Anne's Company,
+those players are allowed to act "as well within their now usual
+houses, called the Curtain and the Boar's Head, within our County of
+Middlesex, as in any other playhouse not used by others."[24]
+
+[Footnote 24: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 265.]
+
+In 1608 the Boar's Head seems to have been occupied by the newly
+organized Prince Charles's Company. In William Kelly's extracts from
+the payments of the city of Leicester we find the entry: "Itm. Given
+to the Prince's Players, of Whitechapel, London, xx _s._"
+
+In 1664, as Flecknoe tells us, the Cross Keys and the Bull still gave
+evidence of their former use as playhouses; perhaps even then they
+were occasionally let for fencing and other contests. In 1666 the
+great fire completely destroyed the Bell, the Cross Keys, and the Bell
+Savage; the Bull, however, escaped, and enjoyed a prosperous career
+for many years after. Samuel Pepys was numbered among its patrons, and
+writers of the Restoration make frequent reference to it. What became
+of the Boar's Head without Aldgate I am unable to learn; its memory,
+however, is perpetuated to-day in Boar's Head Yard, between Middlesex
+Street and Goulston Street, Whitechapel.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+THE HOSTILITY OF THE CITY
+
+
+As the actors rapidly increased in number and importance, and as
+Londoners flocked in ever larger crowds to witness plays, the
+animosity of two forces was aroused, Puritanism and Civic
+Government,--forces which opposed the drama for different reasons, but
+with almost equal fervor. And when in the course of time the Governors
+of the city themselves became Puritans, the combined animosity thus
+produced was sufficient to drive the players out of London into the
+suburbs.
+
+The Puritans attacked the drama as contrary to Holy Writ, as
+destructive of religion, and as a menace to public morality. Against
+plays, players, and playgoers they waged in pulpit and pamphlet a
+warfare characterized by the most intense fanaticism. The charges they
+made--of ungodliness, idolatrousness, lewdness, profanity, evil
+practices, enormities, and "abuses" of all kinds--are far too numerous
+to be noted here; they are interesting chiefly for their
+unreasonableness and for the violence with which they were urged.
+
+And, after all, however much the Puritans might rage, they were
+helpless; authority to restrain acting was vested in the Lord Mayor,
+his brethren the Aldermen, and the Common Council. The attitude of
+these city officials towards the drama was unmistakable: they had no
+more love for the actors than had the Puritans. They found that "plays
+and players" gave them more trouble than anything else in the entire
+administration of municipal affairs. The dedication of certain "great
+inns" to the use of actors and to the entertainment of the
+pleasure-loving element of the city created new and serious problems
+for those charged with the preservation of civic law and order. The
+presence in these inns of private rooms adjoining the yard and
+balconies gave opportunity for immorality, gambling, fleecing, and
+various other "evil practices"--an opportunity which, if we may
+believe the Common Council, was not wasted. Moreover, the proprietors
+of these inns made a large share of their profits from the beer, ale,
+and other drinks dispensed to the crowds before, during, and after
+performances (the proprietor of the Cross Keys, it will be recalled,
+was described as "citizen and brewer of London"); and the resultant
+intemperance among "such as frequented the said plays, being the
+ordinary place of meeting for all vagrant persons, and masterless men
+that hang about the city, theeves, horse-stealers, whoremongers,
+cozeners, cony-catching persons, practicers of treason, and such other
+like,"[25] led to drunkenness, frays, bloodshed, and often to general
+disorder. Sometimes, as we know, turbulent apprentices and other
+factions met by appointment at plays for the sole purpose of starting
+riots or breaking open jails. "Upon Whitsunday," writes the Recorder
+to Lord Burghley, "by reason no plays were the same day, all the city
+was quiet."[26]
+
+[Footnote 25: So the Lord Mayor characterized playgoers; see _The
+Remembrancia_, in The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 75.]
+
+[Footnote 26: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 164.]
+
+Trouble of an entirely different kind arose when in the hot months of
+the summer the plague was threatening. The meeting together at plays
+of "great multitudes of the basest sort of people" served to spread
+the infection throughout the city more quickly and effectively than
+could anything else. On such occasions it was exceedingly difficult
+for the municipal authorities to control the actors, who were at best
+a stubborn and unruly lot; and often the pestilence had secured a full
+start before acting could be suppressed.
+
+These troubles, and others which cannot here be mentioned, made one of
+the Lord Mayors exclaim in despair: "The Politique State and
+Government of this City by no one thing is so greatly annoyed and
+disquieted as by players and plays, and the disorders which follow
+thereupon."[27]
+
+[Footnote 27: _The Remembrancia_, in The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 69.]
+
+This annoyance, serious enough in itself, was aggravated by the fact
+that most of the troupes were under the patronage of great noblemen,
+and some were even high in favor with the Queen. As a result, the
+attempts on the part of the Lord Mayor and his Aldermen to regulate
+the players were often interfered with by other or higher authority.
+Sometimes it was a particular nobleman, whose request was not to be
+ignored, who intervened in behalf of his troupe; most often, however,
+it was the Privy Council, representing the Queen and the nobility in
+general, which championed the cause of the actors and countermanded
+the decrees of the Lord Mayor and his brethren. One of the most
+notable things in the City's _Remembrancia_ is this long conflict of
+authority between the Common Council and the Privy Council over actors
+and acting.
+
+In 1573 the situation seems to have approached a crisis. The Lord
+Mayor had become strongly puritanical, and in his efforts to suppress
+"stage-plays" was placing more and more obstacles in the way of the
+actors. The temper of the Mayor is revealed in two entries in the
+records of the Privy Council. On July 13, 1573, the Lords of the
+Council sent a letter to him requesting him "to permit liberty to
+certain Italian players"; six days later they sent a second letter,
+repeating the request, and "marveling that he did it not at their
+first request."[28] His continued efforts to suppress the drama
+finally led the troupes to appeal for relief to the Privy Council. On
+March 22, 1574, the Lords of the Council dispatched "a letter to the
+Lord Mayor to advertise their Lordships what causes he hath to
+restrain plays." His answer has not been preserved, but that he
+persisted in his hostility to the drama is indicated by the fact that
+in May the Queen openly took sides with the players. To the Earl of
+Leicester's troupe she issued a special royal license, authorizing
+them to act "as well within our city of London and liberties of the
+same, as also within the liberties and freedoms of any our cities,
+towns, boroughs, etc., whatsoever"; and to the mayors and other
+officers she gave strict orders not to interfere with such
+performances: "Willing and commanding you, and every of you, as ye
+tender our pleasure, to permit and suffer them herein without any your
+lets, hindrances, or molestation during the term aforesaid, any act,
+statute, proclamation, or commandment heretofore made, or hereafter to
+be made, to the contrary notwithstanding."
+
+[Footnote 28: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, VIII, 131, 132.]
+
+This license was a direct challenge to the authority of the Lord
+Mayor. He dared not answer it as directly; but on December 6, 1574, he
+secured from the Common Council the passage of an ordinance which
+placed such heavy restrictions upon acting as virtually to nullify the
+license issued by the Queen, and to regain for the Mayor complete
+control of the drama within the city. The Preamble of this remarkable
+ordinance clearly reveals the puritanical character of the City
+Government:
+
+ Whereas heretofore sundry great disorders and inconveniences
+ have been found to ensue to this city by the inordinate
+ haunting of great multitudes of people, specially youths, to
+ plays, interludes, and shews: namely, occasion of frays and
+ quarrels; evil practises of incontinency in great inns
+ having chambers and secret places adjoining to their open
+ stages and galleries; inveigling and alluring of maids,
+ specially orphans and good citizens' children under age, to
+ privy and unmeet contracts; the publishing of unchaste,
+ uncomly, and unshamefaced speeches and doings; withdrawing
+ of the Queen's Majesty's subjects from divine service on
+ Sundays and holy days, at which times such plays were
+ chiefly used; unthrifty waste of the money of the poor and
+ fond persons; sundry robberies by picking and cutting of
+ purses; uttering of popular, busy, and seditious matters;
+ and many other corruptions of youth, and other enormities;
+ besides that also sundry slaughters and maimings of the
+ Queen's subjects have happened by ruins of scaffolds,
+ frames, and stages, and by engines, weapons, and powder used
+ in plays. And whereas in time of God's visitation by the
+ plague such assemblies of the people in throng and press
+ have been very dangerous for spreading of infection.... And
+ for that the Lord Mayor and his brethren the Aldermen,
+ together with the grave and discreet citizens in the Common
+ Council assembled, do doubt and fear lest upon God's
+ merciful withdrawing his hand of sickness from us (which God
+ grant), the people, specially the meaner and most unruly
+ sort, should with sudden forgetting of His visitation,
+ without fear of God's wrath, and without due respect of the
+ good and politique means that He hath ordained for the
+ preservation of common weals and peoples in health and good
+ order, return to the undue use of such enormities, to the
+ great offense of God....[29]
+
+[Footnote 29: For the complete document see W.C. Hazlitt, _The English
+Drama and Stage_, p. 27.]
+
+The restrictions on playing imposed by the ordinance may be briefly
+summarized:
+
+1. Only such plays should be acted as were free from all unchastity,
+seditiousness, and "uncomely matter."
+
+2. Before being acted all plays should be "first perused and allowed
+in such order and form, and by such persons as by the Lord Mayor and
+Court of Aldermen for the time being shall be appointed."
+
+3. Inns or other buildings used for acting, and their proprietors,
+should both be licensed by the Lord Mayor and the Aldermen.
+
+4. The proprietors of such buildings should be "bound to the
+Chamberlain of London" by a sufficient bond to guarantee "the keeping
+of good order, and avoiding of" the inconveniences noted in the
+Preamble.
+
+5. No plays should be given during the time of sickness, or during any
+inhibition ordered at any time by the city authorities.
+
+6. No plays should be given during "any usual time of divine service,"
+and no persons should be admitted into playing places until after
+divine services were over.
+
+7. The proprietors of such places should pay towards the support of
+the poor a sum to be agreed upon by the city authorities.
+
+In order, however, to avoid trouble with the Queen, or those noblemen
+who were accustomed to have plays given in their homes for the private
+entertainment of themselves and their guests, the Common Council
+added, rather grudgingly, the following proviso:
+
+ Provided alway that this act (otherwise than touching the
+ publishing of unchaste, seditious, and unmeet matters) shall
+ not extend to any plays, interludes, comedies, tragedies, or
+ shews to be played or shewed in the private house, dwelling,
+ or lodging of any nobleman, citizen, or gentleman, which
+ shall or will then have the same there so played or shewed
+ in his presence for the festivity of any marriage, assembly
+ of friends, or other like cause, without public or common
+ collections of money of the auditory or beholders thereof.
+
+Such regulations if strictly enforced would prove very annoying to the
+players. But, as the Common Council itself informs us, "these orders
+were not then observed." The troupes continued to play in the city,
+protected against any violent action on the part of the municipal
+authorities by the known favor of the Queen and the frequent
+interference of the Privy Council. This state of affairs was not, of
+course, comfortable for the actors; but it was by no means desperate,
+and for several years after the passage of the ordinance of 1574 they
+continued without serious interruption to occupy their inn-playhouses.
+
+The long-continued hostility of the city authorities, however, of
+which the ordinance of 1574 was an ominous expression, led more or
+less directly to the construction of special buildings devoted to
+plays and situated beyond the jurisdiction of the Common Council. As
+the Reverend John Stockwood, in _A Sermon Preached at Paules Crosse,
+1578_, indignantly puts it:
+
+ Have we not _houses of purpose_, built with great charges
+ for the maintenance of plays, and that _without the
+ liberties_, as who would say "_There, let them say what they
+ will say, we will play!_"
+
+Thus came into existence playhouses; and with them dawned a new era in
+the history of the English drama.
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE FIRST PLAYHOUSES
+
+Finsbury Field and Holywell. The man walking from the Field towards
+Shoreditch is just entering Holywell Lane.
+
+(From Agas's _Map of London_, representing the city as it was about
+1560.)]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+THE THEATRE
+
+
+The hostility of the city to the drama was unquestionably the main
+cause of the erection of the first playhouse; yet combined with this
+were two other important causes, usually overlooked. The first was the
+need of a building specially designed to meet the requirements of the
+players and of the public, a need yearly growing more urgent as plays
+became more complex, acting developed into a finer art, and audiences
+increased in dignity as well as in size. The second and the more
+immediate cause was the appearance of a man with business insight
+enough to see that such a building would pay. The first playhouse, we
+should remember, was not erected by a troupe of actors, but by a
+money-seeking individual.[30] Although he was himself an actor, and
+the manager of a troupe, he did not, it seems, take the troupe into
+his confidence. In complete independence of any theatrical
+organization he proceeded with the erection of his building as a
+private speculation; and, we are told, he dreamed of the "continual
+great profit and commodity through plays that should be used there
+every week."
+
+[Footnote 30: I emphasize this point because the opposite is the
+accepted opinion. We find it expressed in _The Cambridge History of
+English Literature_, VI, 431, as follows: "Certain players, finding
+the city obdurate, and unwilling to submit to its severe regulations,
+began to look about them for some means of carrying on their business
+out of reach of the mayor's authority," etc.]
+
+This man, "the first builder of playhouses,"--and, it might have been
+added, the pioneer in a new field of business,--was James Burbage,
+originally, as we are told by one who knew him well, "by occupation a
+joiner; and reaping but a small living by the same, gave it over and
+became a common player in plays."[31] As an actor he was more
+successful, for as early as 1572 we find him at the head of
+Leicester's excellent troupe.
+
+[Footnote 31: Deposition by Robert Myles, 1592, printed in Wallace's
+_The First London Theatre_, p. 141.]
+
+Having in 1575 conceived the notion of erecting a building specially
+designed for dramatic entertainments, he was at once confronted with
+the problem of a suitable location. Two conditions narrowed his
+choice: first, the site had to be outside the jurisdiction of the
+Common Council; secondly, it had to be as near as possible to the
+city.
+
+No doubt he at once thought of the two suburbs that were specially
+devoted to recreation, the Bankside to the south, and Finsbury Field
+to the north of the city. The Bankside had for many years been
+associated in the minds of Londoners with "sports and pastimes."
+Thither the citizens were accustomed to go to witness bear-baiting
+and bull-baiting, to practice archery, and to engage in various
+athletic sports. Thither, too, for many years the actors had gone to
+present their plays. In 1545 King Henry VIII had issued a proclamation
+against vagabonds, ruffians, idle persons, and common players,[32] in
+which he referred to their "fashions commonly used at the Bank." The
+Bankside, however, was associated with the lowest and most vicious
+pleasures of London, for here were situated the stews, bordering the
+river's edge. Since the players were at this time subject to the
+bitterest attacks from the London preachers, Burbage wisely decided
+not to erect the first permanent home of the drama in a locality
+already a common target for puritan invective.
+
+[Footnote 32: See page 134.]
+
+The second locality, Finsbury Field, had nearly all the advantages,
+and none of the disadvantages, of the Bankside. Since 1315 the Field
+had been in the possession of the city,[33] and had been used as a
+public playground, where families could hold picnics, falconers could
+fly their hawks, archers could exercise their sport, and the militia
+on holidays could drill with all "the pomp and circumstance of
+glorious war." In short, the Field was eminently respectable, was
+accessible to the city, and was definitely associated with the idea of
+entertainment. The locality, therefore, was almost ideal for the
+purpose Burbage had in mind.[34]
+
+[Footnote 33: See _The Remembrancia_, p. 274; Stow, _Survey_. The
+Corporation of London held the manor on lease from St. Paul's
+Cathedral until 1867.]
+
+[Footnote 34: Doubtless, too, Burbage was influenced in his choice by
+the fact that he had already made his home in the Liberty of
+Shoreditch, near Finsbury Field.]
+
+The new playhouse, of course, could not be erected in the Field
+itself, which was under the control of the city; but just to the east
+of the Field certain vacant land, part of the dissolved Priory of
+Holywell, offered a site in every way suitable to the purpose. The
+Holywell property, at the dissolution of the Priory, had passed under
+the jurisdiction of the Crown, and hence the Lord Mayor and the
+Aldermen could not enforce municipal ordinances there. Moreover, it
+was distant from the city wall not much more than half a mile. The old
+conventual church had been demolished, the Priory buildings had been
+converted into residences, and the land near the Shoreditch highway
+had been built up with numerous houses. The land next to the Field,
+however, was for the most part undeveloped. It contained some
+dilapidated tenements, a few old barns formerly belonging to the
+Priory, and small garden plots, conspicuous objects in the early maps.
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE FIRST PLAYHOUSES
+
+Finsbury Field lies to the north (beyond Moor Field, the small
+rectangular space next to the city wall), and the Holywell Property
+lies to the right of Finsbury Field, between the Field and the
+highway. Holywell Lane divides the garden plots; the Theatre was
+erected just to the north, and the Curtain just to the south of this
+lane, facing the Field. (From the _Map of London_ by Braun and
+Hogenbergius representing the city as it was in 1554-1558.)]
+
+Burbage learned that a large portion of this land lying next to the
+Field was in the possession of a well-to-do gentleman named Gyles
+Alleyn,[35] and that Alleyn was willing to lease a part of his
+holding on the conditions of development customary in this section of
+London. These conditions are clearly revealed in a chancery suit of
+1591:
+
+ The ground there was for the most part converted first into
+ garden plots, and then leasing the same to diverse tenants
+ caused them to covenant or promise to build upon the same,
+ by occasion whereof the buildings which are there were for
+ the most part erected and the rents increased.[36]
+
+[Footnote 35: For a detailed history of the property from the year
+1128, and for the changes in the ownership of Alleyn's portion after
+the dissolution, see Braines, _Holywell Priory_.]
+
+[Footnote 36: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 365. The suit
+concerns the Curtain property, somewhat south of the Alleyn property,
+but a part of the Priory.]
+
+The part of Alleyn's property on which Burbage had his eye was in sore
+need of improvement. It consisted of five "paltry tenements,"
+described as "old, decayed, and ruinated for want of reparation, and
+the best of them was but of two stories high," and a long barn "very
+ruinous and decayed and ready to have fallen down," one half of which
+was used as a storage-room, the other half as a slaughter-house. Three
+of the tenements had small gardens extending back to the Field, and
+just north of the barn was a bit of "void ground," also adjoining the
+Field. It was this bit of "void ground" that Burbage had selected as a
+suitable location for his proposed playhouse. The accompanying map of
+the property[37] will make clear the position of this "void ground"
+and of the barns and tenements about it. Moreover, it will serve to
+indicate the exact site of the Theatre. If one will bear in mind the
+fact that in the London of to-day Curtain Road marks the eastern
+boundary of Finsbury Field, and New Inn Yard cuts off the lower half
+of the Great Barn, he will be able to place Burbage's structure within
+a few yards.[38]
+
+[Footnote 37: I have based this map in large measure on the documents
+presented by Braines in his excellent pamphlet, _Holywell Priory_.]
+
+[Footnote 38: For proof see Braines, _op. cit._]
+
+[Illustration: A PLAN OF BURBAGE'S HOLYWELL PROPERTY
+
+Based on the lease, and on the miscellaneous documents printed by
+Halliwell-Phillipps and by Braines. The "common sewer" is now marked
+by Curtain Road, and the "ditch from the horse-pond" by New Inn Yard.]
+
+The property is carefully described in the lease--quoted below--which
+Burbage secured from Alleyn, but the reader will need to refer to the
+map in order to follow with ease the several paragraphs of
+description:[39]
+
+ All those two houses or tenements, with appurtenances, which
+ at the time of the said former demise made were in the
+ several tenures or occupations of Joan Harrison, widow, and
+ John Dragon.
+
+ And also all that house or tenement with the appurtenances,
+ together with the garden ground lying behind part of the
+ same, being then likewise in the occupation of William
+ Gardiner; which said garden plot doth extend in breadth from
+ a great stone wall there which doth enclose part of the
+ garden then or lately being in the occupation of the said
+ Gyles, unto the garden there then in the occupation of Edwin
+ Colefox, weaver, and in length from the same house or
+ tenement unto a brick wall there next unto the fields
+ commonly called Finsbury Fields.
+
+ And also all that house or tenement, with the appurtenances,
+ at the time of the said former demise made called or known
+ by the name of the Mill-house; together with the garden
+ ground lying behind part of the same, also at the time of
+ the said former demise made being in the tenure or
+ occupation of the aforesaid Edwin Colefox, or of his
+ assigns; which said garden ground doth extend in length from
+ the same house or tenement unto the aforesaid brick wall
+ next unto the aforesaid Fields.
+
+ And also all those three upper rooms, with the
+ appurtenances, next adjoining to the aforesaid Mill-house,
+ also being at the time of the said former demise made in the
+ occupation of Thomas Dancaster, shoemaker, or of his
+ assigns; and also all the nether rooms, with the
+ appurtenances, lying under the same three upper rooms, and
+ next adjoining also to the aforesaid house or tenement
+ called the Mill-house, then also being in the several
+ tenures or occupations of Alice Dotridge, widow, and Richard
+ Brockenbury, or of their assigns; together with the garden
+ ground lying behind the same, extending in length from the
+ same nether rooms down unto the aforesaid brick wall next
+ unto the aforesaid Fields, and then or late being also in
+ the tenure or occupation of the aforesaid Alice Dotridge.
+
+ And also so much of the ground and soil lying and being
+ afore all the tenements or houses before granted, as
+ extendeth in length from the outward part of the aforesaid
+ tenements being at the time of the making of the said former
+ demise in the occupation of the aforesaid Joan Harrison and
+ John Dragon, unto a pond there being next unto the barn or
+ stable then in the occupation of the right honorable the
+ Earl of Rutland or of his assigns, and in breadth from the
+ aforesaid tenement or Mill-house to the midst of the well
+ being afore the same tenements.
+
+ And also all that Great Barn, with the appurtenances, at the
+ time of the making of the said former demise made being in
+ the several occupations of Hugh Richards, innholder, and
+ Robert Stoughton, butcher; and also a little piece of ground
+ then inclosed with a pale and next adjoining to the
+ aforesaid barn, and then or late before that in the
+ occupation of the said Robert Stoughton; together also with
+ all the ground and soil lying and being between the said
+ nether rooms last before expressed, and the aforesaid Great
+ Barn, and the aforesaid pond; that is to say, extending in
+ length from the aforesaid pond unto a ditch beyond the brick
+ wall next the aforesaid Fields.
+
+ And also the said Gyles Alleyn and Sara his wife do by these
+ presents demise, grant, and to farm lett unto the said James
+ Burbage all the right, title, and interest which the said
+ Gyles and Sara have or ought to have in or to all the
+ grounds and soil lying between the aforesaid Great Barn and
+ the barn being at the time of the said former demise in the
+ occupation of the Earl of Rutland or of his assigns,
+ extending in length from the aforesaid pond and from the
+ aforesaid stable or barn then in the occupation of the
+ aforesaid Earl of Rutland or of his assigns, down to the
+ aforesaid brick wall next the aforesaid Fields.[40]
+
+ And also the said Gyles and Sara do by these presents
+ demise, grant, and to farm lett to the said James all the
+ said void ground lying and being betwixt the aforesaid ditch
+ and the aforesaid brick wall, extending in length from the
+ aforesaid [great stone] wall[41] which encloseth part of the
+ aforesaid garden being at the time of the making of the said
+ former demise or late before that in the occupation of the
+ said Gyles Allen, unto the aforesaid barn then in the
+ occupation of the aforesaid Earl or of his assigns.
+
+[Footnote 39: The original lease may be found incorporated in Alleyn
+_v._ Street, Coram Rege, 1599-1600, printed in full by Wallace, _The
+First London Theatre_, pp. 163-80, and again in Alleyn _v._ Burbage,
+Queen's Bench, 1602, Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 267-75. The lease, I
+think, was in English not Latin, and hence is more correctly given in
+the first document; in the second document the scrivener has
+translated it into Latin. The lease is also given in part on page
+187.]
+
+[Footnote 40: This part of the property was claimed by the Earl of
+Rutland, and was being used by him. For a long time it was the subject
+of dispute. Ultimately, it seems, the Earl secured the title, as he
+had always had the use of the property. This probably explains why
+Burbage did not attempt to erect his playhouse there.]
+
+[Footnote 41: The document by error reads "brick wall" but the mistake
+is obvious, and the second version of the lease does not repeat the
+error. This clause merely means that the ditch, not the brick wall,
+constituted the western boundary of the property.]
+
+The lease was formally signed on April 13, 1576, and Burbage entered
+into the possession of his property. Since the terms of the lease are
+important for an understanding of the subsequent history of the
+playhouse, I shall set these forth briefly:
+
+First, the lease was to run for twenty-one years from April 13, 1576,
+at an annual rental of £14.
+
+Secondly, Burbage was to spend before the expiration of ten years the
+sum of £200 in rebuilding and improving the decayed tenements.
+
+Thirdly, in view of this expenditure of £200, Burbage was to have at
+the end of the ten years the right to renew the lease at the same
+rental of £14 a year for twenty-one years, thus making the lease good
+in all for thirty-one years:
+
+ And the said Gyles Alleyn and Sara his wife did thereby
+ covenant with the said James Burbage that they should and
+ would at any time within the ten years next ensuing at or
+ upon the lawful request or demand of the said James Burbage
+ make or cause to be made to the said James Burbage a new
+ lease or grant like to the same presents for the term of one
+ and twenty years more, to begin from the date of making the
+ same lease, yielding therefor the rent reserved in the
+ former indenture.[42]
+
+[Footnote 42: Quoted from Burbage _v._ Alleyn, Court of Requests,
+1600, Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 182. I have stripped the passage of some
+of its legal verbiage.]
+
+Fourthly, it was agreed that at any time before the expiration of the
+lease, Burbage might take down and carry away to his own use any
+building that in the mean time he might have erected on the vacant
+ground for the purpose of a playhouse:
+
+ And farther, the said Gyles Alleyn and Sara his wife did
+ covenant and grant to the said James Burbage that it should
+ and might be lawful to the said James Burbage (in
+ consideration of the imploying and bestowing the foresaid
+ two hundred pounds in forme aforesaid) at any time or times
+ before the end of the said term of one and twenty years, to
+ have, take down, and carry away to his own proper use for
+ ever all such buildings and other things as should be
+ builded, erected, or set up in or upon the gardens and void
+ grounds by the said James, either for a theatre or playing
+ place, or for any other lawful use, without any stop, claim,
+ let, trouble, or interruption of the said Gyles Alleyn and
+ Sara his wife.[43]
+
+[Footnote 43: Quoted from Burbage _v._ Alleyn, Court of Requests,
+1600, Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 182.]
+
+Protected by these specific terms, Burbage proceeded to the erection
+of his playhouse. He must have had faith and abundant courage, for he
+was a poor man, quite unequal to the large expenditures called for by
+his plans. A person who had known him for many years, deposed in 1592
+that "James Burbage was not at the time of the first beginning of the
+building of the premises worth above one hundred marks[44] in all his
+substance, for he and this deponent were familiarly acquainted long
+before that time and ever since."[45] We are not surprised to learn,
+therefore, that he was "constrained to borrow diverse sums of money,"
+and that he actually pawned the lease itself to a money-lender.[46]
+Even so, without assistance, we are told, he "should never be able to
+build it, for it would cost five times as much as he was worth."
+
+[Footnote 44: That is, about £80.]
+
+[Footnote 45: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 134; cf. p. 153.]
+
+[Footnote 46: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 151. Cuthbert Burbage declared
+in 1635: "The Theatre he built with many hundred pounds taken up at
+interest." (Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 317.)]
+
+Fortunately he had a wealthy brother-in-law, John Brayne,[47] a London
+grocer, described as "worth five hundred pounds at the least, and by
+common fame worth a thousand marks."[48] In some way Brayne became
+interested in the new venture. Like Burbage, he believed that large
+profits would flow from such a novel undertaking; and as a result he
+readily agreed to share the expense of erecting and maintaining the
+building. Years later members of the Brayne faction asserted that
+James Burbage "induced" his brother-in-law to venture upon the
+enterprise by unfairly representing the great profits to ensue;[49]
+but the evidence, I think, shows that Brayne eagerly sought the
+partnership. Burbage himself asserted in 1588 that Brayne "practiced
+to obtain some interest therein," and presumed "that he might easily
+compass the same by reason that he was natural brother"; and that he
+voluntarily offered to "bear and pay half the charges of the said
+building then bestowed and thereafter to be bestowed" in order "that
+he might have the moiety[50] of the above named Theatre."[51] As a
+further inducement, so the Burbages asserted, he promised that "for
+that he had no children," the moiety at his death should go to the
+children of James Burbage, "whose advancement he then seemed greatly
+to tender."
+
+[Footnote 47: The name is often spelled "Braynes."]
+
+[Footnote 48: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 109.]
+
+[Footnote 49: See Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 139 _seq._]
+
+[Footnote 50: That is, half-interest.]
+
+[Footnote 51: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 40.]
+
+Whatever caused Brayne to interest himself in the venture, he quickly
+became fired with such hopes of great gain that he not only spent upon
+the building all the money he could gather or borrow, but sold his
+stock of groceries for £146, disposed of his house for £100, even
+pawned his clothes, and put his all into the new structure. The spirit
+in which he worked to make the venture a success, and the personal
+sacrifices that he and his wife made, fully deserve the quotation
+here of two legal depositions bearing on the subject:
+
+ This deponent, being servant, in Bucklersbury, aforesaid, to
+ one Robert Kenningham, grocer, in which street the said John
+ Brayne dwelled also, and of the same trade, he, the said
+ Brayne, at the time he joined with the said James Burbage in
+ the aforesaid lease, was reputed among his neighbors to be
+ worth one thousand pounds at the least, and that after he
+ had joined with the said Burbage in the matter of the
+ building of the said Theatre, he began to slack his own
+ trade, and gave himself to the building thereof, and the
+ chief care thereof he took upon him, and hired workmen of
+ all sorts for that purpose, bought timber and all other
+ things belonging thereunto, and paid all. So as, in this
+ deponent's conscience, he bestowed thereupon for his owne
+ part the sum of one thousand marks at the least, in so much
+ as his affection was given so greatly to the finishing
+ thereof, in hope of great wealth and profit during their
+ lease, that at the last he was driven to sell to this
+ deponent's father his lease of the house wherein he dwelled
+ for £100, and to this deponent all such wares as he had left
+ and all that belonged thereunto remaining in the same, for
+ the sum of £146 and odd money, whereof this deponent did pay
+ for him to one Kymbre, an ironmonger in London, for iron
+ work which the said Brayne bestowed upon the said Theatre,
+ the sum of £40. And afterwards the said Brayne took the
+ matter of the said building so upon him as he was driven to
+ borrow money to supply the same, saying to this deponent
+ that his brother Burbage was not able to help the same, and
+ that he found not towards it above the value of fifty
+ pounds, some part in mony and the rest in stuff.[52]
+
+[Footnote 52: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 136.]
+
+In reading the next deposition, one should bear in mind the fact that
+the deponent, Robert Myles, was closely identified with the Brayne
+faction, and was, therefore, a bitter enemy to the Burbages. Yet his
+testimony, though prejudiced, gives us a vivid picture of Brayne's
+activity in the building of the Theatre:
+
+ So the said John Brayne made a great sum of money of purpose
+ and intent to go to the building of the said playhouse, and
+ thereupon did provide timber and other stuff needful for the
+ building thereof, and hired carpenters and plasterers for
+ the same purpose, and paid the workmen continually. So as he
+ for his part laid out of his own purse and what upon credit
+ about the same to the sum of £600 or £700 at the least. And
+ in the same time, seeing the said James Burbage nothing able
+ either of himself or by his credit to contribute any like
+ sum towards the building thereof, being then to be finished
+ or else to be lost that had been bestowed upon it already,
+ the said Brayne was driven to sell his house he dwelled in
+ in Bucklersbury, and all his stock that was left, and give
+ up his trade, yea in the end to pawn and sell both his own
+ garments and his wife's, and to run in debt to many for
+ money, to finish the said playhouse, and so to employ
+ himself only upon that matter, and all whatsoever he could
+ make, to his utter undoing, for he saieth that in the latter
+ end of the finishing thereof, the said Brayne and his wife,
+ the now complainants, were driven to labor in the said work
+ for saving of some of the charge in place of two laborers,
+ whereas the said James Burbage went about his own business,
+ and at sometimes when he did take upon him to do some thing
+ in the said work, he would be and was allowed a workman's
+ hire as other the workman there had.[53]
+
+[Footnote 53: Brayne _v._ Burbage, 1592. Printed in full by Wallace,
+_op cit._ p. 141.]
+
+The last fling at Burbage is quite gratuitous; yet it is probably true
+that the main costs of erecting the playhouse fell upon the shoulders
+of Brayne. The evidence is contradictory; some persons assert that
+Burbage paid half the cost of the building,[54] others that Brayne
+paid nearly all,[55] and still others content themselves with saying
+that Brayne paid considerably more than half. The last statement may
+be accepted as true. The assertion of Gyles Alleyn in 1601, that the
+Theatre was "erected at the costs and charges of one Brayne and not of
+the said James Burbage, to the value of one thousand marks,"[56] is
+doubtless incorrect; more correct is the assertion of Robert Myles,
+executor of the Widow Brayne's will, in 1597: "The said John Brayne
+did join with the said James [Burbage] in the building aforesaid, and
+did expend thereupon greater sums than the said James, that is to say,
+at least five or six hundred pounds."[57] Since there is evidence
+that the playhouse ultimately cost about £700,[58] we might hazard the
+guess that of this sum Brayne furnished about £500,[59] and Burbage
+about £200. To equalize the expenditure it was later agreed that "the
+said Brayne should take and receive all the rents and profits of the
+said Theatre to his own use until he should be answered such sums of
+money which he had laid out for and upon the same Theatre more than
+the said Burbage had done."[60]
+
+[Footnote 54: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 213, 217, 263, 265, _et al._]
+
+[Footnote 55: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 137, 141, 142, 148, 153.]
+
+[Footnote 56: Alleyn _v._ Burbage, Star Chamber Proceedings, 1601-02;
+printed by Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 277.]
+
+[Footnote 57: Myles _v._ Burbage and Alleyn, 1597; printed by Wallace,
+_op. cit._, p. 159; cf. pp. 263, 106, 152.]
+
+[Footnote 58: See Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 277.]
+
+[Footnote 59: This agrees with the claim of Brayne's widow.]
+
+[Footnote 60: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 120.]
+
+But if Burbage at the outset was "nothing able to contribute any"
+great sum of ready money towards the building of the first playhouse,
+he did contribute other things equally if not more important. In the
+first place, he conceived the idea, and he carried it as far towards
+realization as his means allowed. In the second place, he planned the
+building--its stage as well as its auditorium--to meet the special
+demands of the actors and the comfort of the audience. This called for
+bold originality and for ingenuity of a high order, for, it must be
+remembered, he had no model to study--he was designing the first
+structure of its kind in England.[61] For this task he was well
+prepared. In the first place, he was an actor of experience; in the
+second place, he was the manager of one of the most important troupes
+in England; and, in the third place, he was by training and early
+practice a carpenter and builder. In other words, he had exact
+knowledge of what was needed, and the practical skill to meet those
+needs.
+
+[Footnote 61: Mr. E.K. Chambers (_The Mediæval Stage_, I, 383, note 2;
+II, 190, note 4) calls attention to a "theatre" belonging to the city
+of Essex as early as 1548. Possibly the Latin document he cites
+referred to an amphitheatre of some sort near the city which was used
+for dramatic performances; at any rate "in theatro" does not
+necessarily imply the existence of a playhouse (cf., for example, _op.
+cit._, I, 81-82). There is also a reference (quoted by Chambers, _op.
+cit._, II, 191, note 1, from _Norfolk Archæology_, XI, 336) to a
+"game-house" built by the corporation of Yarmouth in 1538 for dramatic
+performances. What kind of house this was we do not know, but the
+corporation leased it for other purposes, with the proviso that it
+should be available "at all such times as any interludes or plays
+should be ministered or played." Howes, in his continuation of Stow's
+_Annals_ (1631), p. 1004, declares that before Burbage's time he
+"neither knew, heard, nor read of any such theatres, set stages, or
+playhouses as have been purposely built, within man's memory"; and
+Cuthbert Burbage confidently asserted that his father "was the first
+builder of playhouses"--an assertion which, I think, cannot well be
+denied.]
+
+The building that he designed and erected he named--as by virtue of
+priority he had a right to do--"The Theatre."
+
+Of the Theatre, unfortunately, we have no pictorial representation,
+and no formal description, so that our knowledge of its size, shape,
+and general arrangement must be derived from scattered and
+miscellaneous sources. That the building was large we may feel sure;
+the cost of its erection indicates as much. The Fortune, one of the
+largest and handsomest of the later playhouses, cost only £520, and
+the Hope, also very large, cost £360. The Theatre, therefore, built at
+a cost of £700, could not have been small. It is commonly referred to,
+even so late as 1601, as "the great house called the Theatre," and the
+author of _Skialetheia_ (1598) applied to it the significant adjective
+"vast." Burbage, no doubt, had learned from his experience as manager
+of a troupe the pecuniary advantage of having an auditorium large
+enough to receive all who might come. Exactly how many people his
+building could accommodate we cannot say. The Reverend John Stockwood,
+in 1578, exclaims bitterly: "Will not a filthy play, with the blast of
+a trumpet, sooner call thither a thousand than an hour's tolling of
+the bell bring to the sermon a hundred?"[62] And Fleetwood, the City
+Recorder, in describing a quarrel which took place in 1584 "at Theatre
+door," states that "near a thousand people" quickly assembled when the
+quarrel began.
+
+[Footnote 62: The rest of his speech indicates that he had the Theatre
+in mind. The passage, of course, is rhetorical.]
+
+In shape the building was probably polygonal, or circular. I see no
+good reason for supposing that it was square; Johannes de Witt
+referred to it as an "amphitheatre," and the Curtain, erected the
+following year in imitation, was probably polygonal.[63] It was built
+of timber, and its exterior, no doubt, was--as in the case of
+subsequent playhouses--of lime and plaster. The interior consisted of
+three galleries surrounding an open space called the "yard." The
+German traveler, Samuel Kiechel, who visited London in the autumn of
+1585, described the playhouses--i.e., the Theatre and the Curtain--as
+"singular [_sonderbare_] houses, which are so constructed that they
+have about three galleries, one above the other."[64] And Stephen
+Gosson, in _Plays Confuted_ (_c._ 1581) writes: "In the playhouses at
+London, it is the fashion for youths to go first into the yard, and to
+carry their eye through every gallery; then, like unto ravens, where
+they spy the carrion, thither they fly, and press as near to the
+fairest as they can." The "yard" was unroofed, and all persons there
+had to stand during the entire performance. The galleries, however,
+were protected by a roof, were divided into "rooms," and were provided
+for the most part with seats. Gyles Alleyn inserted in the lease he
+granted to Burbage the following condition:
+
+ And further, that it shall or may [be] lawful for the said
+ Gyles and for his wife and family, upon lawful request
+ therefor made to the said James Burbage, his executors or
+ assigns, to enter or come into the premises, and there in
+ some one of the upper rooms to have such convenient place to
+ sit or stand to see such plays as shall be there played,
+ freely without anything therefor paying.[65]
+
+[Footnote 63: One cannot be absolutely sure, yet the whole history of
+early playhouses indicates that the Theatre was polygonal (or
+circular) in shape. The only reason for suspecting that it might have
+been square, doubtfully presented by T.S. Graves in "The Shape of the
+First London Theatre" (_The South Atlantic Quarterly_, July, 1914),
+seems to me to deserve no serious consideration.]
+
+[Footnote 64: Quoted by W.B. Rye, _England as Seen by Foreigners_, p.
+88.]
+
+[Footnote 65: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 177.]
+
+The stage was a platform, projecting into the yard, with a
+tiring-house at the rear, and a balcony overhead. The details of the
+stage, no doubt, were subject to alteration as experience suggested,
+for its materials were of wood, and histrionic and dramatic art were
+both undergoing rapid development.[66] The furnishings and
+decorations, as in the case of modern playhouses, seem to have been
+ornate. Thus T[homas] W[hite], in _A Sermon Preached at Pawles Crosse,
+on Sunday the Thirde of November, 1577_, exclaims: "Behold the
+sumptuous Theatre houses, a continual monument of London's
+prodigality"; John Stockwood, in _A Sermon Preached at Paules Cross,
+1578_, refers to it as "the gorgeous playing place erected in the
+Fields"; and Gabriel Harvey could think of no more appropriate epithet
+for it than "painted"--"painted theatres," "painted stage."
+
+[Footnote 66: There is no reason whatever to suppose, with Ordish,
+Mantzius, Lawrence, and others, that the stage of the Theatre was
+removable; for although the building was frequently used by fencers,
+tumblers, etc., it was never, so far as I can discover, used for
+animal-baiting.]
+
+The building was doubtless used for dramatic performances in the
+autumn of 1576, although it was not completed until later; John
+Grigges, one of the carpenters, deposed that Burbage and Brayne
+"finished the same with the help of the profits that grew by plays
+used there before it was fully finished."[67] Access to the playhouse
+was had chiefly by way of Finsbury Field and a passage made by Burbage
+through the brick wall mentioned in the lease.[68]
+
+[Footnote 67: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 135.]
+
+[Footnote 68: For depositions to this effect see Halliwell-Phillipps,
+_Outlines_, I, 350 ff.]
+
+The terms under which the owners let it to the actors were simple: the
+actors retained as their share the pennies paid at the outer doors for
+general admission, and the proprietors received as their share the
+money paid for seats or standings in the galleries.[69] Cuthbert
+Burbage states in 1635: "The players that lived in those first times
+had only the profits arising from the doors, but now the players
+receive all the comings in at the doors to themselves, and half the
+galleries."[70]
+
+[Footnote 69: I suspect that the same terms were made with the actors
+by the proprietors of the inn-playhouses.]
+
+[Footnote 70: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 317.]
+
+Before the expiration of two years, or in the early summer of 1578,
+Burbage and Brayne began to quarrel about the division of the money
+which fell to their share. Brayne apparently thought that he should at
+once be indemnified for all the money he had expended on the playhouse
+in excess of Burbage; and he accused Burbage of "indirect
+dealing"--there were even whispers of "a secret key" to the "common
+box" in which the money was kept.[71] Finally they agreed to "submit
+themselves to the order and arbitrament of certain persons for the
+pacification thereof," and together they went to the shop of a notary
+public to sign a bond agreeing to abide by the decision of the
+arbitrators. There they "fell a reasoning together," in the course of
+which Brayne asserted that he had disbursed in the Theatre "three
+times at the least as much more as the sum then disbursed by the said
+James Burbage." In the end Brayne unwisely hinted at "ill dealing" on
+the part of Burbage, whereupon "Burbage did there strike him with his
+fist, and so they went together by the ears, in so much," says the
+notary, "that this deponent could hardly part them." After they were
+parted, they signed a bond of £200 to abide by the decision of the
+arbitrators. The arbitrators, John Hill and Richard Turnor, "men of
+great honesty and credit," held their sessions "in the Temple church,"
+whither they summoned witnesses. Finally, on July 12, 1578, after
+"having thoroughly heard" both sides, they awarded that the profits
+from the Theatre should be used first to pay the debts upon the
+building, then to pay Brayne the money he had expended in excess of
+Burbage, and thereafter to be shared "in divident equally between
+them."[72] These conditions, however, were not observed, and the
+failure to observe them led to much subsequent discord.
+
+[Footnote 71: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 142, 148.]
+
+[Footnote 72: For the history of this quarrel, and for other details
+of the award see Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 102, 119, 138, 142, 143,
+148, 152.]
+
+The arbitrators also decided that "if occasion should move them
+[Burbage and Brayne] to borrow any sum of money for the payment of
+their debts owing for any necessary use and thing concerning the said
+Theatre, that then the said James Burbage and the said John Brayne
+should _join_ in pawning or mortgageing of their estate and interest
+of and in the same."[73] An occasion for borrowing money soon arose.
+So on September 26, 1579, the two partners mortgaged the Theatre to
+John Hide for the sum of £125 8_s._ 11_d._ At the end of a year, by
+non-payment, they forfeited the mortgage, and the legal title to the
+property passed to Hide. It seems, however, that because of some
+special clause in the mortgage Hide was unable to expel Burbage and
+Brayne, or to dispose of the property to others. Hence he took no
+steps to seize the Theatre; but he constantly annoyed the occupants by
+arrest and otherwise. This unfortunate transference of the title to
+Hide was the cause of serious quarreling between the Burbages and the
+Braynes, and finally led to much litigation.
+
+[Footnote 73: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 103.]
+
+In 1582 a more immediate disaster threatened the owners of the
+Theatre. One Edmund Peckham laid claim to the land on which the
+playhouse had been built, and brought suit against Alleyn for
+recovery. More than that, Peckham tried to take actual possession of
+the playhouse, so that Burbage "was fain to find men at his own charge
+to keep the possession thereof from the said Peckham and his
+servants," and was even "once in danger of his own life by keeping
+possession thereof." As a result of this state of affairs, Burbage
+"was much disturbed and troubled in his possession of the Theatre, and
+could not quietly and peaceably enjoy the same. And therefore the
+players forsook the said Theatre, to his great loss."[74] In order to
+reimburse himself in some measure for this loss Burbage retained £30
+of the rental due to Alleyn. The act led to a bitter quarrel with
+Alleyn, and figured conspicuously in the subsequent litigation that
+came near overwhelming the Theatre.
+
+[Footnote 74: See Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 201, 239, 240, 242.]
+
+In 1585 Burbage, having spent the stipulated £200 in repairing and
+rebuilding the tenements on the premises, sought to renew the lease,
+according to the original agreement, for the extended period of
+twenty-one years. On November 20, 1585, he engaged three skilled
+workmen to view the buildings and estimate the sum he had disbursed in
+improvements. They signed a formal statement to the effect that in
+their opinion at least £220 had been thus expended on the premises.
+Burbage then "tendered unto the said Alleyn a new lease devised by his
+counsel, ready written and engrossed, with labels and wax thereunto
+affixed, agreeable to the covenant." But Alleyn refused to sign the
+document. He maintained that the new lease was not a verbatim copy of
+the old lease, that £200 had not been expended on the buildings, and
+that Burbage was a bad tenant and owed him rent. In reality, Alleyn
+wanted to extort a larger rental than £14 for the property, which had
+greatly increased in value.
+
+On July 18, 1586, Burbage engaged six men, all expert laborers, to
+view the buildings again and estimate the cost of the improvements.
+They expressed the opinion in writing that Burbage had expended at
+least £240 in developing the property.[75] Still Alleyn refused to
+sign an extension of the lease. His conduct must have been very
+exasperating to the owner of the Theatre. Cuthbert Burbage tells us
+that his father "did often in gentle manner solicit and require the
+said Gyles Alleyn for making a new lease of the said premises
+according to the purporte and effect of the said covenant." But
+invariably Alleyn found some excuse for delay.
+
+[Footnote 75: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 229, 234, 228, 233.]
+
+The death of Brayne, in August, 1586, led John Hide, who by reason of
+the defaulted mortgage was legally the owner of the Theatre, to
+redouble his efforts to collect his debt. He "gave it out in speech
+that he had set over and assigned the said lease and bonds to one
+George Clough, his ... father-in-law (but in truth he did not so),"
+and "the said Clough, his father-in-law, did go about to put the said
+defendant [Burbage] out of the Theatre, or at least did threaten to
+put him out." As we have seen, there was a clause in the mortgage
+which prevented Hide from ejecting Burbage;[76] yet Clough was able to
+make so much trouble, "divers and sundry times" visiting the Theatre,
+that at last Burbage undertook to settle the debt out of the profits
+of the playhouse. As Robert Myles deposed in 1592, Burbage allowed the
+widow of Brayne for "a certain time to take and receive the one-half
+of the profits of the galleries of the said Theatre ... then on a
+sudden he would not suffer her to receive any more of the profits
+there, saying that he must take and receive all till he had paid the
+debts. And then she was constrained, as his servant, to gather the
+money and to deliver it unto him."[77]
+
+[Footnote 76: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 55.]
+
+[Footnote 77: _Ibid._, p. 105.]
+
+For some reason, however, the debt was not settled, and Hide continued
+his futile demands. Several times Burbage offered to pay the sum in
+full if the title of the Theatre were made over to his son Cuthbert
+Burbage; and Brayne's widow made similar offers in an endeavor to gain
+the entire property for herself. But Hide, who seems to have been an
+honest man, always declared that since Burbage and Brayne "did jointly
+mortgage it unto him" he was honor-bound to assign the property back
+to Burbage and the widow of Brayne jointly. So matters stood for a
+while.
+
+At last, however, in 1589, Hide declared that "since he had forborne
+his money so long, he could do it no more, so as they that came first
+should have it of him." Thereupon Cuthbert Burbage came bringing not
+only the money in hand, but also a letter from his master and patron,
+Walter Cape, gentleman usher to the Lord High Treasurer, requesting
+Hide to make over the Theatre to Cuthbert, and promising in return to
+assist Hide with the Lord Treasurer when occasion arose. Under this
+pressure, Hide accepted full payment of his mortgage, and made over
+the title of the property to Cuthbert Burbage. Thus Brayne's widow was
+legally excluded from any share in the ownership of the Theatre. Myles
+deposed, in 1592, that henceforth Burbage "would not suffer her to
+meddle in the premises, but thrust her out of all."
+
+This led at once to a suit, in which Robert Myles acted for the widow.
+He received an order from the Court of Chancery in her favor, and
+armed with this, and accompanied by two other persons, he came on
+November 16, 1590, to Burbage's "dwelling house near the Theatre,"
+called to the door Cuthbert Burbage, and in "rude and exclamable sort"
+demanded "the moiety of the said Theatre." James Burbage "being within
+the house, hearing a noise at the door, went to the door, and there
+found his son, the said Cuthbert, and the said Myles speaking loud
+together." Words were bandied, until finally Burbage, "dared by the
+same Myles with great threats and words that he would do this and
+could do that," lost his temper, and threatened to beat Myles off the
+ground.[78]
+
+[Footnote 78: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 57, 60, 62.]
+
+Next the widow, attended by Robert Myles and others, visited the home
+of the Burbages "to require them to perform the said award" of the
+court. They were met by James Burbage's wife, who "charged them to go
+out of her grounds, or else she would make her son break their knaves'
+heads." Aroused by this noise, "James Burbage, her husband, looking
+out a window upon them, called the complainant [Widow Brayne]
+murdering whore, and ... the others villaines, rascals, and knaves."
+And when Mistress Brayne spoke of the order of the court, "he cryed
+unto her, 'Go, go. A cart, a cart for you! I will obey no such order,
+nor I care not for any such orders, and therefore it were best for you
+and your companions to be packing betimes, for if my son [Cuthbert]
+come he will thump you hence!'" Just then Cuthbert did "come home, and
+in very hot sort bid them get thence, or else he would set them
+forwards, saying 'I care for no such order. The Chancery shall not
+give away what I have paid for.'" And so, after "great and horrible
+oathes" by James Burbage and his son, the widow and her attendants
+"went their ways."[79]
+
+[Footnote 79: _Ibid._, p. 121.]
+
+Receiving thus no satisfaction from these visits to the home of James
+Burbage, the widow and Robert Myles came several times to the Theatre,
+bearing the order of the court in their hands; but each time they were
+railed upon and driven out. Finally, the widow, with her ever-faithful
+adjutant Robert Myles, his son Ralph, and his business partner,
+Nicholas Bishop, went "to the Theatre upon a play-day to stand at the
+door that goeth up to the galleries of the said Theatre to take and
+receive for the use of the said Margaret half of the money that should
+be given to come up into the said gallery." In the Theatre they were
+met by Richard Burbage, then about nineteen years old, and his mother,
+who "fell upon the said Robert Myles and beat him with a broom staff,
+calling him murdering knave." When Myles's partner, Bishop, ventured
+to protest at this contemptuous treatment of the order of the court,
+"the said Richard Burbage," so Bishop deposed, "scornfully and
+disdainfully playing with this deponent's nose, said that if he dealt
+in the matter, he would beat him also, and did challenge the field of
+him at that time." One of the actors then coming in, John
+Alleyn--brother of the immortal Edward Alleyn--"found the foresaid
+Richard Burbage, the youngest son of the said James Burbage, there
+with a broom staff in his hand; of whom when this deponent Alleyn
+asked what stir was there, he answered in laughing phrase how they
+came for a moiety, 'But,' quod he (holding up the said broom staff)
+'I have, I think, delivered him a moiety with this, and sent them
+packing.'" Alleyn thereupon warned the Burbages that Myles could bring
+an action of assault and battery against them. "'Tush,' quod the
+father, 'no, I warrant you; but where my son hath now beat him hence,
+my sons, if they will be ruled by me, shall at their next coming
+provide charged pistols, with powder and hempseed, to shoot them in
+the legs.'"[80]
+
+[Footnote 80: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 63, 97, 100, 101, 114.]
+
+But if the Burbages could laugh at the efforts of Myles and the widow
+to secure a moiety of the Theatre from Cuthbert, they were seriously
+troubled by the continued refusal of Gyles Alleyn to renew the lease.
+James Burbage many times urged his landlord to fulfill the original
+agreement, but in vain. At last, Alleyn, "according to his own will
+and discretion, did cause a draft of a lease to be drawn, wherein were
+inserted many unreasonable covenants." The new conditions imposed by
+Alleyn were: (1) that Burbage should pay a rental of £24 instead of
+£14 a year; (2) that he should use the Theatre as a place for acting
+for only five years after the expiration of the original
+twenty-one-year lease, and should then convert the building to other
+uses; (3) that he should ultimately leave the building in the
+possession of Alleyn.[81] The first and third conditions, though
+unjust, Burbage was willing to accept, but the second condition--that
+he should cease to use the Theatre for plays--he "utterly refused" to
+consider.
+
+[Footnote 81: See Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 195, 212, 216, 250, 258,
+_et al._]
+
+Finally, perceiving that it was useless to deal further with Alleyn,
+he made plans to secure a new playhouse in the district of
+Blackfriars, a district which, although within the city walls, was not
+under the jurisdiction of the city authorities. He purchased there the
+old Blackfriars refectory for £600, and then at great expense made the
+refectory into a playhouse. But certain influential noblemen and
+others living near by protested against this, and the Privy Council
+ordered that the building should not be used as a public playhouse.
+All this belongs mainly to the history of the Second Blackfriars
+Playhouse, and for further details the reader is referred to the
+chapter dealing with that theatre.
+
+Shortly after the order of the Privy Council cited above, Burbage
+died, just two months before the expiration of his lease from Alleyn;
+and the Theatre with all its troubles passed to his son Cuthbert. By
+every means in his power Cuthbert sought to induce Alleyn to renew the
+lease: "Your said subject was thereof possessed, and being so
+possessed, your said servant did often require the said Alleyn and
+Sara his wife to make unto him the said new lease of the premises,
+according to the agreement of the said indenture." Cuthbert's
+importunity in the matter is clearly set forth in a deposition by
+Henry Johnson, one of Alleyn's tenants. It was Alleyn's custom to come
+to London at each of the four pay terms of the year, and stop at the
+George Inn in Shoreditch to receive his rents; and on such occasions
+Johnson often observed Cuthbert's entreaties with Alleyn. In his
+deposition he says that he "knoweth that the said complainant
+[Cuthbert Burbage] hath many times labored and entreated the defendant
+[Gyles Alleyn] to make him a new lease of the premises in question,
+for this deponent sayeth that many times when the defendant hath come
+up to London to receive his rents, he, this deponent, hath been with
+him paying him certain rent; and then he hath seen the plaintiff with
+his landlord, paying his rent likewise; and then, finding opportunity,
+the plaintiff would be intreating the defendant to make him a new
+lease of the premises in question; and sayeth that it is at least
+three years since [i.e., in 1597] he, this deponent, first heard the
+plaintiff labor and entreat the defendant for a new lease."[82]
+Cuthbert tells us that Alleyn did not positively refuse to renew the
+lease, "but for some causes, which he feigned, did defer the same from
+time to time, but yet gave hope to your subject, and affirmed that he
+would make him such a lease."[83]
+
+[Footnote 82: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 246.]
+
+[Footnote 83: _Ibid._, p. 184.]
+
+Cuthbert's anxiety in this matter is explained by the fact that the
+old lease gave him the right to tear down the Theatre and carry away
+the timber and other materials to his own use, provided he did so
+before the expiration of the twenty-one years. Yet, relying on
+Alleyn's promises to renew the lease, he "did forbear to pull downe
+and carry away the timber and stuff employed for the said Theatre and
+playing-house at the end of the said first term of one and twenty
+years." A failure to renew the lease would mean, of course, the loss
+of the building.
+
+Alleyn, though deferring to sign a new lease, allowed Burbage to
+continue in possession of the property at "the old rent of £14." Yet
+the Theatre seems not to have been used for plays after the original
+lease expired.[84] The Lord Chamberlain's Company, which had been
+occupying the Theatre, and of which Richard Burbage was the chief
+actor, had moved to the Curtain; and the author of _Skialetheia_,
+printed in 1598, refers to the old playhouse as empty: "But see,
+yonder, one, like the unfrequented Theatre, walks in dark silence and
+vast solitude."[85]
+
+[Footnote 84: The lease expired on April 13, 1597; on July 28 the
+Privy Council closed all playhouses until November. The references to
+the Theatre in _The Remembrancia_ (see The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 78) do not necessarily imply that the building was
+then actually used by the players.]
+
+[Footnote 85: The same fact is revealed in the author's remark, "If my
+dispose persuade me to a play, I'le to the Rose or Curtain," for at
+this time only the Chamberlain's Men and the Admiral's Men were
+allowed to play.]
+
+To Cuthbert Burbage such a state of affairs was intolerable, and on
+September 29, 1598, he made a new appeal to Alleyn. Alleyn proffered a
+lease already drawn up, but Cuthbert would not "accept thereof"
+because of the "very unreasonable covenants therein contained."[86]
+
+[Footnote 86: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 216, 249.]
+
+Shortly after this fruitless interview, or late in 1598, Gyles Alleyn
+resolved to take advantage of the fact that Cuthbert Burbage had not
+removed the Theatre before the expiration of the first twenty-one
+years. He contended that since Cuthbert had "suffered the same there
+to continue till the expiration of the said term ... the right and
+interest of the said Theatre was both in law and conscience absolutely
+vested" now in himself; accordingly he planned "to pull down the same,
+and to convert the wood and timber thereof to some better use for the
+benefit" of himself.[87]
+
+[Footnote 87: _Ibid._, pp. 277, 288.]
+
+But, unfortunately for Alleyn, Cuthbert Burbage "got intelligence" of
+this purpose, and at once set himself to the task of saving his
+property. He and his brother Richard, the great actor, took into their
+confidence the chief members of the Lord Chamberlain's Company, then
+performing at the Curtain Playhouse, namely William Shakespeare, John
+Heminges, Augustine Phillips, Thomas Pope, and William Kempe. These
+men agreed to form with the Burbages a syndicate to finance the
+erection of a new playhouse. The two Burbages agreed to bear one-half
+the expense, including the timber and other materials of the old
+Theatre, and the five actors promised to supply the other half.
+Together they leased a suitable plot of land on the Bankside near
+Henslowe's Rose, the lease dating from December 25, 1598. These
+details having been arranged, it remained only for the Burbages to
+save their building from the covetousness of Alleyn.
+
+On the night of December 28, 1598,[88] Alleyn being absent in the
+country, Cuthbert Burbage, his brother Richard, his friend William
+Smith, "of Waltham Cross, in the County of Hartford, gentleman," Peter
+Street, "cheefe carpenter," and twelve others described as "laborers
+such as wrought for wages," gathered at the Theatre and began to tear
+down the building. We learn that the widow of James Burbage "was
+there, and did see the doing thereof, and liked well of it";[89] and
+we may suspect that at some time during the day Shakespeare and the
+other actors were present as interested spectators.
+
+[Footnote 88: The date, January 20, 1599, seems to be an error.]
+
+[Footnote 89: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 238.]
+
+The episode is thus vividly described by the indignant Gyles Allen:
+
+ The said Cuthbert Burbage, having intelligence of your
+ subject's purpose herein, and unlawfully combining and
+ confederating himself with the said Richard Burbage and one
+ Peter Street, William Smith, and diverse other persons to
+ the number of twelve, to your subject unknown, did about
+ the eight and twentieth day of December, in the one and
+ fortieth year of your highness reign, and sithence your
+ highness last and general pardon, by the confederacy
+ aforesaid, riotously assembled themselves together, and then
+ and there armed themselves with diverse and many unlawful
+ and offensive weapons, as namely swords, daggers, bills,
+ axes, and such like, and so armed did then repair unto the
+ said Theatre, and then and there armed as aforesaid, in very
+ riotous, outrageous, and forceable manner, and contrary to
+ the laws of your highness realm, attempted to pull down the
+ said Theatre. Whereupon, diverse of your subjects, servants
+ and farmers, then going about in peaceable manner to procure
+ them to desist from that unlawful enterprise, they, the said
+ riotous persons aforesaid, notwithstanding procured then
+ therein with great violence, not only then and there
+ forcibly and riotously resisting your subjects, servants,
+ and farmers, but also then and there pulling, breaking, and
+ throwing down the said Theatre in very outrageous, violent,
+ and riotous sort.[90]
+
+[Footnote 90: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 278-79. This document was
+discovered by J.O. Halliwell-Phillipps, who printed extracts in his
+_Outlines_. See also Ordish, _Early London Theatres_, pp. 75-76.]
+
+The workmen, under the expert direction of Peter Street, carried the
+timber and other materials of the old Theatre to the tract of land on
+the Bankside recently leased by the new syndicate--as Gyles Alleyn
+puts it, "did then also in most forcible and riotous manner take and
+carry away from thence all the wood and timber thereof unto the
+Bankside, in the Parish of St. Mary Overies, and there erected a new
+playhouse with the said timber and wood."
+
+The playhouse thus erected was, of course, an entirely new structure.
+Nearly a quarter of a century had elapsed since James Burbage designed
+the old Theatre, during which time a great development had taken place
+both in histrionic art and in play writing; and, no doubt, many
+improvements were possible in the stage and in the auditorium to
+provide better facilities for the actors and greater comfort for the
+spectators. In designing such improvements the architect had the
+advice and help of the actors, including Shakespeare; and he succeeded
+in producing a playhouse that was a model of excellence. The name
+selected by the syndicate for their new building was "The Globe." For
+further details as to its construction, and for its subsequent
+history, the reader is referred to the chapter dealing with that
+building.
+
+When Gyles Alleyn learned that the Burbages had demolished the Theatre
+and removed the timber to the Bankside, he was deeply incensed, not
+only at the loss of the building, but also, no doubt, at being
+completely outwitted. At once he instituted suit against Cuthbert
+Burbage; but he was so intemperate in his language and so reckless in
+his charges that he weakened his case. The suit dragged for a few
+years, was in part referred to Francis Bacon, and finally in the
+summer of 1601 was dismissed. Thus the history of the first London
+playhouse, which is chiefly the history of quarrels and litigation,
+came to a close.
+
+It is not possible now to indicate exactly the stay of the different
+troupes at the Theatre; the evidence is scattered and incomplete, and
+the inferences to be drawn are often uncertain.
+
+When the building was opened in 1576, it was, no doubt, occupied by
+the Earl of Leicester's troupe, of which Burbage was the manager, and
+for which, presumably, the structure had been designed. Yet other
+troupes of players may also have been allowed to use the
+building--when Leicester's Men were touring the provinces, or,
+possibly, on days when Leicester's Men did not act. This arrangement
+lasted about six years.
+
+In 1582 the use of the Theatre was interrupted by the interference of
+Peckham. For a long time the actors "could not enjoy the premises,"
+and Burbage was forced to keep Peckham's servants out of the building
+with an armed guard night and day. As a result of this state of
+affairs, Leicester's troupe was dissolved; "many of the players," we
+are told, were driven away, and the rest "forsook the said Theatre."
+The last notice of these famous players is a record of their
+performance at Court on February 10, 1583.
+
+Shortly after this, in March, 1583, Tilney, the Master of the Revels,
+organized under royal patronage a new company called the Queen's Men.
+For this purpose he selected twelve of the best actors of the realm,
+including some of the members of Leicester's company.[91] The two
+best-known actors in the new organization were the Queen's favorite
+comedian, Richard Tarleton, the immortal "Lord of Mirth," and John
+Lanham, the leader and apparently the manager of the troupe. James
+Burbage, who may by this time, if not before, have retired from
+acting, was not included.
+
+[Footnote 91: For a list of the Queen's Men see Wallace, _op. cit._,
+p. 11.]
+
+The newly organized Queen's Men in all probability occupied the
+Theatre which had been left vacant by the dissolution of Leicester's
+company. Mr. Wallace denies this, mainly on the evidence of a permit
+issued by the Lord Mayor, November 28, 1583, granting the Queen's Men
+the privilege of acting "at the sign of the Bull [Inn] in Bishopgate
+Street, and the sign of the Bell [Inn] in Gracious Street, and nowhere
+else within this city." But this permit, I think, lends scant support
+to Mr. Wallace's contention. The Lord Mayor had no authority to issue
+a license for the Queen's Men to play at the Theatre, for that
+structure was outside the jurisdiction of the city. The Privy Council
+itself, no doubt, had issued such a general license when the company
+was organized under royal patronage.[92] And now, ten months later,
+on November 26, 1583, the Council sends to the Lord Mayor a request
+"that Her Majesty's players may be suffered to play ... within the
+city and liberties _between this and shrovetide next_"[93]--in other
+words, during the winter season when access to the Theatre was
+difficult. It was customary for troupes to seek permission to act
+within the city during the winter months.[94] Thus the Queen's Men, in
+a petition written probably in the autumn of the following year, 1584,
+requested the Privy Council to dispatch "favorable letters unto the
+Lord Mayor of London to permit us to exercise within the city," and
+the Lord Mayor refused, with the significant remark that "if in winter
+... the foulness of season do hinder the passage into the fields to
+play, the remedy is ill conceived to bring them into London."[95]
+Obviously the Queen's Men were seeking permission to play in the city
+only during the cold winter months; during the balmy spring, summer,
+and autumn months--for actors the best season of the year--they
+occupied their commodious playhouse in "the fields."
+
+[Footnote 92: Such a license would include also permission to act in
+the provinces. This latter was soon needed, for shortly after their
+organization the Queen's Men were driven by the plague to tour the
+provinces. They were in Cambridge on July 9, and probably returned to
+London shortly after. See Murray, _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 8.]
+
+[Footnote 93: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 66.]
+
+[Footnote 94: Lord Hunsdon, on October 8, 1594, requested the Lord
+Mayor to permit the Chamberlain's Men "to play this winter time within
+the city at the Cross Keys in Gracious Street." See The Malone
+Society's _Collections_, I, 67.]
+
+[Footnote 95: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 170, 172.]
+
+That this playhouse for a time, at least, was the Theatre is indicated
+by several bits of evidence. Thus the author of _Martin's Month's
+Mind_ (1589) speaks of "twittle-twattles that I had learned in
+ale-houses and at the Theatre of Lanham and his fellows." Again, Nash,
+in _Pierce Penniless_ (1592), writes: "Tarleton at the Theatre made
+jests of him"; Harrington, in _The Metamorphosis of Ajax_ (1596):
+"Which word was after admitted into the Theatre with great applause,
+by the mouth of Master Tarleton"; and the author of _Tarlton's Newes
+out of Purgatory_ (_c._ 1589) represents Tarleton as connected with
+the Theatre. Now, unless Lanham, Tarleton, and their "fellows" usually
+or sometimes acted at the Theatre, it is hard to understand these and
+other similar passages.
+
+The following episode tends to prove the same thing. On June 18, 1584,
+William Fleetwood, Recorder, wrote to Lord Burghley:[96]
+
+ Right honorable and my very good lord. Upon Whitsunday there
+ was a very good sermon preached at the new churchyard near
+ Bethelem, whereat my Lord Mayor was with his brethren; and
+ by reason no plays were the same day, all the city was
+ quiet. Upon Monday I was at the Court.... That night I
+ returned to London and found all the wards full of watchers;
+ the cause thereof was for that very near the Theatre or
+ Curtain, at the time of the plays, there lay a prentice
+ sleeping upon the grass; and one Challes, at Grostock, did
+ turn upon the toe upon the belly of the same prentice.
+ Whereupon the apprentice start up.
+
+[Footnote 96: The letter is printed in full in The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 164.]
+
+In the altercation that followed, Challes remarked that "prentices
+were but the scum of the world." This led to a general rising of
+apprentices, and much disorder throughout the city. Fleetwood records
+the upshot thus:
+
+ Upon Sunday my Lord [Mayor] sent two aldermen to the court
+ for the suppressing and pulling down of the Theatre and
+ Curtain. All the Lords [of the Privy Council] agreed
+ thereunto saving my Lord Chamberlain and Mr.
+ Vice-Chamberlain. But we obtained a letter to suppress them
+ all. Upon the same night I sent for the Queen's Players [at
+ the Theatre?] and my Lord Arundel's Players [at the
+ Curtain?] and they all willingly obeyed the Lords's letters.
+ The chiefest of Her Highness's Players advised me to send
+ for the owner of the Theatre [James Burbage[97]], who was a
+ stubborn fellow, and to bind him. I did so. He sent me word
+ he was my Lord of Hundson's man, and that he would not come
+ at me; but he would in the morning ride to my lord.
+
+[Footnote 97: This could not have been Hide, as usually stated. Hide
+had nothing to do with the management of the Theatre, and was not "my
+Lord of Hunsdon's man." Hide's connection with the Theatre as sketched
+in this chapter shows the absurdity of such an interpretation of the
+document.]
+
+The natural inference from all this is that the Queen's Men and Lord
+Arundel's Men were then playing _outside the city_ where they could be
+controlled only by "the Lords's Letters"; that the Queen's Men were
+occupying the Theatre, and that James Burbage was (as we know) not a
+member of that company, but merely stood to them in the relation of
+"owner of the Theatre."
+
+What Burbage meant by calling himself "my Lord of Hunsdon's man" is
+not clear. Mr. Wallace contends that when Leicester's Men were
+dissolved, Burbage organized "around the remnants of Leicester's
+Company" a troupe under the patronage of Lord Hunsdon, and that this
+troupe, and not the Queen's Men, occupied the Theatre thereafter.[98]
+But we hear of Hunsdon's Men at Ludlow in July, 1582; and we find them
+presenting a play at Court on December 27, 1582. Since Leicester's
+troupe is recorded as acting at Court as late as February 10, 1583, it
+seems unlikely that Mr. Wallace's theory as to the origin of Hunsdon's
+Men is true. It may be, however, that after the dissolution of
+Leicester's Men, Burbage associated himself with Hunsdon's Men, and it
+may be that he allowed that relatively unimportant company to occupy
+the Theatre for a short time. Hunsdon's Men seem to have been mainly a
+traveling troupe; Mr. Murray states that notices of them "occur
+frequently in the provinces," but we hear almost nothing of them in
+London. Indeed, at the time of the trouble described by Fleetwood,
+Hunsdon's Men were in Bath.[99] If Burbage was a member of the troupe,
+he certainly did not accompany them on their extended tours; and when
+they played in London, if they used the Theatre, they must have used
+it jointly with the Queen's Men.
+
+[Footnote 98: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 11.]
+
+[Footnote 99: Murray, _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 321.]
+
+Late in 1585 the Theatre was affiliated with the adjacent Curtain.
+Burbage and Brayne made an agreement with the proprietor of that
+playhouse whereby the Curtain might be used "as an easore" [easer?] to
+the Theatre, and "the profits of the said two playhouses might for
+seven years space be in divident between them." This agreement, we
+know, was carried out, but whether it led to an exchange of companies,
+or what effect it had upon the players, we cannot say. Possibly to
+this period of joint management may be assigned the witticism of Dick
+Tarleton recorded as having been uttered "at the Curtain" where the
+Queen's Men were then playing.[100] It may even be that as one result
+of the affiliation of the two houses the Queen's Men were transferred
+to the Curtain.
+
+[Footnote 100: _Tarlton's Jests_, ed. by J.O. Halliwell, p. 16.
+Tarleton died in 1588.]
+
+In 1590, as we learn from the deposition of John Alleyn, the Theatre
+was being used by the Admiral's Men.[101] This excellent company had
+been formed early in 1589 by the separation of certain leading players
+from Worcester's Men, and it had probably occupied the Theatre since
+its organization. Its star actor, Edward Alleyn, was then at the
+height of his powers, and was producing with great success Marlowe's
+splendid plays. We may suppose that the following passage refers to
+the performance of the Admiral's Men at the Theatre:
+
+ He had a head of hair like one of my devils in _Dr.
+ Faustus_, when the old Theatre crackt and frightened the
+ audience.[102]
+
+[Footnote 101: Wallace, _op. cit._, pp. 101, 126.]
+
+[Footnote 102: _The Black Booke_, 1604.]
+
+Late in 1590 the Admiral's Men seem to have been on bad terms with
+Burbage,[103] and when John Alleyn made his deposition, February 6,
+1592, they had certainly left the Theatre. Mr. Greg, from entirely
+different evidence, has concluded that they were dispersed in
+1591,[104] and this conclusion is borne out by the legal document
+cited above.
+
+[Footnote 103: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 101.]
+
+[Footnote 104: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, II, 83. The Admiral's Men
+were reorganized in 1594, and occupied the Rose under Henslowe's
+management.]
+
+The next company that we can definitely associate with the Theatre was
+the famous Lord Chamberlain's Men. On April 16, 1594, Lord Strange,
+the Earl of Derby, died, and the chief members of his troupe--William
+Shakespeare, Richard Burbage, John Heminges, William Kempe, Thomas
+Pope, George Bryan, and Augustine Phillips--organized a new company
+under the patronage of the Lord Chamberlain. For ten days, in June,
+1594, they acted at Newington Butts under the management of Philip
+Henslowe, then went, probably at once, to the Theatre, which they made
+their home until the Burbage lease of the property expired in the
+spring of 1597. Here, among other famous plays, they produced the
+original _Hamlet_, thus referred to by Lodge in _Wit's Miserie_, 1596:
+
+ He looks as pale as the visard of the ghost which cries so
+ miserably at the Theatre, like an oyster-wife, "Hamlet,
+ revenge!"
+
+And here, too, they presented all of Shakespeare's early masterpieces.
+
+Their connection with the building ceased in 1597 at the expiration of
+the Burbage lease; but their association with the proprietors of the
+Theatre was permanent. Their subsequent history, as also the history
+of the Burbage brothers, will be found in the chapters dealing with
+the Globe and the Second Blackfriars.[105]
+
+[Footnote 105: For other but unimportant references to the Theatre see
+The Malone Society's _Collections_, vol. I: disorder at, October,
+1577, p. 153; disorder at, on Sunday, April, 1580, p. 46; fencing
+allowed at, July, 1582, p. 57; fencing forbidden at, May, 1583, p. 62;
+to be closed during infection, May, 1583, p. 63; complaint against, by
+the Lord Mayor, September, 1594, p. 76. And see Halliwell-Phillipps,
+_Outlines_, I, 363, for a special performance there by a "virgin,"
+February 22, 1582.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+THE CURTAIN
+
+
+Although James Burbage was, as his son asserted, "the first builder of
+playhouses," a second public playhouse followed hard on the Theatre,
+probably within twelve months. It was erected a short distance to the
+south of the Theatre,--that is, nearer the city,--and, like that
+building, it adjoined Finsbury Field.[106] To the two playhouses the
+audiences came trooping over the meadows, in "great multidudes," the
+Lord Mayor tells us; and the author of _Tarlton's Newes out of
+Purgatory_ (_c._ 1589) describes their return to London thus: "With
+that I waked, and saw such concourse of people through the fields that
+I knew the play was done."[107]
+
+[Footnote 106: The site is probably marked by Curtain Court in
+Chasserau's survey of 1745, reproduced on page 79.]
+
+[Footnote 107: Ed. by J.O. Halliwell, for The Shakespeare Society
+(1844), p. 105.]
+
+The new playhouse derived its name from the Curtain estate, on which
+it was erected.[108] This estate was formerly the property of the
+Priory of Holywell, and was described in 1538 as "scituata et
+existentia extra portas ejusdem nuper monasterii prope pasturam dicte
+nuper Priorisse, vocatam _the Curteine_."[109] Why it was so called
+is not clear. The name may have been derived from some previous owner
+of the property; it may, as Collier thought, have come from some early
+association with the walls (_curtains_) or defenses of the city; or,
+it may have come, as Tomlins suggests, from the mediæval Latin
+_cortina_, meaning a court, a close, a farm enclosure.[110] Whatever
+its origin--the last explanation seems the most plausible--the
+interesting point is that it had no connection whatever with a stage
+curtain.
+
+[Footnote 108: The Rose and the Red Bull derived their names in a
+similar way from the estates on which they were erected.]
+
+[Footnote 109: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 364.]
+
+[Footnote 110: Tomlins, _Origin of the Curtain Theatre, and Mistakes
+Regarding It_, in The Shakespeare Society's Papers (1844), p. 29.]
+
+The building was probably opened to the London public in the summer or
+autumn of 1577. The first reference to it is found in T[homas]
+W[hite]'s _Sermon Preached at Pawles Crosse on Sunday the Thirde of
+November, 1577_: "Behold the sumptuous theatre houses, a continual
+monument of London's prodigality and folly";[111] and a reference to
+it by name appears in Northbrooke's _A Treatise_, licensed December,
+1577: "Those places, also, which are made up and builded for such
+plays and interludes, as the Theatre and Curtain."[112]
+
+[Footnote 111: J.D. Wilson, _The Cambridge History of English
+Literature_, VI, 435, says that this sermon was "delivered at Paul's
+cross on 9 December, 1576 and, apparently, repeated on 3 November in
+the following year." This is incorrect; White did preach a sermon at
+Paul's Cross on December 9, but not the sermon from which this
+quotation is drawn.]
+
+[Footnote 112: Ed. by J.P. Collier, for The Shakespeare Society
+(1843), p. 85.]
+
+Like the Theatre, the Curtain was a peculiarly shaped building,
+specially designed for acting; "those playhouses that are erected and
+built _only for such purposes_ ... namely the Curtain and the
+Theatre,"[113] writes the Privy Council; and the German traveler,
+Samuel Kiechel, who visited London in 1585, describes them as
+"_sonderbare_" structures. They are usually mentioned together, and in
+such a way as to suggest similarity of shape as well as of purpose. We
+may, I think, reasonably suppose that the Curtain was in all essential
+details a copy of Burbage's Theatre.[114] Presumably, then, it was
+polygonal (or circular) in shape,[115] was constructed of timber, and
+was finished on the outside with lime and plaster. The interior, as
+the evidence already cited in the chapter on the Theatre shows,
+consisted of three galleries surrounding an open yard. There was a
+platform projecting into the middle of the yard, with dressing-rooms
+at the rear, "heavens" overhead, and a flagpole rising above the
+"heavens." That some sign was displayed in front of the door is
+likely. Malone writes: "The original sign hung out at this playhouse
+(as Mr. Steevens has observed) was the painting of a curtain
+striped."[116] Aubrey records that Ben Jonson "acted and wrote, but
+both ill, at the Green Curtain, a kind of nursery or obscure playhouse
+somewhere in the suburbs, I think towards Shoreditch or
+Clerkenwell."[117] By "at the Green Curtain" Aubrey means, of course,
+"at the sign of the Green Curtain"; but the evidence of Steevens and
+of Aubrey is too vague and uncertain to warrant any definite
+conclusions.
+
+[Footnote 113: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVII, 313.]
+
+[Footnote 114: It seems, however, to have been smaller than the
+Theatre.]
+
+[Footnote 115: Johannes de Witt describes the Theatre and the Curtain
+along with the Swan and the Rose as "amphitheatra" (see page 167). It
+is quite possible that Shakespeare refers to the Curtain in the
+Prologue to _Henry V_ as "this wooden O," though the reference may be
+to the Globe.]
+
+[Footnote 116: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 54; cf. also Ellis, _The
+Parish of St. Leonard_.]
+
+[Footnote 117: Did Steevens base his statement on this passage in
+Aubrey?]
+
+Of the early history of the Curtain we know little, mainly because it
+was not, like certain other playhouses, the subject of extensive
+litigation. We do not even know who planned and built it. The first
+evidence of its ownership appears fifteen years after its erection, in
+some legal documents connected with the Theatre.[118] In July, 1592,
+Henry Lanman, described as "of London, gentleman, of the age of 54
+years," deposed: "That true it is about 7 years now shall be this next
+winter, they, the said Burbage and Brayne, having the profits of plays
+made at the Theatre, and this deponent having the profits of the plays
+done at the house called the Curtain near to the same, the said
+Burbage and Brayne, taking the Curtain as an esore[119] to their
+playhouse, did of their own motion move this deponent that he would
+agree that the profits of the said two playhouses might for seven
+years space be in divident between them."[120]
+
+[Footnote 118: Brayne _v._ Burbage, 1592, printed in full by Wallace,
+_The First London Theatre_, pp. 109-52. See especially pp. 126, 148.]
+
+[Footnote 119: Easer?]
+
+[Footnote 120: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 148; cf. p. 126.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE CURTAIN PLAYHOUSE
+
+From _An Actual Survey of the Parish of St Leonard in Shoreditch taken
+in the year 1745_ by Peter Chasserau, Surveyor. The key to the map
+gives "93" as Curtain Court, probably the site of the old playhouse,
+"87" as New Inn Yard, and "94" as Holywell Court, both interesting in
+connection with Burbage's Theatre. (Redrawn from the original for this
+volume.)]
+
+From this statement it is evident that Henry Lanman was the sole
+proprietor of the Curtain as far back as 1585, and the presumption is
+that his proprietorship was of still earlier date. This presumption is
+strengthened by the fact that in a sale of the Curtain estate early in
+1582, he is specifically mentioned as having a tenure of an "edifice
+or building" erected in the Curtain Close, that is, that section of
+the estate next to the Field, on which the playhouse was built.[121]
+Since Lanman is not mentioned as having any other property on the
+estate, the "edifice or building" referred to was probably the
+playhouse. The document gives no indication as to how long he had held
+possession of the "edifice," but the date of sale, March, 1582,
+carries us back to within four years of the erection of the Curtain,
+and it seems reasonable to suppose, though of course we cannot be
+sure, that Lanman had been proprietor of the building from the very
+beginning.[122]
+
+[Footnote 121: Tomlins, _op. cit._, pp. 29-31.]
+
+[Footnote 122: Of this Henry Lanman we know nothing beyond the facts
+here revealed. Possibly he was a brother of the distinguished actor
+John Lanman (the name is variously spelled Lanman, Laneman, Lenmann,
+Laneham, Laynman, Lanham), one of the chief members of Leicester's
+troupe, and one of the twelve men selected in 1583 to form the Queen's
+Men. But speculation of this sort is vain. It is to be hoped that in
+the future some student will investigate the life of this obscure
+theatrical manager, and trace his connection with the early history of
+the drama.]
+
+Certain records of the sale of the Curtain estate shortly before and
+shortly after the erection of the playhouse are preserved, but these
+throw very little light upon the playhouse itself. We learn that on
+February 20, 1567, Lord Mountjoy and his wife sold the estate to
+Maurice Longe, clothworker, and his son William Longe, for the sum of
+£60; and that on August 23, 1571, Maurice Longe and his wife sold it
+to the then Lord Mayor, Sir William Allyn, for the sum of £200. In
+both documents the property is described in the same words: "All that
+house, tenement or lodge commonly called the _Curtain_, and all that
+parcel of ground and close, walled and enclosed with a brick wall on
+the west and north parts, called also the _Curtain Close_." The lodge
+here referred to, generally known as "Curtain House," was on, or very
+near, Holywell Lane;[123] the playhouse, as already stated, was
+erected in the close near the Field.[124]
+
+[Footnote 123: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 365.]
+
+[Footnote 124: The Privy Council on March 10, 1601, refers to it as
+"The Curtaine in Moorefeildes"; in ancient times, says Stow,
+Moorefields extended to Holywell. See Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_,
+I, 364.]
+
+How long Sir William Allyn held the property, or why it reverted to
+the Longe family, we do not know. But on March 18, 1582, we find
+William Longe, the son of "Maurice Longe, citizen and clothworker, of
+London, deceased," selling the same property, described in the same
+words, to one "Thomas Harberte, citizen and girdler, of London." In
+the meantime, of course, the playhouse had been erected, but no clear
+or direct mention of the building is made in the deed of sale.
+Possibly it was included in the conventionally worded phrase: "and all
+and singular other messuages, tenements, edifices, and buildings, with
+all and singular their appurtenances, erected and builded upon the
+said close called the Curtain."[125] Among the persons named as
+holding tenures of the above-mentioned "edifices and buildings" in the
+close was Henry Lanman. It seems not improbable, therefore, that the
+Curtain, like the Theatre, was erected on leased ground.
+
+[Footnote 125: Tomlins, _op. cit._, p. 31.]
+
+It is impossible to give a connected history of the Curtain. Most of
+the references to it that we now possess are invectives in early
+puritanical writings, or bare mention, along with other playhouses, in
+letters or ordinances of the Privy Council and the Lord Mayor. Such
+references as these do not much help us in determining what companies
+successively occupied the building, or what varying fortunes marked
+its ownership and management. Yet a few scattered facts have sifted
+down to us, and these I have arranged in chronological order.
+
+On the afternoon of April 6, 1580, an earthquake, especially severe in
+Holywell, shook the building during the performance of a play, and
+greatly frightened the audience. Munday says merely: "at the
+playhouses the people came running forth, surprised with great
+astonishment";[126] but Stubbes, the Puritan, who saw in the event a
+"fearful judgment of God," writes with fervor: "The like judgment
+almost did the Lord show unto them a little before, being assembled at
+their theatres to see their bawdy interludes and other trumperies
+practised, for He caused the earth mightily to shake and quaver, as
+though all would have fallen down; whereat the people, sore amazed,
+some leapt down from the top of the turrets, pinnacles, and towers
+where they stood, to the ground, whereof some had their legs broke,
+some their arms, some their backs, some hurt one where, some another,
+and many score crushed and bruised."[127]
+
+[Footnote 126: _View of Sundry Examples_, 1580.]
+
+[Footnote 127: _The Anatomy of Abuses_, ed. F.J. Furnivall, New
+Shakspere Society, p. 180. For other descriptions of this earthquake
+see Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 369.]
+
+The disturbance at the Theatre and the Curtain in 1584, when one
+Challes "did turn upon the toe upon the belly of" an apprentice
+"sleeping upon the grass" in the Field near by, has been mentioned in
+the preceding chapter. If the interpretation of the facts there given
+is correct, Lord Arundel's Players were then occupying the Curtain.
+
+In the winter of 1585 Lanman entered into his seven years' agreement
+with Burbage and Brayne by which the Theatre and the Curtain were
+placed under one management, and the profits shared "in divident
+between them." This agreement was faithfully kept by both parties, but
+there is no evidence that after the expiration of the seven years, in
+the winter of 1592, the affiliation was continued. What effect the
+arrangement had upon the companies of players occupying the two
+theatres we cannot now determine. To this period, however, I would
+assign the appearance of the Queen's Men at the Curtain.[128]
+
+[Footnote 128: _Tarlton's Jests_, ed. by J.O. Halliwell for the
+Shakespeare Society (1844), p. 16. For a discussion see the preceding
+chapter on the Theatre, p. 72.]
+
+On July 28, 1597, as a result of the performance of Thomas Nashe's
+_The Isle of Dogs_, by Pembroke's Men at the Swan,[129] the Privy
+Council ordered the plucking down of "the Curtain and the
+Theatre."[130] The order, however, was not carried out, and in October
+plays were allowed again as before.
+
+[Footnote 129: For details see the chapter on the Swan.]
+
+[Footnote 130: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVII, 313.]
+
+At this time the Lord Chamberlain's men were at the Curtain, having
+recently moved thither in consequence of the difficulties Cuthbert
+Burbage was having with Gyles Alleyn over the Theatre property. During
+the stay of the Chamberlain's Company, which numbered among its
+members William Shakespeare, Richard Burbage, William Kempe (who had
+succeeded Tarleton in popular favor as a clown), John Heminges, Thomas
+Pope, and Augustine Phillips, the playhouse probably attained its
+greatest distinction. Both Shakespeare and Jonson wrote plays for the
+troupe; _Romeo and Juliet_, we are told, "won Curtain plaudities," as
+no doubt did many other of Shakespeare's early masterpieces; and
+Jonson's _Every Man in His Humour_ created such enthusiasm here on its
+first performance as to make its author famous.[131]
+
+[Footnote 131: Marston, _The Scourge of Villainy_ (1598); Bullen, _The
+Works of John Marston_, III, 372.]
+
+In the summer of 1599 the Chamberlain's Men moved into their splendid
+new home, the Globe, on the Bankside, and the Curtain thus abandoned
+fell on hard times. Perhaps it was let occasionally to traveling
+troupes; in Jeaffreson's _Middlesex County Records_, under the date of
+March 11, 1600, is a notice of the arrest of one William Haukins
+"charged with a purse taken at a play at the Curtain." But shortly
+after, in April, 1600, when Henslowe and Alleyn began to erect their
+splendid new Fortune Playhouse, they were able to give the impression
+to Tilney, the Master of the Revels, and to the Privy Council, that
+the Curtain was to be torn down. Thus in the Council's warrant for the
+building of the Fortune, dated April 8, 1600, we read that "another
+house is [to be] pulled down instead of it";[132] and when the
+Puritans later made vigorous protests against the erection of the
+Fortune, the Council defended itself by stating that "their Lordships
+have been informed by Edmund Tilney, Esquire, Her Majesty's servant,
+and Master of the Revels, that the house now in hand to be built by
+the said Edward Alleyn is not intended to increase the number of the
+playhouses, but to be instead of another, namely the Curtain, which is
+either to be ruined and plucked down, or to be put to some other good
+use."[133]
+
+[Footnote 132: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 52.]
+
+[Footnote 133: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 82.]
+
+All this talk of the Curtain's being plucked down or devoted to other
+uses suggests a contemplated change in the ownership or management of
+the building. We do not know when Lanman died (in 1592 he described
+himself as fifty-four years of age),[134] but we do know that at some
+date prior to 1603 the Curtain had passed into the hands of a
+syndicate. When this syndicate was organized, or who constituted its
+members, we cannot say. Thomas Pope, in his will, dated July 22, 1603,
+mentions his share "of, in, and to all that playhouse, with the
+appurtenances, called the Curtain";[135] and John Underwood, in his
+will, dated October 4, 1624, mentions his "part or share ... in the
+said playhouses called the Blackfriars, the Globe on the Bankside, and
+the Curtain."[136] It may be significant that both Pope and Underwood
+were sharers also in the Globe. Since, however, further information
+is wanting, it is useless to speculate. We can only say that at some
+time after the period of Lanman's sole proprietorship, the Curtain
+passed into the hands of a group of sharers; and that after a
+discussion in 1600 of demolishing the building or devoting it to other
+uses, it entered upon a long and successful career.
+
+[Footnote 134: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 148.]
+
+[Footnote 135: J.P. Collier, _Lives of the Original Actors in
+Shakespeare's Plays_, p. 127. In exactly the same words Pope disposed
+of his share in the Globe.]
+
+[Footnote 136: _Ibid._, p. 230.]
+
+On May 10, 1601, "the actors at the Curtain"[137] gave serious offense
+by representing on the stage persons "of good desert and quality, that
+are yet alive, under obscure manner, but yet in such sort as all the
+hearers may take notice both of the matter and the persons that are
+meant thereby." The Privy Council ordered the Justices of the Peace to
+examine into the case and to punish the offenders.[138]
+
+[Footnote 137: Possibly Derby's Men.]
+
+[Footnote 138: See Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXXI, 346.]
+
+Early in 1604 a draft of a royal patent for Queen Anne's Players--who
+had hitherto been under the patronage of Worcester[139]--gives those
+players permission to act "within their now usual houses, called the
+Curtain, and the Boar's Head."[140] On April 9, 1604, the Privy
+Council authorized the three companies of players that had been taken
+under royal patronage "to exercise their plays in their several and
+usual houses for that purpose, and no other, viz., the Globe,
+scituate in Maiden Lane on the Bankside in the County of Surrey, the
+Fortune in Golding Lane, and the Curtain in Holywell."[141] The King's
+Men (the Burbage-Shakespeare troupe) occupied the Globe; Prince
+Henry's Men (the Henslowe-Alleyn troupe), the Fortune; and Queen
+Anne's Men, the Curtain.
+
+[Footnote 139: The company was formed by an amalgamation of Oxford's
+and Worcester's Men in 1602. See The Malone Society's _Collections_,
+I, 85.]
+
+[Footnote 140: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 266.]
+
+[Footnote 141: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 61; Dasent, _Acts of the
+Privy Council_, XXXII, 511.]
+
+But the Queen's Men were probably dissatisfied with the Curtain. It
+was small and antiquated, and it must have suffered by comparison with
+the more splendid Globe and Fortune. So the Queen's players had built
+for themselves a new and larger playhouse, called "The Red Bull." This
+was probably ready for occupancy in 1605, yet it is impossible to say
+exactly when the Queen's Men left the Curtain; their patent of April
+15, 1609, gives them permission to act "within their now usual houses
+called the Red Bull, in Clerkenwell, and the Curtain in
+Holywell."[142] It may be that they retained control of the Curtain in
+order to prevent competition.
+
+[Footnote 142: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 270.]
+
+What company occupied the Curtain after Queen Anne's Men finally
+surrendered it is not clear. Mr. Murray is of the opinion that Prince
+Charles's Men moved into the Curtain "about December, 1609, or early
+in 1610."[143]
+
+[Footnote 143: _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 230.]
+
+In 1613 "a company of young men" acted _The Hector of Germany_ "at
+the Red Bull and at the Curtain." Such plays, however, written and
+acted by amateurs, were not uncommon, and no significance can be
+attached to the event.
+
+In 1622, as we learn from the Herbert Manuscripts, the Curtain was
+being occupied by Prince Charles's Servants.[144] In the same year the
+author of _Vox Graculi, or The Jack Daw's Prognostication for 1623_,
+refers to it thus: "If company come current to the Bull and Curtain,
+there will be more money gathered in one afternoon than will be given
+to Kingsland Spittle in a whole month; also, if at this time about the
+hours of four and five it wax cloudy and then rain downright, they
+shall sit dryer in the galleries than those who are the understanding
+men in the yard."
+
+[Footnote 144: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 59; cf. Chalmers's
+_Supplemental Apology_, p. 213, note _y_. Murray gives the date
+incorrectly as 1623.]
+
+Prince Charles's Men did not remain long at the Curtain. At some date
+between June 10 and August 19, 1623, they moved to the larger and more
+handsome Red Bull.[145] After this, so far as I can discover, there is
+no evidence to connect the playhouse with dramatic performances.
+Malone, who presumably bases his statements on the now lost records of
+Herbert, says that shortly after the accession of King Charles I it
+"seems to have been used only by prize-fighters."[146]
+
+[Footnote 145: Murray, _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 237, note 1.]
+
+[Footnote 146: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 54, note 2.]
+
+The last mention of the Curtain is found in the _Middlesex County
+Records_ under the date February 21, 1627.[147] It is merely a passing
+reference to "the common shoare near the Curtain playhouse," yet it is
+significant as indicating that the building was then still standing.
+What ultimately became of it we do not know. For a time, however, its
+memory survived in Curtain Court (see page 79), and to-day its fame is
+perpetuated in Curtain Road.
+
+[Footnote 147: See Jeaffreson, _Middlesex County Records_, III, 164,
+from which the notice was quoted by Ordish, _Early London Theatres_,
+p. 106.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+THE FIRST BLACKFRIARS
+
+
+The choir boys of the Chapel Royal, of Windsor, and of Paul's were all
+engaged in presenting dramatic entertainments before Queen Elizabeth.
+Each organization expected to be called upon one or more times a
+year--at Christmas, New Year's, and other like occasions--to furnish
+recreation to Her Majesty; and in return for its efforts each received
+a liberal "reward" in money. Richard Farrant, Master of the Windsor
+Chapel, was especially active in devising plays for the Queen's
+entertainment. But having a large family, he was poor in spite of his
+regular salary and the occasional "rewards" he received for the
+performances of his Boys at Court; and doubtless he often cast about
+in his mind for some way in which to increase his meagre income.
+
+In the spring of 1576 James Burbage, having conceived the idea of a
+building devoted solely to plays, had leased a plot of ground for the
+purpose, and had begun the erection of the Theatre. By the autumn, no
+doubt, the building was nearing completion, if, indeed, it was not
+actually open to the public; and the experiment, we may suppose, was
+exciting much interest in the dramatic circles of London. It seems to
+have set Farrant to thinking. The professional actors, he observed,
+had one important advantage over the child actors: not only could they
+present their plays before the Queen and receive the usual court
+reward, but in addition they could present their plays before the
+public and thus reap a second and richer harvest. Since the child
+actors had, as a rule, more excellent plays than the professional
+troupes, and were better equipped with properties and costumes, and
+since they expended just as much energy in devising plays and in
+memorizing and rehearsing their parts, Farrant saw no reason why they,
+too, should not be allowed to perform before the public. This, he
+thought, might be done under the guise of rehearsals for the Court.
+Possibly the Queen might even wink at regular performances before the
+general public when she understood that this would train the Boys to
+be more skilful actors, would provide Her Majesty with more numerous
+and possibly more excellent plays, and would enable the Master and his
+assistants to live in greater comfort without affecting the royal
+purse.
+
+[Illustration: BLACKFRIARS MONASTERY
+
+A plan of the various buildings as they appeared before the
+dissolution, based on the Loseley Manuscripts and other documents,
+surveys, and maps. The Buttery became Farrant's, the Frater Burbage's
+playhouse. (Drawn by the author.)]
+
+For Farrant to build a playhouse specifically for the use of the
+Children was out of the question. In the first place, it would be too
+conspicuously a capitalization of the royal choristers for private
+gain; and in the second place, it would be far too hazardous a
+business venture for so poor a man as he to undertake. The more
+sensible thing for him to do was to rent somewhere a large hall which
+could at small expense be converted into a place suitable for training
+the Children in their plays, and for the entertainment of
+select--possibly at first invited--audiences. The performances, of
+course, were not to be heralded by a trumpet-and-drum procession
+through the street, by the flying of a flag, and by such-like vulgar
+advertising as of a public show; instead, they were to be quiet,
+presumably "private," and were to attract only noblemen and those
+citizens of the better class who were interested in the drama.[148]
+
+[Footnote 148: From this notion of privacy, I take it, arose the term
+"private" theatre as distinguished from "common" or "public" theatre.
+The interpretation of the term suggested by Mr. W.J. Lawrence, and
+approved by Mr. William Archer, namely, that it was a legal device to
+escape the city ordinance of 1574, cannot be accepted. The city had no
+jurisdiction over the precinct of Blackfriars, nor did Farrant live in
+the building.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITES OF THE TWO BLACKFRIARS PLAYHOUSES
+
+The smaller rectangle at the north represents the Buttery, later
+Farrant's playhouse, the larger rectangle represents the Frater, later
+Burbage's playhouse. (From Ogilby and Morgan's _Map of London_, 1677,
+the sites marked by the author.)]
+
+Such was Farrant's scheme. In searching for a hall suitable for his
+purpose, his mind at once turned to the precinct of Blackfriars, where
+in former years the Office of the Revels had been kept, and where the
+Children had often rehearsed their plays. The precinct had once, as
+the name indicates, been in the possession of the Dominican or "Black"
+Friars. The Priory buildings had consisted chiefly of a great church
+two hundred and twenty feet long and sixty-six feet broad, with a
+cloister on the south side of the church forming a square of one
+hundred and ten feet, and a smaller cloister to the south of this. At
+the dissolution of the religious orders, the property had passed into
+the possession of the Crown; hence, though within the city walls, it
+was not under the jurisdiction of the city authorities. Farrant
+probably did not anticipate any interference on the part of the Common
+Council with the royal choristers "practicing" their plays in order
+"to yield Her Majesty recreation and delight," yet the absolute
+certainty of being free from the adverse legislation of the London
+authorities was not to be ignored. Moreover, the precinct was now the
+home of many noblemen and wealthy gentlemen, and Farrant probably
+thought that, as one of the most fashionable residential districts in
+London, it was suitable for "private" performances to be given by
+members of Her Majesty's household.
+
+In furthering his project he sought the counsel and aid of his "very
+friend" Sir Henry Neville, Lieutenant of Windsor, who, it is to be
+presumed, was interested in the Windsor Boys. It happened that Neville
+knew of exactly such rooms as were desired, rooms in the old monastery
+of Blackfriars which he himself had once leased as a residence, and
+which, he heard, were "to be let either presently, or very shortly."
+These rooms were in the southwestern corner of the monastery, on the
+upper floor of two adjoining buildings formerly used by the monks as a
+buttery and a frater. A history of the rooms up to the time of their
+use as a theatre may be briefly sketched.
+
+In 1548 the buttery and frater, with certain other buildings, were let
+by King Edward to Sir Thomas Cawarden, Master of the Revels; and in
+1550 they were granted to him outright. In 1554 Cawarden sold the
+northern section of the buttery, fifty-two feet in length, to Lord
+Cobham, whose mansion it adjoined. The rest of the buttery, forty-six
+feet in length, and the frater, he converted into lodgings. Since the
+frater was of exceptional breadth--fifty-two feet on the outside,
+forty-six feet on the inside--he ran a partition through its length,
+dividing it into two parts. The section of the frater on the west of
+this partition he let to Sir Richard Frith; the section on the east,
+with the remainder of the buttery not sold to Lord Cobham, he let to
+Sir John Cheeke. It is with the Cheeke Lodgings that we are especially
+concerned.
+
+About September, 1554, Cheeke went to travel abroad, and surrendered
+his rooms in the Blackfriars. Sir Thomas Cawarden thereupon made use
+of them "for the Office of the Queen's Majesty's Revells"; thus for a
+time the Cheeke Lodgings were intimately connected with dramatic
+activities. But at the death of Cawarden, in 1559, the Queen
+transferred the Office of the Revels to St. John's, and the
+Blackfriars property belonging to Cawarden passed into the possession
+of Sir William More.
+
+[Illustration: A PLAN OF FARRANT'S PLAYHOUSE
+
+Frith's Lodging and the four southern rooms of Farrant's Lodging were
+on the upper floor of the Frater; the two northern rooms of Farrant's
+Lodging were on the upper floor of the Buttery. The playhouse was
+erected in the two rooms last mentioned.]
+
+In 1560 the new proprietor let the Cheeke Lodgings to Sir Henry
+Neville, with the addition of "a void piece of ground" eighteen feet
+wide extending west to Water Lane.[149] During his tenancy Neville
+erected certain partitions, built a kitchen in the "void piece of
+ground," and a large stairway leading to the rooms overhead. In 1568
+he surrendered his lease, and More let the rooms first to some "sylk
+dyers," and then in 1571 to Lord Cobham. In 1576 Cobham gave up the
+rooms, and More was seeking a tenant. It was at this auspicious moment
+that Farrant planned a private theatre, and enlisted the aid of Sir
+Henry Neville.
+
+[Footnote 149: This was enclosed with brick walls, and the greater
+part used as a wood-yard. This yard was later purchased by James
+Burbage when he secured the frater for his playhouse. The kitchen,
+shed, and stairs, built on the eastern part, were sold to Cobham.]
+
+On August 27 Farrant and Neville separately wrote letters to Sir
+William More about the matter. Farrant respectfully solicited the
+lease, and made the significant request that he might "pull down one
+partition, and so make two rooms--one." Neville, in a friendly letter
+beginning with "hearty commendations unto you and to Mrs. More," and
+ending with light gossip, urged Sir William to let the rooms to
+Farrant, and recommended Farrant as a desirable tenant ("I dare answer
+for him"). Neither letter mentioned the purpose for which the rooms,
+especially the large room referred to by Farrant, were to be used; but
+More doubtless understood that the Windsor Children were to practice
+their plays there, with occasional private rehearsals. Largely as a
+result of Neville's recommendation, More decided to let the rooms to
+Farrant. The progress of the negotiations is marked by a letter from
+Farrant to More, dated September 17, 1576, requesting that there be
+granted him also a certain "little dark room," which he found would be
+useful.
+
+The lease as finally signed describes the property thus:
+
+ Sir William More hath demised, granted, and to ferm letten,
+ and by these presents doth demise, grant, and to ferm let
+ unto the said Richard Farrant all those his six upper
+ chambers, lofts, lodgings, or rooms, lying together within
+ the precinct of the late dissolved house or priory of the
+ Blackfriars, otherwise called the friars preachers, in
+ London; which said six upper chambers, lofts, lodgings, or
+ rooms, were lately, amongst others, in the tenure and
+ occupation of the right honourable Sir William Brooke,
+ Knight, Lord Cobham; and do contain in length from the north
+ end thereof to the south end of the same one hundred fifty
+ and six foot and a half of assize; whereof two of the said
+ six upper chambers, lofts, lodgings, or rooms in the north
+ end of the premises, together with the breadth of the little
+ room under granted, do contain in length forty[150] and six
+ foot and a half, and from the east to the west part thereof
+ in breadth twenty and five foot of assize;[151] and the
+ four other chambers, or rooms, residue of the said six upper
+ chambers, do contain in length one hundred and ten foot, and
+ in breadth from the east to the west part thereof twenty-two
+ foot of assize.... And also ... the great stairs lately
+ erected and made by the said Sir Henry Neville upon part of
+ the said void ground and way.
+
+[Footnote 150: By an error in the manuscript this reads "fifty"; but
+the rooms are often described and always as "forty-six" feet in
+length; moreover, the error is made obvious by the rest of the lease.]
+
+[Footnote 151: The breadth is elsewhere given as twenty-six, and
+twenty-seven feet.]
+
+It was agreed that the lease should run for twenty-one years, and that
+the rental should be £14 per annum. But Sir William More, being a most
+careful and exacting landlord, with the interest of his adjacent
+lodgings to care for, inserted in the lease the following important
+proviso, which was destined to make trouble, and ultimately to wreck
+the theatre:
+
+ Provided also that the said Richard Farrant, his executors
+ or assigns, or any of them, shall not in any wise demise,
+ let, grant, assign, set over, or by any ways or means put
+ away his or their interest or term of years, or any part of
+ the same years, of or in the said premises before letten, or
+ any part, parcel, or member thereof to any person, or
+ persons, at any time hereafter during this present lease and
+ term of twenty-one years, without the special license,
+ consent, and agreement of the said Sir William More, his
+ heirs and assigns, first had, and obtained in writing under
+ his and their hands and seals.
+
+The penalty affixed to a violation of this provision was the immediate
+forfeiture of the lease.
+
+Apparently Farrant entered into possession of the rooms on September
+29[152] (although the formal lease was not signed until December 20),
+and we may suppose that he at once set about converting the two upper
+rooms at the north end of the lodgings into a suitable theatre.[153]
+Naturally he took for his model the halls at Court in which the
+Children had been accustomed to act. First, we are told, he "pulled
+down partitions to make that place apt for that purpose"; next, he
+"spoiled" the windows--by which is meant, no doubt, that he stopped up
+the windows, for the performances were to be by candle-light. At one
+end of the hall he erected a platform to serve as a stage, and in the
+auditorium he placed benches or chairs. There was, presumably, no room
+for a gallery; if such had been erected, the indignant More would
+certainly have mentioned it in his bill of complaints.[154]
+Chandeliers over the stage, and, possibly, footlights, completed the
+necessary arrangements. For these alterations Farrant, we are told,
+became "greatly indebted," and he died three or four years later with
+the debt still unpaid. More complained that the alterations had put
+the rooms into a state of "great ruin," which meant, of course, from
+the point of view of a landlord desiring to let them again for
+residential purposes. Just how costly or how extensive the alterations
+were we cannot now determine; but we may reasonably conclude that
+Farrant made the hall not only "commodious for his purpose," but also
+attractive to the aristocratic audiences he intended to gather there
+to see his plays.
+
+[Footnote 152: The date from which the lease was made to run.]
+
+[Footnote 153: It is usually said that he converted the entire seven
+rooms into his theatre, but that seems highly unlikely. The northern
+section was 46 x 26 feet, the southern section 110 x 22--absurd
+dimensions for an auditorium. Moreover, that Farrant originally
+planned to use only the northern section is indicated by his request
+to be allowed to "pull down one partition and so make two rooms--one."
+The portion not used for the playhouse he rented; in 1580, we are
+told, he let "two parcels thereof to two several persons."]
+
+[Footnote 154: M. Feuillerat, I think, is wrong in supposing that
+there was a gallery. He deduces no proof for his contention, and the
+evidence is against him.]
+
+To reach the hall, playgoers had to come first into Water Lane, thence
+through "a way leading from the said way called Water Lane" to "a
+certain void ground" before the building. Here "upon part of the said
+void ground" they found a "great stairs, which said great stairs do
+serve and lead into" the upper rooms--or, as we may now say,
+Blackfriars Playhouse.[155]
+
+[Footnote 155: There must have been two stairways leading to the upper
+rooms; I have assumed that playgoers used Neville's stairs to reach
+the theatre.]
+
+Having thus provided a playhouse, Farrant next provided an adequate
+company of boy actors. To do this, he combined the Children of Windsor
+with the Children of the Chapel Royal, of which William Hunnis was
+master. What arrangement he made with Hunnis we do not know, but the
+Court records show that Farrant was regarded as the manager of the new
+organization; he is actually referred to in the payments as "Master of
+the Children of Her Majesty's Chapel," and Hunnis's official
+connection with the Children is ignored.
+
+Farrant may have been able to open his playhouse before the close of
+the year; or he may have first begun performances there in the early
+months of 1577. He would certainly be anxious to make use of the new
+play he was preparing for presentation at Court on Twelfth Day,
+January 6, 1577.
+
+For four years, 1576-1580, the playhouse was operated without trouble.
+Sir William More, however, was not pleased at the success with which
+the actors were meeting. He asserted that when he made the lease he
+was given to understand that the building was to be used "only for the
+teaching of the Children of the Chapel"--with, no doubt, a few
+rehearsals to which certain persons would be _privately_ invited. But,
+now, to his grief, he discovered that Farrant had "made it a continual
+house for plays." He asserted that the playhouse had become offensive
+to the precinct; and doubtless some complaints had been made to him,
+as landlord, by the more aristocratic inhabitants.[156] At any rate,
+he became anxious to regain possession of the building.
+
+[Footnote 156: I suspect that the theatre gave greater offense to More
+himself than it did to any one else, for it adjoined his home, and the
+audience made use of the private passage which led from Water Lane to
+his mansion. Unquestionably he suffered worse than any one else both
+from the noise and the crowds.]
+
+In the autumn of 1580 he saw an opportunity to break the lease and
+close the playhouse. Farrant made the mistake of letting "two parcels
+thereof to two severall persons" without first gaining the written
+consent of More, and at once More "charged him with forfeiture of his
+lease." But before More could "take remedy against him" Farrant died,
+November 30, 1580. More, however, "entered upon the house, and refused
+to receive any rent but conditionally."
+
+By his will, proved March 1, 1581, Farrant left the lease of the
+Blackfriars to his widow, Anne Farrant. But she had no authority over
+the royal choristers, nor was she qualified to manage a company of
+actors, even if she had had the time to do so after caring for her
+"ten little ones." What use, if any, was made of the playhouse during
+the succeeding winter we do not know. The widow writes that she,
+"being a sole woman, unable of herself to use the said rooms to such
+purpose as her said husband late used them, nor having any need or
+occasion to occupy them to such commodity as would discharge the rents
+due for the said rooms in the bill alledged, nor being able to
+sustain, repair, and amend the said rooms," etc.;[157] the natural
+inference from which is that for a time the playhouse stood unused.
+The widow, of course, was anxious to sublet the building to some one
+who could make use of it as a playhouse; and on December 25, 1580, she
+addressed a letter to Sir William More asking his written permission
+to make such a disposal of the lease. The letter has a pathetic
+interest that justifies its insertion here:
+
+ _To the right worshipful Sir William More, Knight, at his
+ house near Guilford, give these with speed._
+
+ _Right worshipful Sir:_
+
+ After my humble commendations, and my duty also
+ remembered--where it hath pleased your worship to grant unto
+ my husband in his life time one lease of your house within
+ the Blackfriars, for the term of twenty-one years, with a
+ proviso in the end thereof that he cannot neither let nor
+ set the same without your worship's consent under your hand
+ in writing. And now for that it hath pleased God to call my
+ said husband unto His mercy, having left behind him the
+ charge of ten small children upon my hand, and my husband
+ besides greatly indebted, not having the revenue of one
+ groat any way coming in, but by making the best I may of
+ such things as he hath left behind him, to relieve my little
+ ones. May it therefore please your worship, of your abundant
+ clemency and accustomed goodness, to consider a poor widow's
+ distressed estate, and for God's cause to comfort her with
+ your worship's warrant under your hand to let and set the
+ same to my best comodity during the term of years in the
+ said lease contained, not doing any waste. In all which
+ doing, I shall evermore most abundantly pray unto God for
+ the preservation of your worship's long continuance. From
+ Grenwich, the twenty-fifth of December,
+
+ By a poor and sorrowful widow,
+
+ ANNE FARRANT.[158]
+
+[Footnote 157: Wallace, _The Evolution of the English Drama_, p. 163.]
+
+[Footnote 158: Wallace, _The Evolution of the English Drama_, p.
+153.]
+
+Whether she secured in writing the permission she requested we do not
+know. Four years later More said that she did not. Possibly, however,
+she was orally given to understand that she might transfer the lease
+to her husband's former partner in the enterprise, William
+Hunnis.[159] Hunnis naturally was eager to make use of the building in
+preparation for the Christmas plays at Court. At some date before
+September 19, he secured the use of the playhouse on a temporary
+agreement with the widow; but in order to avoid any difficulty with
+More, he interviewed the latter, and presented a letter of
+recommendation from the Earl of Leicester. This letter has been
+preserved among Sir William's papers:
+
+ _Sir William More:_
+
+ Whereas my friend, Mr. Hunnis, this bearer, informeth me
+ that he hath of late bought of Farrant's widow her lease of
+ that house in Blackfriars which you made to her husband,
+ deceased, and means there to practice the Queen's Children
+ of the Chapel, being now in his charge, in like sort as his
+ predecessor did, for the better training them to do Her
+ Majesty's service; he is now a suitor to me to recommend him
+ to your good favour--which I do very heartily, as one that I
+ wish right well unto, and will give you thanks for any
+ continuance or friendship you shall show him for the
+ furtherance of this his honest request. And thus, with my
+ hearty commendations, I wish you right heartily well to
+ fare. From the Court, this nineteenth of September, 1581.
+
+ Your very friend,
+
+ R. LEICESTER.[160]
+
+[Footnote 159: More had "refused to accept any rent but
+conditionally." Probably he refused written consent to the sublease
+for the same reason.]
+
+[Footnote 160: Wallace, _The Evolution of the English Drama_, p. 154.]
+
+The result of this interview we do not know. But on December 20
+following, the widow made a formal lease of the property to William
+Hunnis and John Newman, at a rental of £20 13_s._ 4_d._ a year, an
+increase of £6 13_s._ 4_d._ over the rental she had to pay More. She
+required of them a bond of £100 to guarantee their performance of all
+the covenants of the lease. Thereupon the theatre under Hunnis and
+Newman resumed its career--if, indeed, this had ever been seriously
+interrupted.
+
+In the course of time, More's anxiety to recover possession of the
+hall seems to have increased. The quarterly payments were not promptly
+met by the widow, and the repairs on the building were not made to his
+satisfaction. Probably through fear of the increasing dissatisfaction
+on the part of More, Hunnis and Newman transferred their lease, in
+1583, to a young Welsh scrivener, Henry Evans, who had become
+interested in dramatic affairs. This transfer of the lease without
+More's written consent was a second clear breach of the original
+contract, and it gave More exactly the opportunity he sought.
+Accordingly, he declared the original lease to Farrant void, and made
+a new lease of the house "unto his own man, Thomas Smallpiece, to try
+the said Evans his right." But Evans, being a lawyer, knew how to take
+care of himself. He "demurred in law," and "kept the same in his hands
+with long delays."
+
+The widow, alarmed at the prospect of losing her lease, brought suit,
+in December, 1583, against Hunnis and Newman separately for the
+forfeiture of their several bonds of £100, contending that they had
+not paid promptly according to their agreement, and had not kept the
+building in proper repair. Hunnis and Newman separately brought suit
+in the Court of Requests for relief against the widow's suits.
+Meanwhile More was demanding judgment against Evans. Hunnis, it seems,
+carried his troubles to the Court and there sought help. Queen
+Elizabeth could take no direct action, because Sir William More was a
+good friend of hers, who had entertained her in his home. But she
+might enlist the aid of one of her noblemen who were interested in the
+drama. However this was, the young Earl of Oxford, himself a
+playwright and the patron of a troupe of boy-actors, came to the
+rescue of the theatre. He bought the lease of the building from Evans,
+and undertook to reorganize its affairs. To Hunnis's twelve Children
+of the Chapel he added the Children of St. Paul's Cathedral, making
+thus a company of adequate size. He retained Hunnis, no doubt, as one
+of the trainers of the Boys, and he kept Evans as manager of the
+troupe. Moreover, shortly after the purchase, probably in June, 1583,
+he made a free gift of the lease to his private secretary, John Lyly,
+a young man who had recently won fame with the first English novel,
+_Euphues_. The object of this, like the preceding transfers of title,
+it seems, was to put as many legal blocks in the path of Sir William
+More as possible. More realized this, and complained specifically that
+"the title was posted from one to another"; yet he had firmly made up
+his mind to recover the property, and in spite of Oxford's
+interference, he instructed his "learned council" to "demand
+judgment."
+
+Meanwhile the dramatic organization at Blackfriars continued under the
+direction of Hunnis, Evans, and Lyly, with the Earl of Oxford as
+patron. Not only was Lyly the proprietor of the theatre, but he
+attempted to supply it with the necessary plays. He had already shown
+his power to tell in effective prose a pleasing love romance. That
+power he now turned to the production of his first play, written in
+haste for the Christmas festivities. The play, _Alexander and
+Campaspe_, was presented before Her Majesty on January 1, 1584, and at
+Blackfriars, with great applause. Lyly's second play, _Sapho and
+Phao_, was produced at Court on March 3, following, and also at
+Blackfriars before the general public.
+
+But at the Easter term, 1584, Sir William More got judgment in his
+favor. The widow begged Sir Francis Walsingham to intercede in her
+behalf, declaring that the loss of the lease "might be her utter
+undoing."[161] Walsingham sent the letter to More, and apparently
+urged a consideration of her case. More, however, refused to yield. He
+banished Lyly, Hunnis, Evans, and the Children from the "great upper
+hall," and reconverted the building into tenements.
+
+[Footnote 161: The letter is printed in full by Mr. Wallace in _The
+Evolution of the English Drama_, p. 158. Mr. Wallace, however,
+misdates it. It was not written until after More had "recovered it
+[the lease] against Evans."]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+ST. PAUL'S
+
+
+As shown in the preceding chapter, not only were the Children of the
+Chapel Royal and of Windsor called upon to entertain the Queen with
+dramatic performances, but the Children of St. Paul's were also
+expected to amuse their sovereign on occasion. And following the
+example of the Children of the Chapel and of Windsor in giving
+performances before the public in Blackfriars, the Paul's Boys soon
+began to give such performances in a building near the Cathedral.[162]
+The building so employed was doubtless one of the structures owned by
+the Church. Burbage and Heminges refer to it as "the said house near
+St. Paul's Church."[163] Richard Flecknoe, in _A Discourse of the
+English Stage_ (1664), places it "behind the Convocation-house in
+Paul's";[164] and Howes, in his continuation of Stow's _Annals_
+(1631), says that it was the "singing-school" of the Cathedral.[165]
+That the auditorium was small we may well believe. So was the stage.
+Certain speakers in the Induction to _What You Will_, acted at Paul's
+in 1600, say: "Let's place ourselves within the curtains, for, good
+faith, the stage is so very little, we shall wrong the general eye
+else very much." Both Fleay and Lawrence[166] contend that the
+building was "round, like the Globe," and as evidence they cite the
+Prologue to Marston's _Antonio's Revenge_, acted at Paul's in 1600, in
+which the phrases "within this round" and "within this ring" are
+applied to the theatre. The phrases, however, may have reference
+merely to the circular disposition of the benches about the stage.
+That high prices of admission to the little theatre were charged we
+learn from a marginal note in _Pappe with an Hatchet_ (1589), which
+states that if a tragedy "be showed at Paul's, it will cost you four
+pence; at the Theatre two pence."[167] The Children, indeed, catered
+to a very select public. Persons who went thither were gentle by birth
+and by behavior as well; and playwrights, we are told, could always
+feel sure there of the "calm attention of a choice audience."[168]
+Lyly, in the Prologue to _Midas_, acted at Paul's in 1589, says: "Only
+this doth encourage us, that presenting our studies before
+_Gentlemen_, though they receive an inward dislike, we shall not be
+hissed with an open disgrace." Things were quite otherwise in the
+public theatres of Shoreditch and the Bankside.
+
+[Footnote 162: Murray, _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 325,
+erroneously says: "Their public place was, probably, from the first,
+the courtyard of St. Paul's Cathedral."]
+
+[Footnote 163: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+95.]
+
+[Footnote 164: That is, in or near Pater Noster Row.]
+
+[Footnote 165: _Annales, or A Generall Chronicle of England_, 1631,
+signature liii 1, verso.]
+
+[Footnote 166: F.G. Fleay, _A Biographical Chronicle of the English
+Drama_, II, 76; W.J. Lawrence, _The Elizabethan Playhouse_, p. 17.]
+
+[Footnote 167: R.W. Bond, _The Complete Works of John Lyly_, III, 408.
+Higher prices of admission were charged to all the private
+playhouses.]
+
+[Footnote 168: John Marston, _Antonio's Revenge_, acted at Paul's in
+1600.]
+
+Under the direction of their master, Sebastian Westcott, the Boys
+acted before the public at least as early as 1578,[169] for in
+December of that year the Privy Council ordered the Lord Mayor to
+permit them to "exercise plays" within the city;[170] and Stephen
+Gosson, in his _Plays Confuted_, written soon afterwards, mentions
+_Cupid and Psyche_ as having been recently "plaid at Paules."
+
+[Footnote 169: There is a record of a play by the Paul's Boys in 1527
+before ambassadors from France, dealing with the heretic Luther; but
+exactly when they began to give public performances for money we do
+not know.]
+
+[Footnote 170: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 432.]
+
+Westcott died in 1582, and was succeeded by Thomas Gyles. Shortly
+after this we find the Children of Paul's acting publicly with the
+Children of the Chapel Royal at the little theatre in Blackfriars. For
+them John Lyly wrote his two earliest plays, _Campaspe_ and _Sapho and
+Phao_, as the title-pages clearly state. But their stay at Blackfriars
+was short. When in 1584 Sir William More closed up the theatre there,
+they fell back upon their singing-school as the place for their public
+performances.
+
+At the same time the Queen became greatly interested in promoting
+their dramatic activities. To their master, Thomas Gyles, she issued,
+in April, 1585, a special commission "to take up apt and meet
+children" wherever he could find them. It was customary for the Queen
+to issue such a commission to the masters of her two private chapels,
+but never before, or afterwards, had this power to impress children
+been conferred upon a person not directly connected with the royal
+choristers. Its issuance to Gyles in 1585 clearly indicates the
+Queen's interest in the Paul's Boys as actors, and her expectation of
+being frequently entertained by them. And to promote her plans still
+further, she appointed the successful playwright John Lyly as their
+vice-master, with the understanding, no doubt, that he was to keep
+them--and her--supplied with plays. This he did, for all his comedies,
+except the two just mentioned, were written for the Cathedral
+Children, and were acted by them at Court, and in their little theatre
+"behind the Convocation House."
+
+Unfortunately under Lyly's leadership the Boys became involved in the
+bitter Martin Marprelate controversy, for which they were suppressed
+near the end of 1590. The printer of Lyly's _Endimion_, in 1591, says
+to the reader: "Since the plays in Paul's were dissolved, there are
+certain comedies come to my hands by chance, which were presented
+before Her Majesty at several times by the Children of Paul's."
+
+Exactly how long the Children were restrained it is hard to determine.
+In 1596 Thomas Nash, in _Have With You to Saffron Walden_, expressed
+a desire to see "the plays at Paul's up again." Mr. Wallace thinks
+they may have been allowed "up again" in 1598;[171] Fleay, in 1599 or
+1600;[172] the evidence, however, points, I think, to the spring or
+early summer of 1600. The Children began, naturally, with old plays,
+"musty fopperies of antiquity"; the first, or one of the first, new
+plays they presented was Marston's _Jack Drum's Entertainment_, the
+date of which can be determined within narrow limits. References to
+Kempe's Morris, which was danced in February, 1600, as being still a
+common topic of conversation, and the entry of the play in the
+Stationers' Registers on September 8, 1600, point to the spring or
+early summer of 1600 as the date of composition. This makes very
+significant the following passage in the play referring to the Paul's
+Boys as just beginning to act again after their long inhibition:
+
+ _Sir Ed._ I saw the Children of Paul's last night,
+ And troth they pleas'd me pretty, pretty well.
+ The Apes in time will do it handsomely.
+
+ _Plan._ S'faith, I like the audience that frequenteth there
+ With much applause. A man shall not be choak't
+ With the stench of garlic, nor be pasted
+ To the barmy jacket of a beer-brewer.
+
+ _Bra. Ju._ 'Tis a good, gentle audience; and I hope the Boys
+ Will come one day into the Court of Requests.
+
+[Footnote 171: _The Children of the Chapel_, p. 153.]
+
+[Footnote 172: _A Chronicle History of the London Stage_, p. 152.]
+
+Shortly after this the Boys were indeed called "into the Court of
+Requests," for on New Year's Day, 1601, they were summoned to present
+a play before Her Majesty.
+
+Their master now was Edward Pierce, who had succeeded Thomas Gyles. In
+1605 the experienced Edward Kirkham, driven from the management of the
+Blackfriars Theatre, became an assistant to Pierce in the management
+of Paul's. In this capacity we find him in 1606 receiving the payment
+for the two performances of the Boys at Court that year.[173]
+
+[Footnote 173: Cunningham, _Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels_,
+p. XXXVIII.]
+
+Among the playwrights engaged by Pierce to write for Paul's were
+Marston, Middleton, Chapman, Dekker, Webster, and Beaumont; and, as a
+result, some of the most interesting dramas of the period were first
+acted on the small stage of the singing-school. Details in the history
+of the Children, however, are few. We find an occasional notice of
+their appearance at Court, but our record of them is mainly secured
+from the title-pages of their plays.
+
+The last notice of a performance by them is as follows: "On the 30th
+of July, 1606, the youths of Paul's, commonly called the Children of
+Paul's, played before the two Kings [of England and of Denmark] a play
+called _Abuses_, containing both a comedy and a tragedy, at which the
+Kings seemed to take great delight and be much pleased."[174]
+
+[Footnote 174: Nichols, _The Progresses of James_, IV, 1073.]
+
+The reason why the Children ceased to act is made clear in the lawsuit
+of Keysar _v._ Burbage _et al._, recently discovered and printed by
+Mr. Wallace.[175] From this we learn that when Rosseter became manager
+of the Children of the Queen's Revels at the private playhouse of
+Whitefriars in 1609, he undertook to increase his profits by securing
+a monopoly both of child-acting and of private theatres. Blackfriars
+had been deserted, and the only other private theatre then in
+existence was Paul's. So Rosseter agreed to pay Pierce a dead rent of
+£20 a year to keep the Paul's playhouse closed:
+
+ One Mr. Rosseter, a partner of the said complainant, dealt
+ for and compounded with the said Mr. Pierce to the only
+ benefit of him, the said Mr. Rosseter, the now complainant,
+ the rest of their partners and Company [at the Whitefriars]
+ ... that thereby they might ... advance their gains and
+ profit to be had and made in their said house in the
+ Whitefriars, that there might be a cessation of playing and
+ plays to be acted in the said house near St. Paul's Church
+ aforesaid, for which the said Rosseter compounded with the
+ said Pierce to give him the said Pierce twenty pounds per
+ annum.[176]
+
+[Footnote 175: _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 80.]
+
+[Footnote 176: _Ibid._, p. 95.]
+
+In this attempt to secure a monopoly in private playhouses Rosseter
+was foiled by the coming of Shakespeare's troupe to the Blackfriars;
+but the King's Men readily agreed to join in the payment of the dead
+rent to Pierce, for it was to their advantage also to eliminate
+competition.
+
+The agreement which Rosseter secured from Pierce was binding "for one
+whole year"; whether it was renewed we do not know, but the Children
+never again acted in "their house near St. Paul's Church."
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+THE BANKSIDE AND THE BEAR GARDEN
+
+
+From time out of mind the suburb of London known as "the
+Bankside"--the term was loosely applied to all the region south of the
+river and west of the bridge--had been identified with sports and
+pastimes. On Sundays, holidays, and other festive occasions, the
+citizens, their wives, and their apprentices were accustomed to seek
+outdoor entertainment across the river, going thither in boats (of
+which there was an incredible number, converting "the silver sliding
+Thames" almost into a Venetian Grand Canal), or strolling on foot over
+old London Bridge. On the Bankside the visitors could find maypoles
+for dancing, butts for the practice of archery, and broad fields for
+athletic games; or, if so disposed, they could visit bull-baitings,
+bear-baitings, fairs, stage-plays, shows, motions, and other
+amusements of a similar sort.
+
+Not all the attractions of the Bankside, however, were so innocent.
+For here, in a long row bordering the river's edge, were situated the
+famous stews of the city, licensed by authority of the Bishop of
+Winchester; and along with the stews, of course, such places as thrive
+in a district devoted to vice--houses for gambling, for
+coney-catching, and for evil practices of various sorts. The less said
+of this feature of the Bankside the better.
+
+More needs to be said of the bull- and bear-baiting, which probably
+constituted the chief amusement of the crowds from the city, and which
+was later closely associated with the drama and with playhouses. This
+sport, now surviving in the bull-fights of Spain and of certain
+Spanish-American countries, was in former times one of the most
+popular species of entertainment cultivated by the English. Even so
+early as 1174, William Fitz-Stephen, in his _Descriptio Nobilissimæ
+Ciuitatis Londoniæ_, under the heading _De Ludis_, records that the
+London citizens diverted themselves on holiday occasions with the
+baiting of beasts, when "strong horn-goring bulls, or immense bears,
+contend fiercely with dogs that are pitted against them."[177] In some
+towns the law required that bulls intended for the butcher-shop should
+first be baited for the amusement of the public before being led to
+the slaughter-house. Erasmus speaks of the "many herds of bears" which
+he saw in England "maintained for the purpose of baiting." The baiting
+was accomplished by tying the bulls or bears to stakes, or when
+possible releasing them in an amphitheatre, and pitting against them
+bull-dogs, bred through centuries for strength and ferocity.
+Occasionally other animals, as ponies and apes, were brought into the
+fight, and the sport was varied in miscellaneous ways. Some of the
+animals, by unusual courage or success, endeared themselves to the
+heart of the sporting public. Harry Hunks, George Stone, and Sacarson
+were famous bears in Shakespeare's time; and the names of many of the
+"game bulls" and "mastiff dogs" became household words throughout
+London.
+
+[Footnote 177: "Pingues tauri cornupetæ, seu vrsi immanes, cum
+obiectis depugnant canibus."]
+
+[Illustration: THE BANKSIDE
+
+Showing the Bear- and Bull-baiting Rings. (From the _Map of London_ by
+Braun and Hogenbergius, representing the city in 1554-1558.)]
+
+[Illustration: THE BANKSIDE
+
+This was the second district of London used for public playhouses.
+Notice the amphitheatres for animal-baiting. (From William Smith's MS.
+of the Description of England, _c._ 1580.)]
+
+The home of this popular sport was the Bankside. The earliest extant
+map of Southwark,[178] drawn about 1542, shows in the very centre of
+High Street, just opposite London Bridge, a circular amphitheatre
+marked "The Bull Ring"; and doubtless there were other places along
+the river devoted to the same purpose. The baiting of bears was more
+closely identified with the Manor of Paris Garden,[179] that section
+of the Bank lying to the west of the Clink, over towards the marshes
+of Lambeth. The association of bear-baiting with this particular
+section was probably due to the fact that in early days the butchers
+of London used a part of the Manor of Paris Garden for the disposal
+of their offal,[180] and the entrails and other refuse from the
+slaughtered beasts furnished cheap and abundant food for the bears and
+dogs. The Earl of Manchester wrote to the Lord Mayor and the Common
+Council, in 1664, that he had been informed by the master of His
+Majesty's Game of Bears and Bulls, and others, that "the Butcher's
+Company had formerly caused all their offal in Eastcheap and Newgate
+Market to be conveyed by the beadle of the Company unto two barrow
+houses, conveniently placed on the river side, for the provision and
+feeding of the King's Game of Bears."
+
+[Footnote 178: The map is reproduced in facsimile by Rendle as a
+frontispiece to _Old Southwark and its People_.]
+
+[Footnote 179: Or Parish Garden, possibly the more correct form. For
+the early history of the Manor see William Bray, _The History and
+Antiquities of the County of Surrey_, III, 530; Wallace, in _Englische
+Studien_ (1911), XLIII, 341, note 3; Ordish, _Early London Theatres_,
+p. 125.]
+
+[Footnote 180: Blount, in his _Glossographia_ (1681), p. 473, says of
+Paris Garden: "So called from Robert de Paris, who had a house and
+garden there in Richard II.'s time; who by proclamation, ordained that
+the butchers of London should buy that garden for receipt of their
+garbage and entrails of beasts, to the end the city might not be
+annoyed thereby."]
+
+[Illustration: THE BEAR- AND BULL-BAITING RINGS
+
+These "rings" later gave place to the Bear Garden. (From Agas's _Map
+of London_, representing the city as it was about 1560.)]
+
+At first, apparently, the baiting of bears was held in open
+places,[181] with the bear tied to a stake and the spectators crowding
+around, or at best standing on temporary scaffolds. But later,
+permanent amphitheatres were provided. In Braun and Hogenberg's _Map
+of London_, drawn between 1554 and 1558, and printed in 1572, we find
+two well-appointed amphitheatres, with stables and kennels attached,
+labeled respectively "The Bear Baiting" and "The Bull Baiting." When
+these amphitheatres were erected we do not know, but probably they do
+not antedate by much the middle of the century.[182]
+
+[Footnote 181: See Gilpin's _Life of Cranmer_ for a description of a
+bear-baiting before the King held on or near the river's edge. See
+also the proclamation of Henry VIII in 1546 against the stews, which
+implies the non-existence of regular amphitheatres.]
+
+[Footnote 182: Sir Sidney Lee (_Shakespeare's England_, II, 428) says
+that one of the amphitheatres was erected in 1526. I do not know his
+authority; he was apparently misled by one of Rendle's statements.
+Neither of the amphitheatres is shown in Wyngaerde's careful _Map of
+London_ made about 1530-1540; possibly they are referred to in the
+_Diary_ of Henry Machyn under the date of May 26, 1554. The old "Bull
+Ring" in High Street had then disappeared, and the baiting of bulls
+was henceforth more or less closely associated, as was natural, with
+the baiting of bears.]
+
+It is to be noted that at this time neither "The Bull Baiting" nor
+"The Bear Baiting" is in the Manor of Paris Garden, but close by in
+the Liberty of the Clink. Yet the name "Paris Garden" continued to be
+used of the animal-baiting place for a century and more. Possibly the
+identification of bear-baiting with Paris Garden was of such long
+standing that Londoners could not readily adjust themselves to the
+change; they at first confused the terms "Bear Garden" and "Paris
+Garden," and later extended the term "Paris Garden" to include that
+section of the Clink devoted to the baiting of animals.
+
+The two amphitheatres, it seems, were used until 1583, when a serious
+catastrophe put an end to one if not both of them. Stow, in his
+_Annals_, gives the following account of the accident:
+
+ The same thirteenth day of January, being Sunday, about four
+ of the clock in the afternoon, the old and underpropped
+ scaffolds round about the Bear Garden, commonly called Paris
+ Garden, on the south side of the river of Thamis over
+ against the city of London, overcharged with people, fell
+ suddenly down, whereby to the number of eight persons, men
+ and women, were slain, and many others sore hurt and bruised
+ to the shortening of their lives.[183]
+
+[Footnote 183: Stow, _Annals_ (ed. 1631), p. 696.]
+
+Stubbes, the Puritan, writes in his more heightened style:
+
+ Upon the 13 day of January last, being the Saboth day,
+ _Anno_ 1583, the people, men, women, and children, both
+ young and old, an infinite number, flocking to those
+ infamous places where these wicked exercises are usually
+ practised (for they have their courts, gardens, and yards
+ for the same purpose), when they were all come together and
+ mounted aloft upon their scaffolds and galleries, and in the
+ midst of all their jolity and pastime, all the whole
+ building (not one stick standing) fell down with a most
+ wonderful and fearful confusion. So that either two or three
+ hundred men, women, and children (by estimation), whereof
+ seven were killed dead, some were wounded, some lamed, and
+ otherwise bruised and crushed almost to death. Some had
+ their brains dashed out, some their heads all to-squashed,
+ some their legs broken, some their arms, some their backs,
+ some their shoulders, some one hurt, some another.[184]
+
+[Footnote 184: Philip Stubbes, _The Anatomie of Abuses_ (ed.
+Furnivall), p. 179.]
+
+The building, which the Reverend John Field described as "old and
+rotten,"[185] was a complete ruin; "not a stick was left so high as
+the bear was fastened to." The Puritan preachers loudly denounced the
+unholy spectacles, pointing to the catastrophe as a clear warning from
+the Almighty; and the city authorities earnestly besought the Privy
+Council to put an end to such performances. Yet the owners of the
+building set to work at once, and soon had erected a new house,
+stronger and larger and more pretentious than before. The Lord Mayor,
+in some indignation, wrote to the Privy Council on July 3, 1583, that
+"the scaffolds are new builded, and the multitudes on the Saboth day
+called together in most excessive number."[186]
+
+[Footnote 185: _A Godly Exhortation by Occasion of the Late Judgement
+of God, Shewed at Paris-Garden_ (London, 1583). Another account of the
+disaster may be found in Vaughan's _Golden Grove_ (1600).]
+
+[Footnote 186: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 65.]
+
+The New Bear Garden, octagonal in form, was probably modeled after the
+playhouses in Shoreditch, and made in all respects superior to the old
+amphitheatre which it supplanted.[187] We find that it was reckoned
+among the sights of the city, and was exhibited to distinguished
+foreign visitors. For example, when Sir Walter Raleigh undertook to
+entertain the French Ambassador, he carried him to view the monuments
+in Westminster Abbey and to see the new Bear Garden.
+
+[Footnote 187: What became of the other amphitheatre labeled "The Bull
+Baiting" I do not know. Stow, in his _Survey_, 1598, says: "Now to
+return to the west bank, there be two bear gardens, the old and new
+places, wherein be kept bears, bulls, and other beasts to be baited."]
+
+[Illustration: THE BEAR GARDEN
+
+From Visscher's _Map of London_, published in 1616, but representing
+the city as it was several years earlier.]
+
+A picture of the building is to be seen in the Hondius _View of
+London_, 1610 (see page 149), and in the small inset views from the
+title-pages of Holland's _Her[Greek: ô]ologia_, 1620, and Baker's
+_Chronicle_, 1643 (see page 147), all three of which probably go back
+to a view of London made between 1587 and 1597, and now lost. Another
+representation of the structure is to be seen in the Delaram portrait
+of King James, along with the Rose and the Globe (see opposite page
+246). The best representation of the building, however, is in
+Visscher's _View of London_ (see page 127), printed in 1616, but drawn
+several years earlier.[188]
+
+[Footnote 188: For a fuller discussion of these various maps and views
+see pages 146, 248, and 328. Norden's map of 1594 (see page 147)
+merely indicates the site of the building.]
+
+Although we are not directly concerned with the history of the Bear
+Garden,[189] a few descriptions of "the royal game of bears, bulls,
+and dogs" drawn from contemporary sources will be of interest and of
+specific value for the discussion of the Hope Playhouse--itself both a
+bear garden and a theatre.
+
+[Footnote 189: For such a history the reader is referred to Ordish,
+_Early London Theatres_; Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, II, and _Henslowe
+Papers_; Young, _The History of Dulwich College_; Rendle, _The
+Bankside_, and _The Playhouses at Bankside_.]
+
+Robert Laneham, in his _Description of the Entertainment at
+Kenilworth_ (1575), writes thus of a baiting of bears before the
+Queen:
+
+ Well, syr, the Bearz wear brought foorth intoo the Coourt,
+ the dogs set too them.... It was a Sport very pleazaunt of
+ theez beastz; to see the bear with his pink nyez leering
+ after hiz enemiez approoch, the nimbleness & wayt of ye dog
+ to take his auauntage, and the fors & experiens of the bear
+ agayn to auoyd the assauts: if he war bitten in one place,
+ how he woold pynch in an oother to get free: that if he wear
+ taken onez, then what shyft, with byting, with clawing, with
+ rooring, tossing, & tumbling he woold woork to wynd hym self
+ from them: and when he waz lose, to shake his earz tywse or
+ thryse, wyth the blud and the slauer aboout his fiznomy, waz
+ a matter of a goodly releef.
+
+John Houghton, in his _Collection for Improvement of Husbandry and
+Trade_,[190] gives a vivid account of the baiting of the bull. He
+says:
+
+ The bull takes great care to watch his enemy, which is a
+ mastiff dog (commonly used to the sport) with a short nose
+ that his teeth may take the better hold; this dog, if right,
+ will creep upon his belly that he may, if possible, get the
+ bull by the nose; which the bull as carefully strives to
+ defend by laying it close to the ground, where his horns are
+ also ready to do what in them lies to toss the dog; and this
+ is the true sport. But if more dogs than one come at once,
+ or they are cowardly and come under his legs, he will, if he
+ can, stamp their guts out. I believe I have seen a dog
+ tossed by a bull thirty, if not forty foot high; and when
+ they are tossed, either higher or lower, the men above
+ strive to catch them on their shoulders, lest the fall might
+ mischief the dogs. They commonly lay sand about that if they
+ fall upon the ground it may be the easier. Notwithstanding
+ this care a great many dogs are killed, more have their
+ limbs broke, and some hold so fast that, by the bull's
+ swinging them, their teeth are often broken out.... The true
+ courage and art is to hold the bull by the nose 'till he
+ roars, which a courageous bull scorns to do.... This is a
+ sport the English much delight in; and not only the baser
+ sort, but the greatest lords and ladies.
+
+[Footnote 190: No. 108, August, 1694. Quoted by J.P. Malcolm,
+_Anecdotes of the Manners and Customs of London from the Roman
+Invasion to the Year 1700_ (London, 1811), p. 433.]
+
+An attendant upon the Duke of Nexara, who visited England in 1544,
+wrote the following account of a bear-baiting witnessed in London:
+
+ In another part of the city we saw seven bears, some of them
+ of great size. They were led out every day to an enclosure,
+ where being tied with a long rope, large and intrepid dogs
+ are thrown to them, in order that they may bite and make
+ them furious. It is no bad sport to see them fight, and the
+ assaults they give each other. To each of the large bears
+ are matched three or four dogs, which sometimes get the
+ better and sometimes are worsted, for besides the fierceness
+ and great strength of the bears to defend themselves with
+ their teeth, they hug the dogs with their paws so tightly,
+ that, unless the masters came to assist them, they would be
+ strangled by such soft embraces. Into the same place they
+ brought a pony with an ape fastened on its back, and to see
+ the animal kicking amongst the dogs, with the screams of the
+ ape, beholding the curs hanging from the ears and neck of
+ the pony, is very laughable.[191]
+
+[Footnote 191: The original manuscript of this narrative, in Spanish,
+is preserved in the British Museum. I quote the translation by
+Frederick Madden, in _Archæologia_, XIII, 354-55.]
+
+Orazio Busino, the chaplain of the Venetian Embassy in London, writes
+in his _Anglipotrida_ (1618):
+
+ The dogs are detached from the bear by inserting between the
+ teeth ... certain iron spattles with a wooden handle; whilst
+ they take them off the bull (keeping at a greater distance)
+ with certain flat iron hooks which they apply to the thighs
+ or even to the neck of the dog, whose tail is simultaneously
+ dexterously seized by another of these rufflers. The bull
+ can hardly get at anybody, as he wears a collar round his
+ neck with only fifteen feet of rope, which is fastened to a
+ stake deeply planted in the middle of the theatre. Other
+ rufflers are at hand with long poles to put under the dog so
+ as to break his fall after he has been tossed by the bull;
+ the tips of these [poles] are covered with thick leather to
+ prevent them from disembowelling the dogs. The most spirited
+ stroke is considered to be that of the dog who seizes the
+ bull's lip, clinging to it and pinning the animal for some
+ time; the second best hit is to seize the eyebrows; the
+ third, but far inferior, consists in seizing the bull's
+ ear.[192]
+
+[Footnote 192: _The Calendar of State Papers_, Venetian, XV, 258.]
+
+Paul Hentzner, the German traveler who visited London in 1598, wrote
+thus of the Bear Garden:
+
+ There is still another place, built in the form of a
+ theatre, which serves for the baiting of bulls and bears;
+ they are fastened behind, and then worried by great English
+ bull-dogs, but not without great risk to the dogs, from the
+ horns of the one, and the teeth of the other; and it
+ sometimes happens they are killed upon the spot; fresh ones
+ are immediately supplied in the places of those that are
+ wounded or tired. To this entertainment there often follows
+ that of whipping a blinded bear, which is performed by five
+ or six men standing circularly with whips, which they
+ exercise upon him without any mercy, as he cannot escape
+ from them because of his chain; he defends himself with all
+ his force and skill, throwing down all who come within his
+ reach, and are not active enough to get out of it, and
+ tearing the whips out of their hands and breaking them.
+
+The following passage is taken from the diary of the Duke of
+Wirtemberg (who visited London in 1592), "noted down daily in the most
+concise manner possible, at his Highness's gracious command, by his
+private secretary":[193]
+
+ On the 1st of September his Highness was shown in London the
+ English dogs, of which there were about 120, all kept in the
+ same enclosure, but each in separate kennel. In order to
+ gratify his Highness, and at his desire, two bears and a
+ bull were baited; at such times you can perceive the breed
+ and mettle of the dogs, for although they receive serious
+ injuries from the bears, and are caught by the horns of the
+ bull and tossed into the air so as frequently to fall down
+ again upon the horns, they do not give in, [but fasten on
+ the bull so firmly] that one is obliged to pull them back by
+ the tails and force open their jaws. Four dogs at once were
+ set on the bull; they however could not gain any advantage
+ over him, for he so artfully contrived to ward off their
+ attacks that they could not well get at him; on the
+ contrary, the bull served them very scurvily by striking and
+ beating at them.
+
+[Footnote 193: The secretary was named Jacob Rathgeb, and the diary
+was published at Tübingen in 1602 with a long title beginning: _A True
+and Faithful Narrative of the Bathing Excursion which His Serene
+Highness_, etc. A translation will be found in Rye, _England as Seen
+by Foreigners_, pp. 3-53.]
+
+The following is a letter from one William Faunte to Edward Alleyn,
+then proprietor of the Bear Garden, regarding the sale of some game
+bulls:
+
+ I understood by a man which came with two bears from the
+ garden, that you have a desire to buy one of my bulls. I
+ have three western bulls at this time, but I have had very
+ ill luck with them, for one of them hath lost his horn to
+ the quick, that I think he will never be able to fight
+ again; that is my old Star of the West: he was a very easy
+ bull. And my bull Bevis, he hath lost one of his eyes, but I
+ think if you had him he would do you more hurt than good,
+ for I protest I think he would either throw up your dogs
+ into the lofts, or else ding out their brains against the
+ grates.[194]
+
+[Footnote 194: Collier, _The Alleyn Papers_, p. 31.]
+
+Finally, among the Alleyn papers of Dulwich College is an interesting
+bill, or advertisement, of an afternoon's performance at the Bear
+Garden:
+
+ To-morrow being Thursday shall be seen at the Bear Garden on
+ the Bankside a great match played by the gamesters of Essex,
+ who hath challenged all comers whatsoever to play five dogs
+ at the single bear for five pounds, and also to weary a bull
+ dead at the stake; and for your better content [you] shall
+ have pleasant sport with the horse and ape and whipping of
+ the blind bear. _Vivat Rex!_
+
+In 1613 the Bear Garden was torn down, and a new and handsomer
+structure erected in its place. For the history of this building the
+reader is referred to the chapter on "The Hope."
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+NEWINGTON BUTTS
+
+
+The Bankside, as the preceding chapter indicates, offered unusual
+attractions to the actors. It had, indeed, long been associated with
+the drama: in 1545 King Henry VIII, in a proclamation against
+vagabonds, players,[195] etc., noted their "fashions commonly used at
+the Bank, and such like naughty places, where they much haunt"; and in
+1547 the Bishop of Winchester made complaint that at a time when he
+intended to have a dirge and mass for the late King, the actors in
+Southwark planned to exhibit "a solemn play, to try who shall have the
+most resort, they in game or I in earnest."[196] The players,
+therefore, were no strangers to "the Bank." And when later in the
+century the hostility of the Common Council drove them to seek homes
+in localities not under the jurisdiction of the city, the suburb
+across the river offered them a suitable refuge. For, although a large
+portion of Southwark was under the jurisdiction of London, certain
+parts were not, notably the Liberty of the Clink and the Manor of
+Paris Garden, two sections bordering the river's edge, and the
+district of Newington lying farther back to the southwest. In these
+places the actors could erect their houses and entertain the public
+without fear of the ordinances of the Corporation, and without danger
+of interruption by puritanical Lord Mayors.
+
+[Footnote 195: It is just possible--but, I think, improbable--that the
+term "common players" as used in this proclamation referred to
+gamblers. The term is regularly used in law to designate actors.]
+
+[Footnote 196: _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1547_,
+February 5, p. 1; cf. Tytler's _Edward VI and Mary_, I, 20.]
+
+Yet, as we have seen, the first public playhouses were erected not on
+the Bankside--a "naughty" place,--but near Finsbury Field to the north
+of the city; and the reasons which led to the selection of such a
+quiet and respectable district have been pointed out.[197] It was
+inevitable, however, that sooner or later a playhouse should make its
+appearance in the region to the south of the city. And at an early
+date--how early it is impossible to say, but probably not long after
+the erection of the Theatre and the Curtain--there appeared in
+Southwark a building specially devoted to the use of players. Whether
+it was a new structure modeled after the theatres of Shoreditch, or
+merely an old building converted into a playhouse, we cannot say. It
+seems to have been something more than an inn-yard fitted up for
+dramatic purposes, and yet something less than the "sumptuous theatre
+houses" erected "on purpose" for plays to the north of the city.
+
+[Footnote 197: See page 29.]
+
+Whatever the building was, it was situated at Newington Butts (a
+place so called from the butts for archery anciently erected there),
+and, unfortunately, at a considerable distance from the river. Exactly
+how far playgoers from London had to walk to reach the theatre after
+crossing over the river we do not know; but the Privy Council speaks
+of "the tediousness of the way" thither,[198] and Stow notes that the
+parish church of Newington was "distant one mile from London Bridge."
+Further information about the building--its exact situation, its size,
+its exterior shape, its interior arrangement, and such-like
+details--is wholly lacking.
+
+[Footnote 198: The Council again refers to the building in the phrase
+"in any of these remote places." (Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_,
+XII, 15.)]
+
+Nor are we much better off in regard to its ownership, management, and
+general history. This seems to be due to the fact that it was not
+intimately associated with any of the more important London troupes;
+and to the fact that after a few unsuccessful years it ceased to
+exist. Below I have recorded the few and scattered references which
+constitute our meagre knowledge of its history.
+
+The first passage cited may refer to the playhouse at Newington Butts.
+It is an order of the Privy Council, May 13, 1580, thus summarized by
+the clerk:
+
+ A letter to the Justices of Peace of the County of Surrey,
+ that whereas their Lordships do understand that
+ notwithstanding their late order given to the Lord Mayor to
+ forbid all plays within and about the city until Michaelmas
+ next for avoiding of infection, nevertheless certain players
+ do play sundry days every week at Newington Butts in that
+ part of Surrey without the jurisdiction of the said Lord
+ Mayor, contrary to their Lordship's order; their Lordships
+ require the Justices not only to inquire who they be that
+ disobey their commandment in that behalf, and not only to
+ forbid them expressly for playing in any of these remote
+ places near unto the city until Michaelmas, but to have
+ regard that within the precinct of Surrey none be permitted
+ to play; if any do, to commit them and to advertise them,
+ &c.[199]
+
+[Footnote 199: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XII, 15.]
+
+The next passage clearly refers to "the theatre" at Newington Butts.
+On May 11, 1586, the Privy Council dispatched a letter to the Lord
+Mayor, which the clerk thus summarized:
+
+ A letter to the Lord Mayor: his Lordship is desired,
+ according to his request made to their Lordships by his
+ letters of the vii th of this present, to give order for the
+ restraining of plays and interludes within and about the
+ city of London, for the avoiding of infection feared to grow
+ and increase this time of summer by the common assemblies of
+ people at those places; and that their Lordships have taken
+ the like order for the prohibiting of the use of plays at
+ the theatre, and the other places about Newington, out of
+ his charge.[200]
+
+[Footnote 200: _Ibid._, XIV, 102.]
+
+Chalmers[201] thought the word "theatre" was used of the Newington
+Playhouse, and for this he was taken to task by Collier,[202] who
+says: "He confounds it with the playhouse emphatically called 'the
+Theatre' in Shoreditch; and on consulting the Register, we find that
+no such playhouse as the Newington Theatre is there spoken of." But
+Chalmers was right; for if we consult the "Registers" we find the
+following letter, dispatched to the Justices of Surrey on the very
+same day that the letter just quoted was sent to the Lord Mayor:
+
+ A letter to the Justices of Surrey, that according to such
+ direction as hath been given by their Lordships to the Lord
+ Mayor to restrain and inhibit the use of plays and
+ interludes in public places in and about the City of London,
+ in respect of the heat of the year now drawing on, for the
+ avoiding of the infection like to grow and increase by the
+ ordinary assemblies of the people to those places, they are
+ also required in like sort to take order that the plays and
+ assemblies of the people at the theatre or any other places
+ about Newington be forthwith restrained and forborn as
+ aforesaid, &c.[203]
+
+[Footnote 201: _Apology_, p. 403.]
+
+[Footnote 202: _History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), III, 131.]
+
+[Footnote 203: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XIV, 99.]
+
+The phrase, "the theatre or any other places about Newington," when
+addressed to the "Justices of the Peace of Surrey" could refer only to
+the Newington Butts Playhouse.
+
+On June 23, 1592, because of a riot in Southwark, the Privy Council
+closed all the playhouses in and about London.[204] Shortly after this
+the Lord Strange's Men, who were then occupying the Rose, petitioned
+the Council to be allowed to resume acting in their playhouse. The
+Council granted them instead permission to act three times a week at
+Newington Butts; but the players, not relishing this proposal, chose
+rather to travel in the provinces. Soon finding that they could not
+make their expenses in the country, they returned to London, and again
+appealed to the Privy Council to be allowed to perform at the
+Rose.[205] The warrant issued by the Council in reply to this second
+petition tells us for the first time something definite about the
+Newington Butts Theatre:
+
+ To the Justices, Bailiffs, Constables, and Others to Whom it
+ Shall Appertain:
+
+ Whereas not long since, upon some considerations, we did
+ restrain the Lord Strange his servants from playing at the
+ Rose on the Bankside, and enjoyned them to play three days
+ [a week] at Newington Butts; now forasmuch as we are
+ satisfied that by reason of the tediousness of the way, and
+ that of long time plays have not there been used on working
+ days, and for that a number of poor watermen are thereby
+ relieved, you shall permit and suffer them, or any other,
+ there [at the Rose] to exercise themselves in such sort as
+ they have done heretofore, and that the Rose may be at
+ liberty without any restraint so long as it shall be free
+ from infection, any commandment from us heretofore to the
+ contrary notwithstanding.[206]
+
+[Footnote 204: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, II, 50, 73.]
+
+[Footnote 205: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 42.]
+
+[Footnote 206: _Ibid._, pp. 43-44.]
+
+From this warrant we learn that so early as 1592 the Newington house
+was almost deserted, and that "of long time" plays had been given
+there only occasionally.
+
+Two years later, on June 3, 1594, Henslowe sent the Admiral's and the
+Chamberlain's Men to play temporarily at the half-deserted old
+playhouse, probably in order to give opportunity for needed repairs at
+the Rose.[207] The section of his _Diary_, under the heading, "In the
+name of god Amen begininge at newington my Lord Admeralle men & my
+Lord Chamberlen men As followethe 1594," constitutes the fullest and
+clearest--and, one may add, the most illustrious--chapter in the
+history of this obscure building; for although it extends over only
+ten days, it tells us that Edward Alleyn, Richard Burbage, and William
+Shakespeare then trod the Newington stage, and it records the
+performance there of such plays as _The Jew of Malta_, _Andronicus_,
+_The Taming of a Shrew_, and _Hamlet_.
+
+[Footnote 207: There is no evidence that Henslowe owned the house at
+Newington; he might very well have rented it for this particular
+occasion.]
+
+We next hear of the building near the end of the century: in 1599,
+says Mr. Wallace, it was "only a memory, as shown by a contemporary
+record to be published later."[208]
+
+[Footnote 208: Wallace, _The First London Theatre_, p. 2.]
+
+Two other references close the history. In _A Woman is a Weathercock_,
+III, iii, printed in 1612, but written earlier, one of the actors
+exclaims of an insufferable pun: "O Newington Conceit!" The fact that
+this sneer is the only reference to the Newington Playhouse found in
+contemporary literature is a commentary on the low esteem in which the
+building was held by the Elizabethans, and its relative unimportance
+for the history of the drama.
+
+The last notice is in Howe's continuation of Stow's _Annals_
+(1631).[209] After enumerating all the theatres built in London and
+the suburbs "within the space of three-score years," he adds vaguely,
+"besides one in former time at Newington Butts."
+
+[Footnote 209: Page 1004.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+THE ROSE
+
+
+Doubtless one reason for the obscure rôle which the theatre at
+Newington played in the history of the drama was "the tediousness of
+the way" thither. The Rose, the second theatre to make its appearance
+in Surrey, was much more conveniently situated with respect to the
+city, for it was erected in the Liberty of the Clink and very near the
+river's edge. As a result, it quickly attained popularity with London
+playgoers, and before the end of the century had caused the centre of
+dramatic activity to be shifted from Finsbury Field to the Bank.
+
+The builder of the Rose was one Philip Henslowe, then, so far as our
+evidence goes, unknown to the dramatic world, but destined soon to
+become the greatest theatrical proprietor and manager of the
+Tudor-Stuart age. We find him living on the Bankside and in the
+Liberty of the Clink at least as early as 1577. At first, so we are
+told, he was "but a poor man," described as "servant ... unto one Mr.
+Woodward." Upon the death of his employer, Woodward, he married the
+widow, Agnes Woodward, and thus came into the possession of
+considerable property. "All his wealth came by her," swore the
+charwoman Joan Horton. This, however, simply means that Henslowe
+obtained his original capital by his marriage; for, although very
+illiterate, he was shrewd in handling money, and he quickly amassed
+"his wealth" through innumerable business ventures.
+
+As one of these ventures, no doubt, he leased from the Parish of St.
+Mildred, on March 24, 1585, a small piece of property on the Bankside
+known as "The Little Rose." "Among the early surveys, 1 Edward VI,"
+says Rendle, "we see that this was not merely a name--the place was a
+veritable Rose Garden."[210] At the time of the lease the property is
+described as consisting of a dwelling-house called "The Rose," "two
+gardens adjoining the same" consisting of "void ground," and at least
+one other small building. The dwelling-house Henslowe probably leased
+as a brothel--for this was the district of the stews; and the small
+building mentioned above, situated at the south end of one of the
+gardens, he let to a London grocer named John Cholmley, who used it
+"to keep victualing in."[211]
+
+[Footnote 210: W. Rendle, in _The Antiquarian Magazine and
+Bibliographer_, VIII, 60.]
+
+[Footnote 211: For the earlier history of the Rose estate see Rendle,
+_The Bankside_, p. xv, and Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, II, 43. "The plan
+of the Rose estate in the vestry of St. Mildred's Church in London
+marks the estate exactly, but not the precise site of the Rose
+Playhouse. The estate consisted of three rods, and was east of Rose
+Alley." (Rendle, _The Bankside_, p. xxx.)]
+
+Not satisfied, however, with the income from these two buildings,
+Henslowe a year and a half later was planning to utilize a part of the
+"void ground" for the erection of a theatre. What interested him in
+the drama we do not know, but we may suppose that the same reason
+which led Burbage, Brayne, Lanman, and others to build playhouses
+influenced him, namely, the prospect of "great gains to ensue
+therefrom."[212]
+
+[Footnote 212: Possibly the fact that Burbage had just secured control
+of the Curtain, and hence had a monopoly of playhouses, was one of the
+reasons for a new playhouse.]
+
+For the site of his proposed playhouse he allotted a small parcel of
+ground ninety-four feet square and lying in the corner formed by Rose
+Alley and Maiden Lane (see page 245). Then he interested in the
+enterprise his tenant Cholmley, for, it seems, he did not wish to
+undertake so expensive and precarious a venture without sharing the
+risk with another. On January 10, 1587, he and Cholmley signed a
+formal deed of partnership, according to which the playhouse was to be
+erected at once and at the sole cost of Henslowe; Cholmley, however,
+was to have from the beginning a half-interest in the building, paying
+for his share by installments of £25 10_s._ a quarter for a period of
+eight years and three months.[213] The total sum to be paid by
+Cholmley, £816, possibly represents the estimated cost of the
+building and its full equipment, plus rental on the land.
+
+[Footnote 213: The deed of partnership is preserved among the Henslowe
+papers at Dulwich College. For an abstract of the deed see Greg,
+_Henslowe Papers_, p. 2. Henslowe seems to have driven a good bargain
+with Cholmley.]
+
+The building is referred to in the deed of January 10 as "a playhouse
+now in framing and shortly to be erected and set up." Doubtless it was
+ready for occupancy early in the summer. That performances were given
+there before the close of the year is at least indicated by an order
+of the Privy Council dated October 29, 1587:
+
+ A letter to the Justices of Surrey, that whereas the
+ inhabitants of Southwark had complained unto their Lordships
+ declaring that the order by their Lordships set down for the
+ restraining of plays and interludes within that county on
+ the Sabbath Days is not observed, and especially within the
+ Liberty of the Clink, and in the Parish of St.
+ Saviours....[214]
+
+[Footnote 214: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XV, 271.]
+
+The Rose was in "the Liberty of the Clink and in the Parish of St.
+Saviours," and so far as we have any evidence it was the only place
+there devoted to plays. Moreover, a distinct reference to it by name
+appears in the Sewer Records in April, 1588, at which date the
+building is described as "new."[215]
+
+[Footnote 215: Discovered by Mr. Wallace and printed in the London
+_Times_, April 30, 1914.]
+
+In Norden's _Map of London_ (1593), the Rose and the adjacent Bear
+Garden are correctly placed with respect to each other, but are
+crudely drawn (see page 147). The representation of both as
+circular--the Bear Garden, we know, was polygonal--was due merely to
+this crudeness; yet the Rose seems to have been indeed circular in
+shape, "the Bankside's round-house" referred to in _Tom Tell Troth's
+Message_. The building is so pictured in the Hondius map of 1610 (see
+page 149), and in the inset maps on the title-pages of Holland's
+_Her[Greek: ô]ologia_, 1620, and Baker's _Chronicle_, 1643 (see page
+147), all three of which apparently go back to an early map of London
+now lost. The building is again pictured as circular, with the Bear
+Garden at the left and the Globe at the right, in the Delaram portrait
+of King James (opposite page 246).[216]
+
+[Footnote 216: The circular building pictured in these maps has been
+widely heralded as the First Globe, but without reason; all the
+evidence shows that it was the Rose. For further discussion see the
+chapters dealing with the Bear Garden, the Globe, and the Hope. In the
+Merian _View_, issued in Frankfort in 1638, the Bear Garden and the
+Globe, each named, are shown conspicuously in the foreground; in the
+background is vaguely represented an unnamed playhouse polygonal in
+shape. This could not possibly be the Rose. Merian's _View_ was a
+compilation from Visscher's _View_ of 1616 and some other view of
+London not yet identified; it has no independent authority, and no
+value whatever so far as the Rose is concerned.]
+
+From Henslowe's _Diary_ we learn that the playhouse was of timber, the
+exterior of lath and plaster, the roof of thatch; and that it had a
+yard, galleries, a stage, a tiring-house, heavens, and a flagpole.
+Thus it differed in no essential way from the playhouses already
+erected in Shoreditch or subsequently erected on the Bank.[217]
+
+[Footnote 217: If we may believe Johannes de Witt, the Rose was "more
+magnificent" than the theatres in Shoreditch. See page 167.]
+
+[Illustration: THE BEAR GARDEN AND THE ROSE
+
+The upper view, from Norden's _Map of London_, 1593, shows the
+relative position of the Bear Garden and Rose. The lower view, an
+inset from the title-page of Baker's _Chronicle_, 1643, also shows the
+relative position, and gives a more detailed picture of the two
+structures. The Bear Garden is represented as polygonal, the Rose as
+circular.]
+
+What troupes of actors used the Rose during the first five years of
+its existence we do not know; indeed, until 1592 we hear nothing
+further of the playhouse. As a result, some scholars have wrongly
+inferred that the building was not erected until the spring of
+1592.[218] It seems likely, as Mr. Greg suggests, that Henslowe and
+Cholmley let the house to some company of players at a stipulated
+annual rent, and so had nothing to do with the management of its
+finances. This would explain the complete absence of references to the
+playhouse in Henslowe's accounts.
+
+[Footnote 218: Ordish, _Early London Theatres_, p. 155; Mantzius, _A
+History of Theatrical Art_, p. 58. Mr. Wallace's discovery of a
+reference to the Rose in the Sewer Records for April, 1588, quite
+overthrows this hypothesis.]
+
+During this obscure period of five years Cholmley disappears from the
+history of the Rose. It may be that he withdrew from the undertaking
+at the outset;[219] it may be that he failed to meet his payments, and
+so forfeited his moiety; or it may be that, becoming dissatisfied with
+his bargain, he sold out to Henslowe. Whatever the cause, his interest
+in the playhouse passed over to Henslowe, who appears henceforth as
+the sole proprietor.
+
+[Footnote 219: This seems unlikely. At the beginning of Henslowe's
+_Diary_ we find the scrawl "Chomley when" (Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_ I,
+217); this was written not earlier than 1592, and it shows that
+Cholmley was at that time in Henslowe's mind.]
+
+[Illustration: THE BEAR GARDEN AND THE ROSE
+
+A small inset view of London, from the map entitled "The Kingdome of
+Great Britaine and Ireland," printed in Speed's _Atlas_ (1611). The
+map is dated 1610, but the inset view of London was copied, like the
+inset views to Baker's _Chronicle_ (1643) and to Holland's _Her[Greek:
+ô]ologia_ (1620), from a lost map of London drawn about 1589-1599.]
+
+In the spring of 1592 the building was in need of repairs, and
+Henslowe spent a large sum of money in thoroughly overhauling it.[220]
+The lathing and plastering of the exterior were done over, the roof
+was re-thatched, new rafters were put in, and much heavy timber was
+used, indicating important structural alterations. In addition, the
+stage was painted, the lord's room and the tiring-house were provided
+with ceilings, a new flagpole was erected, and other improvements were
+introduced. Clearly an attempt was made to render the building not
+only stronger, but also more attractive in appearance and more modern
+in equipment.
+
+[Footnote 220: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 7.]
+
+The immediate occasion for these extensive alterations and repairs was
+the engagement of Lord Strange's Men to occupy the playhouse under
+Henslowe's management. This excellent troupe, with Edward Alleyn at
+its head, was perhaps the best company of actors then in London. It
+later became the Lord Chamberlain's Company, with which Shakespeare
+was identified; even at this early date, although documentary proof is
+lacking, he may have been numbered among its obscure members. The
+troupe opened the Rose on February 19, 1592, with a performance of
+Robert Greene's _Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay_, and followed this with
+many famous plays, such as _The Spanish Tragedy_, _The Jew of Malta_,
+_Orlando Furioso_, and _Henry VI_.[221]
+
+[Footnote 221: For a list of their plays see Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_,
+I, 13 ff.]
+
+The coming of Lord Strange's Men to the Rose led to a close friendship
+between Henslowe and Edward Alleyn, then twenty-six years of age, and
+at the height of his fame as an actor, a friendship which was cemented
+in the autumn by Alleyn's marriage to Henslowe's stepdaughter (and
+only child) Joan Woodward. The two men, it seems, were thoroughly
+congenial, and their common interests led to the formation of a
+business partnership which soon became the most important single force
+in the theatrical life of the time.
+
+Lord Strange's Men continued to act at the Rose from February 19 until
+June 23, 1592, when the Privy Council, because of a serious riot in
+Southwark, ordered the closing of all playhouses in and about London
+until Michaelmas following. Strange's Men very soon petitioned the
+Council to be allowed to reopen their playhouse; the Council, in
+reply, compromised by granting them permission to act three days a
+week at Newington Butts. This, however, did not please the actors, and
+they started on a tour of the provinces. In a short time, discovering
+that they could not pay their expenses on the road, they again
+petitioned for permission to open the Rose, complaining that "our
+company is great, and thereby our charge intolerable in traveling the
+country," and calling attention to the fact that "the use of our
+playhouse on the Bankside, by reason of the passage to and from the
+same by water, is a great relief to the poor watermen there."[222] The
+petition was accompanied by a supporting petition from the watermen
+asking the Council "for God's sake and in the way of charity to
+respect us your poor watermen." As a result of these petitions the
+Council gave permission, probably late in August, 1592, for the
+reopening of the playhouse.[223] But before Strange's Men could take
+advantage of this permission, a severe outbreak of the plague caused a
+general inhibition of acting, and not until December 29, 1592, were
+they able to resume their performances at the Rose. A month later the
+plague broke out again with unusual severity, and on February 1, 1593,
+playing was again inhibited. The year rapidly developed into one of
+the worst plague-years in the history of the city; between ten and
+fifteen thousand persons died of the epidemic, and most of the London
+companies, including Strange's Men, went on an extended tour of the
+country.
+
+[Footnote 222: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 42.]
+
+[Footnote 223: See Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 43. For a general
+discussion of various problems involved, see Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_,
+II, 51-2.]
+
+Near the close of the year, and while Strange's Men were still
+traveling, the plague temporarily subsided, and Sussex's Men, who were
+then in London, secured the use of the Rose. They began to act there
+on December 27, 1593; but on February 6, 1594, the plague having again
+become threatening, acting was once more inhibited. This brief
+occupation of the Rose by Sussex's Men was notable only for the first
+performance of _Titus Andronicus_.[224]
+
+[Footnote 224: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 16.]
+
+[Illustration: JOAN WOODWARD ALLEYN
+
+The stepdaughter and only child of Philip Henslowe, whose marriage to
+the great actor Edward Alleyn led to the Henslowe-Alleyn theatrical
+enterprises. The portrait is here reproduced for the first time. (From
+the Dulwich Picture Gallery, by permission.)]
+
+At Easter, April 1, Strange's Men being still absent, Henslowe allowed
+the Rose to be used for eight days by "the Queen's Men and my Lord of
+Sussex's together." This second brief chapter in the long and varied
+history of the playhouse is interesting only for two performances of
+the old _King Leir_.[225]
+
+[Footnote 225: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 17.]
+
+As a result of the severe plague and the long continued inhibition of
+acting, there was a general confusion and subsequent reorganization of
+the various London troupes. The Admiral's Men, who had been dispersed
+in 1591, some joining Strange's Men, some going to travel in Germany,
+were brought together again; and Edward Alleyn, who had formerly been
+their leader, and who even after he became one of Strange's Men
+continued to describe himself as "servant to the right honorable the
+Lord Admiral,"[226] was induced to rejoin them. Alleyn thereupon
+brought them to the Rose, where they began to perform on May 14, 1594.
+After three days, however, they ceased, probably to allow Henslowe to
+make repairs or improvements on the building.
+
+[Footnote 226: He is so described, for example, in the warrant issued
+by the Privy Council on May 6, 1593, to Strange's Men.]
+
+Strange's Men also had undergone reorganization. On April 16, 1594,
+they lost by death their patron, the Earl of Derby. Shortly afterwards
+they secured the patronage of the Lord Chamberlain, and before June
+3, 1594, they had arrived in London and reported to their former
+manager, Henslowe.
+
+At this time, apparently, the Rose was still undergoing repairs; so
+Henslowe sent both the Admiral's and the Chamberlain's Men to act at
+Newington Butts, where they remained from June 3 to June 13, 1594. On
+June 15 the Admiral's Men moved back to the Rose, which henceforth
+they occupied alone; and the Chamberlain's Men, thus robbed of their
+playhouse, went to the Theatre in Shoreditch.
+
+During the period of Lent, 1595, Henslowe took occasion to make
+further repairs on his playhouse, putting in new pales, patching the
+exterior with new lath and plaster, repainting the woodwork, and
+otherwise furbishing up the building. The total cost of this work was
+£108 10_s._ And shortly after, as a part of these improvements, no
+doubt, he paid £7 2_s._ for "making the throne in the heavens."[227]
+
+[Footnote 227: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 4.]
+
+Near the close of July, 1597, Pembroke's Men at the Swan acted Nashe's
+satirical play, _The Isle of Dogs_, containing, it seems, a burlesque
+on certain persons high in authority. As a result the Privy Council on
+July 28 ordered all acting in and about London to cease until November
+1, and all public playhouses to be plucked down and ruined.[228]
+
+[Footnote 228: For the details of this episode see the chapter on the
+Swan.]
+
+The latter part of the order, happily, was not put into effect, and on
+October 11 the Rose was allowed to open again. The Privy Council,
+however, punished the Swan and Pembroke's Company by ordering that
+only the Admiral's Men at the Rose and the Chamberlain's Men at the
+Curtain should henceforth be "allowed." As a consequence of this
+trouble with the authorities the best actors of Pembroke's Company
+joined the Admiral's Men under Henslowe. This explains the entry in
+the _Diary_: "In the name of God, amen. The xi of October began my
+Lord Admiral's and my Lord Pembroke's Men to play at my house,
+1597."[229] The two companies were very soon amalgamated, and the
+strong troupe thus formed continued to act at the Rose under the name
+of the Admiral's Men.
+
+[Footnote 229: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 54.]
+
+The Chamberlain's Men, who in 1594 had been forced to surrender the
+Rose to the Admiral's Men and move to the Theatre, and who in 1597 had
+been driven from the Theatre to the Curtain, at last, in 1599, built
+for themselves a permanent home, the Globe, situated on the Bankside
+and close to the Rose. Henslowe's ancient structure[230] was eclipsed
+by this new and handsome building, "the glory of the Bank"; and the
+Admiral's Men, no doubt, felt themselves placed at a serious
+disadvantage. As a result, in the spring of 1600, Henslowe and Alleyn
+began the erection of a splendid new playhouse, the Fortune, designed
+to surpass the Globe in magnificence, and to furnish a suitable and
+permanent home for the Admiral's Men. The building was situated in the
+suburb to the north of the city, far away from the Bankside and the
+Globe.
+
+[Footnote 230: In January, 1600, the Earl of Nottingham refers to "the
+dangerous decay" of the Rose. See Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 45; cf.
+p. 52.]
+
+The erection of this handsome new playhouse led to violent outbursts
+from the Puritans, and vigorous protests from the city fathers.
+Accordingly the Privy Council on June 22, 1600, issued the following
+order:[231]
+
+ Whereas divers complaints have heretofore been made unto the
+ Lords and other of Her Majesty's Privy Council of the
+ manifold abuses and disorders that have grown and do
+ continue by occasion of many houses erected and employed in
+ and about London for common stage-plays; and now very lately
+ by reason of some complaint exhibited by sundry persons
+ against the building of the like house [the Fortune] in or
+ near Golding Lane ... the Lords and the rest of Her
+ Majesty's Privy Council with one and full consent have
+ ordered in manner and form as follows. First, that there
+ shall be about the city two houses, and no more, allowed to
+ serve for the use of the common stage-plays; of the which
+ houses, one [the Globe] shall be in Surrey, in that place
+ which is commonly called the Bankside, or thereabouts; and
+ the other [the Fortune], in Middlesex.
+
+[Footnote 231: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXX, 395.]
+
+This sealed the fate of the Rose.
+
+In July the Admiral's Men had a reckoning with Henslowe, and prepared
+to abandon the Bankside. After they had gone, but before they had
+opened the Fortune, Henslowe, on October 28, 1600, let the Rose to
+Pembroke's Men for two days.[232] Possibly the troupe had secured
+special permission to use the playhouse for this limited time;
+possibly Henslowe thought that since the Fortune was not yet open to
+the public, no objection would be made. Of course, after the Admiral's
+Men opened the Fortune--in November or early in December, 1600--the
+Rose, according to the order of the Privy Council just quoted, had to
+stand empty.
+
+[Footnote 232: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 131.]
+
+Its career, however, was not absolutely run. In the spring of 1602
+Worcester's Men and Oxford's Men were "joined by agreement together in
+one company," and the Queen, "at the suit of the Earl of Oxford,"
+ordered that this company be "allowed." Accordingly the Privy Council
+wrote to the Lord Mayor on March 31, 1602, informing him of the fact,
+and adding: "And as the other companies that are allowed, namely of me
+the Lord Admiral and the Lord Chamberlain, be appointed their certain
+houses, and one and no more to each company, so we do straightly
+require that this company be likewise [appointed] to one place. And
+because we are informed the house called the Boar's Head is the place
+they have especially used and do best like of, we do pray and require
+you that that said house, namely the Boar's Head, may be assigned unto
+them."[233] But the Lord Mayor seems to have opposed the use of the
+Boar's Head, and the upshot was that the Council gave permission for
+this "third company" to open the Rose. In Henslowe's _Diary_, we read:
+"Lent unto my Lord of Worcester's Players as followeth, beginning the
+17 day of August, 1602."
+
+[Footnote 233: _The Remembrancia_, II, 189; The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 85.]
+
+This excellent company, destined to become the Queen's Company after
+the accession of King James, included such important actors as William
+Kempe, John Lowin, Christopher Beeston, John Duke, Robert Pallant, and
+Richard Perkins; and it employed such well-known playwrights as Thomas
+Heywood (the "prose Shakespeare," who was also one of the troupe),
+Henry Chettle, Thomas Dekker, John Day, Wentworth Smith, Richard
+Hathway, and John Webster. The company continued to act at the Rose
+until March 16, 1603, when it had a reckoning with Henslowe and left
+the playhouse.[234] In May, however, after the coming of King James,
+it returned to the Rose, and we find Henslowe opening a new account:
+"In the name of God, amen. Beginning to play again by the King's
+license, and laid out since for my Lord of Worcester's Men, as
+followeth, 1603, 9 of May."[235] Since only one entry follows, it is
+probable that the company did not remain long at the Rose. No doubt,
+the outbreak of the plague quickly drove them into the country; and on
+their return to London in the spring of 1604 they occupied the Boar's
+Head and the Curtain.
+
+[Footnote 234: On March 19 the Privy Council formally ordered the
+suppression of all plays. This was five days before the death of Queen
+Elizabeth.]
+
+[Footnote 235: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 190.]
+
+After this there is no evidence to connect the playhouse with dramatic
+performances.
+
+Henslowe's lease of the Little Rose property, on which his playhouse
+stood, expired in 1605, and the Parish of St. Mildred's demanded an
+increase in rental. The following note in the _Diary_ refers to a
+renewal of the lease:
+
+ _Memorandum_, that the 25 of June, 1603, I talked with Mr.
+ Pope at the scrivener's shop where he lies,[236] concerning
+ the taking of the lease anew of the little Rose, and he
+ shewed me a writing betwixt the parish and himself which
+ was to pay twenty pound a year rent,[237] and to bestow a
+ hundred marks upon building, which I said I would rather
+ pull down the playhouse than I would do so, and he bad me
+ do, and said he gave me leave, and would bear me out, for it
+ was in him to do it.[238]
+
+[Footnote 236: Some scholars have supposed that this was Morgan Pope,
+a part owner of the Bear Garden; but he is last heard of in 1585, and
+by 1605 was probably dead. Mr. Greg is of the opinion that Thomas
+Pope, the well-known member of the King's Men at the Globe, is
+referred to. From this has been developed the theory that Pope, acting
+for the Globe players, had rented the Rose and closed it in order to
+prevent competition with the Globe on the Bankside. I believe,
+however, that the "Mr. Pope" here referred to was neither of these
+men, but merely the agent of the Parish of St. Mildred. It is said
+that he lived at a scrivener's shop. This could not apply to the actor
+Thomas Pope, for we learn from his will, made less than a month later,
+that he lived in a house of his own, furnished with plate and
+household goods, and cared for by a housekeeper; and with him lived
+Susan Gasquine, whom he had "brought up ever since she was born."]
+
+[Footnote 237: The old rental was £7 a year.]
+
+[Footnote 238: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 178.]
+
+Henslowe did not renew his lease of the property. On October 4, 1605,
+the Commissioners of the Sewers amerced him for the Rose, but return
+was made that it was then "out of his hands."[239] From a later entry
+in the Sewer Records, February 14, 1606, we learn that the new owner
+of the Rose was one Edward Box, of Bread Street, London. Box, it
+seems, either tore down the building, or converted it into tenements.
+The last reference to it in the Sewer Records is on April 25, 1606,
+when it is referred to as "the late playhouse."[240]
+
+[Footnote 239: Wallace in the London _Times_, April 30, 1914, p. 10.
+In view of these records it seems unnecessary to refute those persons
+who assert that the Rose was standing so late as 1622. I may add,
+however, that before Mr. Wallace published the Sewer Records I had
+successfully disposed of all the evidence which has been collected to
+show the existence of the Rose after 1605. The chief source of this
+error is a footnote by Malone in _Variorum_, III, 56; the source of
+Malone's error is probably to be seen in his footnote, _ibid._, p.
+66.]
+
+[Footnote 240: For the tourist the memory of the old playhouse to-day
+lingers about Rose Alley on the Bank.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+THE SWAN
+
+
+The Manor of Paris Garden,[241] situated on the Bankside just to the
+west of the Liberty of the Clink and to the east of the Lambeth
+marshes, had once been in the possession of the Monastery of
+Bermondsey. At the dissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII, the
+property passed into the possession of the Crown; hence it was free
+from the jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of London, and
+was on this account suitable for the erection of a playhouse. From the
+Crown the property passed through several hands, until finally, in
+1589, the entire "lordship and manor of Paris Garden" was sold for
+£850 to Francis Langley, goldsmith and citizen of London.[242]
+
+[Footnote 241: Or "Parish Garden." See the note on page 121.]
+
+[Footnote 242: The sale took the form of a lease for one thousand
+years.]
+
+Langley had purchased the Manor as an investment, and was ready to
+make thereon such improvements as seemed to offer profitable returns.
+Burbage and Henslowe were reputed to be growing wealthy from their
+playhouses, and Langley was tempted to erect a similar building on his
+newly acquired property. Accordingly at some date before November,
+1594, he secured a license to erect a theatre in Paris Garden. The
+license was promptly opposed by the Lord Mayor of London, who
+addressed to the Lord High Treasurer on November 3, 1594, the
+following letter:
+
+ I understand that one Francis Langley ... intendeth to erect
+ a new stage or theatre (as they call it) for the exercising
+ of plays upon the Bankside. And forasmuch as we find by
+ daily experience the great inconvenience that groweth to
+ this city and the government thereof by the said plays, I
+ have emboldened myself to be an humble suitor to your good
+ Lordship to be a means for us rather to suppress all such
+ places built for that kind of exercise, than to erect any
+ more of the same sort.[243]
+
+[Footnote 243: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 74-76.]
+
+The protest of the Lord Mayor, however, went unheeded, and Langley
+proceeded with the erection of his building. Presumably it was
+finished and ready for the actors in the earlier half of 1595.
+
+[Illustration: THE MANOR OF PARIS GARDEN AND THE SWAN
+
+A survey executed in 1627 by royal command.
+
+(Printed from Rendle's _The Bankside_.)]
+
+The name given to the new playhouse was "The Swan." What caused
+Langley to adopt this name we do not know;[244] but we may suppose
+that it was suggested to him by the large number of swans which
+beautified the Thames. Foreigners on their first visit to London were
+usually very much impressed by the number and the beauty of these
+birds. Hentzner, in 1598, stated that the river "abounds in swans,
+swimming in flocks; the sight of them and their noise is vastly
+agreeable to the boats that meet them in their course"; and the
+Italian Francesco Ferretti observed that the "broad river of Thames"
+was "most charming, and quite full of swans white as the very
+snow."[245]
+
+[Footnote 244: The swan was not uncommon as a sign, especially along
+the river; for example, it was the sign of one of the famous brothels
+on the Bankside, as Stow informs us.]
+
+[Footnote 245: Quoted in Rye, _England as Seen by Foreigners_, p.
+183.]
+
+From a map of the Manor of Paris Garden carefully surveyed by order of
+the King in 1627[246] (see page 163), we learn the exact situation of
+the building. It was set twenty-six poles, or four hundred and
+twenty-six feet, from the bank of the river, in that corner of the
+estate nearest London Bridge. Most of the playgoers from London,
+however, came not over the Bridge, but by water, landing at the Paris
+Garden Stairs, or at the near-by Falcon Stairs, and then walking the
+short distance to the theatre.
+
+[Footnote 246: Reproduced by Rendle, _The Bankside, Southwark, and the
+Globe Playhouse_.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SWAN PLAYHOUSE
+
+(From Visscher's _View of London_, 1616).]
+
+An excellent picture of the exterior of the Swan is furnished by
+Visscher's _View of London_, 1616, (see page 165). From this, as well
+as from the survey of 1627 just mentioned, we discover that the
+building was duodecahedral--at least on the outside, for the interior
+probably was circular. At the time of its erection it was, so we are
+told, "the largest and the most magnificent playhouse" in London. It
+contained three galleries surrounding an open pit, with a stage
+projecting into the pit; and probably it differed in no essential
+respect from the playhouses already built. In one point, however, it
+may have differed--although of this I cannot feel sure: it may have
+been provided with a stage that could be removed so as to allow the
+building to be used on occasions for animal-baiting. The De Witt
+drawing shows such a stage; and possibly Stow in his _Survey_ (1598)
+gives evidence that the Swan was in early times employed for
+bear-baiting:
+
+ And to begin at the west bank as afore, thus it followeth.
+ On this bank is the bear gardens, in number twain; to wit,
+ the old bear garden [i.e., the one built in 1583?] and the
+ new [i.e., the Swan?], places wherein be kept bears, bulls,
+ and other beasts, to be baited at stakes for pleasure; also
+ mastiffs to bait them in several kennels are there
+ nourished.[247]
+
+[Footnote 247: Stow's original manuscript (Harl. MSS., 544), quoted by
+Collier, _History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), III, 96, note 3.
+The text of the edition of 1598 differs very slightly.]
+
+Moreover, in 1613 Henslowe used the Swan as the model for the Hope, a
+building designed for both acting and animal-baiting. It should be
+noted, however, that in all documents the Swan is invariably referred
+to as a _playhouse_, and there is no evidence--beyond that cited
+above--to indicate that the building was ever employed for the baiting
+of bears and bulls.
+
+In the summer of 1596 a Dutch traveler named Johannes de Witt, a
+priest of St. Mary's in Utrecht, visited London, and saw, as one of
+the most interesting sights of the city, a dramatic performance at the
+Swan. Later he communicated a description of the building to his
+friend Arend van Buchell,[248] who recorded the description in his
+commonplace-book, along with a crude and inexact drawing of the
+interior (see page 169), showing the stage, the three galleries, and
+the pit.[249] The description is headed: "Ex Observationibus
+Londinensibus Johannis de Witt." After a brief notice of St. Paul's,
+and a briefer reference to Westminster Cathedral, the traveler begins
+to describe what obviously interested him far more. I give below a
+translation of that portion relating to the playhouses:
+
+ There are four amphitheatres in London [the Theatre,
+ Curtain, Rose, and Swan] of notable beauty, which from their
+ diverse signs bear diverse names. In each of them a
+ different play is daily exhibited to the populace. The two
+ more magnificent of these are situated to the southward
+ beyond the Thames, and from the signs suspended before them
+ are called the Rose and the Swan. The two others are outside
+ the city towards the north on the highway which issues
+ through the Episcopal Gate, called in the vernacular
+ Bishopgate.[250] There is also a fifth [the Bear Garden],
+ but of dissimilar structure, devoted to the baiting of
+ beasts, where are maintained in separate cages and
+ enclosures many bears and dogs of stupendous size, which are
+ kept for fighting, furnishing thereby a most delightful
+ spectacle to men. Of all the theatres,[251] however, the
+ largest and the most magnificent is that one of which the
+ sign is a swan, called in the vernacular the Swan
+ Theatre;[252] for it accommodates in its seats three
+ thousand persons, and is built of a mass of flint stones (of
+ which there is a prodigious supply in Britain),[253] and
+ supported by wooden columns painted in such excellent
+ imitation of marble that it is able to deceive even the most
+ cunning. Since its form resembles that of a Roman work, I
+ have made a sketch of it above.
+
+[Footnote 248: Apparently he allowed Van Buchell to transcribe the
+description and the rough pen-sketch from his notebook or traveler's
+diary.]
+
+[Footnote 249: This interesting document was discovered by Dr. Karl T.
+Gaedertz, and published in full in _Zur Kenntnis der altenglischen
+Bühne_ (Bremen, 1888).]
+
+[Footnote 250: "Viâ quâ itur per Episcopalem portam vulgariter
+Biscopgate nuncupatam."]
+
+[Footnote 251: "Theatrorum."]
+
+[Footnote 252: "Id cuius intersignium est cygnus (vulgo te theatre off
+te cijn)." Mr. Wallace proposes to emend the last clause to read: "te
+theatre off te cijn off te Swan," thus making "cijn" mean "sign"; but
+is not this Flemish, and does not "cijn" mean "Swan"?]
+
+[Footnote 253: It is commonly thought that De Witt was wrong in
+stating that the Swan was built of flint stones. Possibly the plaster
+exterior deceived him; or possibly in his memory he confused this
+detail of the building with the exterior of the church of St. Mary
+Overies, which was indeed built of "a mass of flint stones." On the
+other hand, the long life of the building after it had ceased to be of
+use might indicate that it was built of stones.]
+
+Exactly when the Swan was opened to the public, or what troupes of
+actors first made use of it, we do not know. The visit of Johannes de
+Witt, however, shows that the playhouse was occupied in 1596; and this
+fact is confirmed by a statement in the lawsuit of Shaw _v._
+Langley.[254] We may reasonably suppose that not only in 1596, but
+also in 1595 the building was used by the players.
+
+[Footnote 254: Discovered by Mr. Wallace and printed in _Englische
+Studien_ (1911), XLIII, 340-95. These documents have done much to
+clear up the history of the Swan and the Rose in the year 1597.]
+
+[Illustration: THE INTERIOR OF THE SWAN PLAYHOUSE
+
+Sketched by Johannes de Witt in 1596.]
+
+Our definite history of the Swan, however, begins with 1597. In
+February of that year eight distinguished actors, among whom were
+Robert Shaw, Richard Jones, Gabriel Spencer, William Bird, and
+Thomas Downton, "servants to the right honorable the Earl of
+Pembroke," entered into negotiations with Langley, or, as the legal
+document puts it, "fell into conference with the said Langley for and
+about the hireing and taking a playhouse of the said Langley, situate
+in the old Paris Garden, in the Parish of St. Saviours, in the County
+of Surrey, commonly called and known by the name of the sign of the
+Swan." The result of this conference was that the members of
+Pembroke's Company[255] became each severally bound for the sum of
+£100 to play at the Swan for one year, beginning on February 21, 1597.
+
+[Footnote 255: I cannot agree with Mr. Wallace that Langley induced
+these players to desert Henslowe, secured for them the patronage of
+Pembroke, and thus was himself responsible for the organization of the
+Pembroke Company.]
+
+This troupe contained some of the best actors in London; and Langley,
+in anticipation of a successful year, "disbursed and laid out for
+making of the said house ready, and providing of apparel fit and
+necessary for their playing, the sum of £300 and upwards." Since he
+was at very little cost in making the Swan ready, "for the said house
+was then lately afore used to have plays in it," most of this sum went
+for the purchase of "sundry sort of rich attire and apparel for them
+to play withall."
+
+Everything seems to have gone well until near the end of July, when
+the company presented _The Isle of Dogs_, a satirical play written in
+part by the "young Juvenal" of the age, Thomas Nashe, and in part by
+certain "inferior players," chief of whom seems to have been Ben
+Jonson.[256] The play apparently attacked under a thin disguise some
+persons high in authority. The exact nature of the offense cannot now
+be determined, but Nashe himself informs us that "the troublesome stir
+which happened about it is a general rumour that hath filled all
+England,"[257] and the Queen herself seems to have been greatly
+angered. On July 28, 1597, the Privy Council sent a letter to the
+Justices of Middlesex and of Surrey informing them that Her Majesty
+"hath given direction that not only no plays shall be used within
+London or about the city or in any public place during this time of
+summer, but that also those playhouses that are erected and built only
+for such purposes shall be plucked down." Accordingly the Council
+ordered the Justices to see to it that "there be no more plays used in
+any public place within three miles of the city until Allhallows
+[i.e., November 1] next"; and, furthermore, to send for the owners of
+the various playhouses "and enjoin them by vertue hereof forthwith to
+pluck down quite the stages, galleries, and rooms that are made for
+people to stand in, and so to deface the same as they may not be
+employed again to such use."[258]
+
+[Footnote 256: For an account of _The Isle of Dogs_ see E.K. Chambers,
+_Modern Language Review_ (1909), IV, 407, 511; R.B. McKerrow, _The
+Works of Thomas Nashe_, V, 29; and especially the important article by
+Mr. Wallace in _Englische Studien_ already referred to.]
+
+[Footnote 257: _Nashes Lenten Stuffe_ (1599), ed. McKerrow, III, 153.]
+
+[Footnote 258: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVII, 313.
+Possibly the other public playhouses were suppressed along with the
+Swan in response to the petition presented to the Council on July 28,
+(i.e. on the same day) by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen requesting the
+"final suppressing of the said stage plays, as well at the Theatre,
+Curtain, and Bankside as in all other places in and about the city."
+See The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 78.]
+
+The Council, however, did not stop with this. It ordered the arrest of
+the authors of the play and also of the chief actors who took part in
+its performance. Nashe saved himself by precipitate flight, but his
+lodgings were searched and his private papers were turned over to the
+authorities. Robert Shaw and Gabriel Spencer, as leaders of the
+troupe, and Ben Jonson, as one of the "inferior players" who had a
+part in writing the play,[259] were thrown into prison. The rest of
+the company hurried into the country, their speed being indicated by
+the fact that we find them acting in Bristol before the end of July.
+
+[Footnote 259: In a marginal gloss to _Nashes Lenten Stuffe_ (1599),
+ed. McKerrow, III, 154, Nashe says: "I having begun but the induction
+and first act of it, the other four acts without my consent or the
+best guess of my drift or scope, by the players were supplied, which
+bred both their trouble and mine too."]
+
+Some of these events are referred to in the following letter,
+addressed by the Privy Council "to Richard Topclyfe, Thomas Fowler,
+and Richard Skevington, esquires, Doctor Fletcher, and Mr.
+Wilbraham":
+
+ Upon information given us of a lewd play that was played in
+ one of the playhouses on the Bankside, containing very
+ seditious and slanderous matter, we caused some of the
+ players [Robert Shaw, Gabriel Spencer, and Ben Jonson[260]]
+ to be apprehended and committed to prison, whereof one of
+ them [Ben Jonson] was not only an actor but a maker of part
+ of the said play. Forasmuch as it is thought meet that the
+ rest of the players or actors in that matter shall be
+ apprehended to receive such punishment as their lewd and
+ mutinous behaviour doth deserve, these shall be therefore to
+ require you to examine those of the players that are
+ committed (whose names are known to you, Mr. Topclyfe), what
+ is become of the rest of their fellows that either had their
+ parts in the devising of that seditious matter, or that were
+ actors or players in the same, what copies they have given
+ forth[261] of the said play, and to whom, and such other
+ points as you shall think meet to be demanded of them,
+ wherein you shall require them to deal truly, as they will
+ look to receive any favour. We pray you also to peruse such
+ papers as were found in Nashe his lodgings, which Ferrys, a
+ messenger of the Chamber, shall deliver unto you, and to
+ certify us the examinations you take.[262]
+
+[Footnote 260: The identity of the three players is revealed in an
+order of the Privy Council dated October 8, 1597: "A warrant to the
+Keeper of the Marshalsea to release Gabriel Spencer and Robert Shaw,
+stage-players, out of prison, who were of late committed to his
+custody. The like warrant for the releasing of Benjamin Jonson."
+(Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVIII, 33.)]
+
+[Footnote 261: Such a copy was formerly preserved in a volume of
+miscellaneous manuscripts at Alnwick Castle, but has not come down to
+modern times. See F.J. Burgoyne, _Northumberland Manuscripts_ (London,
+1904).]
+
+[Footnote 262: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVII, 338.]
+
+This unfortunate occurrence destroyed Langley's dream of a successful
+year. It also destroyed the splendid Pembroke organization, for
+several of its chief members, even before the inhibition was raised,
+joined the Admiral's Men. On August 6 Richard Jones went to Henslowe
+and bound himself to play for two years at the Rose, and at the same
+time he bound his friend Robert Shaw, who was still in prison; on
+August 10 William Bird came and made a similar agreement; on October 6
+Thomas Downton did likewise. Their leader, Gabriel Spencer, also
+probably had an understanding with Henslowe, although he signed no
+bond; and upon his release from the Marshalsea he joined his friends
+at the Rose.[263]
+
+[Footnote 263: Langley sued these actors on their bond to him of £100
+to play only at the Swan; see the documents printed by Mr. Wallace.
+Ben Jonson also joined Henslowe's forces at the Rose, as did Anthony
+and Humphrey Jeffes, who were doubtless members of the Pembroke
+Company.]
+
+In the meantime the Queen's anger was abating, and the trouble was
+blowing over. The order to pluck down all the public playhouses was
+not taken seriously by the officers of the law, and Henslowe actually
+secured permission to reopen the Rose on October 11. The inhibition
+itself expired on November 1, but the Swan was singled out for further
+punishment. The Privy Council ordered that henceforth license should
+be granted to two companies only: namely, the Admiral's at the Rose,
+and the Chamberlain's at the Curtain. This meant, of course, the
+closing of the Swan.
+
+In spite of this order, however, the members of Pembroke's Company
+remaining after the chief actors had joined Henslowe, taking on
+recruits and organizing themselves into a company, began to act at the
+Swan without a license. For some time they continued unmolested, but
+at last the two licensed companies called the attention of the Privy
+Council to the fact, and on February 19, 1598, the Council issued the
+following order to the Master of the Revels and the Justices of both
+Middlesex and Surrey:
+
+ Whereas license hath been granted unto two companies of
+ stage players retayned unto us, the Lord Admiral and Lord
+ Chamberlain ... and whereas there is also a third company
+ who of late (as we are informed) have by way of intrusion
+ used likewise to play ... we have therefore thought good to
+ require you upon receipt hereof to take order that the
+ aforesaid third company may be suppressed, and none suffered
+ hereafter to play but those two formerly named, belonging to
+ us, the Lord Admiral and Lord Chamberlain.[264]
+
+[Footnote 264: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXVIII, 327.]
+
+Thus, after February 19, 1598, the Swan stood empty, so far as plays
+were concerned, and we hear very little of it during the next few
+years. Indeed, it never again assumed an important part in the history
+of the drama.
+
+In the summer of 1598[265] it was used by Robert Wilson for a contest
+in extempore versification. Francis Meres, in his _Palladis Tamia_,
+writes: "And so is now our witty Wilson, who for learning and
+extemporall wit in this faculty is without compare or compeere, as, to
+his great and eternal commendations, he manifested in his challenge at
+the Swan on the Bankside."
+
+[Footnote 265: After the order of February 19, when the "intruding
+company" was driven out, and before September 7 when Meres's _Palladis
+Tamia_ was entered in the Stationers' Registers.]
+
+On May 15, 1600, Peter Bromvill was licensed to use the Swan "to show
+his feats of activity at convenient times in that place without let or
+interruption."[266] The Privy Council in issuing the license observed
+that Bromvill "hath been recommended unto Her Majesty from her good
+brother the French King, and hath shewed some feats of great activity
+before Her Highness."
+
+[Footnote 266: Dasent, _Acts of the Privy Council_, XXX, 327.]
+
+On June 22, 1600, the Privy Council "with one and full consent"
+ordered "that there shall be about the city two houses, and no more,
+allowed to serve for the use of the common stage plays; of the which
+houses, one [the Globe] shall be in Surrey ... and the other [the
+Fortune] in Middlesex."[267] This order in effect merely confirmed the
+order of 1598 which limited the companies to two, the Admiral's and
+the Chamberlain's.
+
+[Footnote 267: _Ibid._, 395.]
+
+Early in 1601 Langley died; and in January, 1602, his widow, as
+administratrix, sold the Manor of Paris Garden, including the Swan
+Playhouse, to Hugh Browker, a prothonotary of the Court of Common
+Pleas. The property remained in the possession of the Browker family
+until 1655.[268]
+
+[Footnote 268: For this and other details as to the subsequent history
+of the property see Wallace, _Englische Studien_, XLIII, 342; Rendle,
+_The Antiquarian Magazine_, VII, 207; and cf. the map on page 163.]
+
+On November 6, 1602, the building was the scene of the famous hoax
+known as _England's Joy_, perpetrated upon the patriotic citizens of
+London by one Richard Vennar.[269] Vennar scattered hand-bills over
+the city announcing that at the Swan Playhouse, on Saturday, November
+6, a company of "gentlemen and gentlewomen of account" would present
+with unusual magnificence a play entitled _England's Joy_, celebrating
+Queen Elizabeth. It was proposed to show the coronation of Elizabeth,
+the victory of the Armada, and various other events in the life of
+"England's Joy," with the following conclusion: "And so with music,
+both with voice and instruments, she is taken up into heaven; when
+presently appears a throne of blessed souls; and beneath, under the
+stage, set forth with strange fire-works, diverse black and damned
+souls, wonderfully described in their several torments."[270] The
+price of admission to the performance was to be "two shillings, or
+eighteen pence at least." In spite of this unusually high price, an
+enormous audience, including a "great store of good company and many
+noblemen," passed into the building. Whereupon Vennar seized the money
+paid for admission, and showed his victims "a fair pair of heels." The
+members of the audience, when they found themselves thus duped,
+"revenged themselves upon the hangings, curtains, chairs, stools,
+walls, and whatsoever came in their way, very outrageously, and made
+great spoil."[271]
+
+[Footnote 269: Many writers, including Mr. Wallace, have confused this
+Richard Vennar with William Fennor, who later challenged Kendall to a
+contest of wit at the Fortune. For a correct account, see T.S. Graves,
+"Tricks of Elizabethan Showmen" (in _The South Atlantic Quarterly_,
+April, 1915, XIV) and "A Note on the Swan Theatre" (in _Modern
+Philology_, January, 1912, IX, 431).]
+
+[Footnote 270: From the broadside printed in _The Harleian
+Miscellany_, X, 198. For a photographic facsimile, see Lawrence, _The
+Elizabethan Playhouse_ (Second Series), p. 68.]
+
+[Footnote 271: _Letters Written by John Chamberlain_, Camden Society
+(1861), p. 163; _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1601-1603_,
+p. 264. See also Manningham's _Diary_, pp. 82, 93.]
+
+On February 8, 1603, John Manningham recorded in his _Diary_: "Turner
+and Dun, two famous fencers, playd their prizes this day at the
+Bankside, but Turner at last run Dun so far in the brain at the eye,
+that he fell down presently stone dead; a goodly sport in a Christian
+state, to see one man kill another!" The place where the contest was
+held is not specifically mentioned, but in all probability it was the
+Swan.[272]
+
+[Footnote 272: This seems to be the source of the statement by Mr.
+Wallace (_Englische Studien_, XLIII, 388), quoting Rendle (_The
+Antiquarian Magazine_, VII, 210): "In 1604, a man named Turner, in a
+contest for a prize at the Swan, was killed by a thrust in the eye."
+Rendle cites no authority for his statement.]
+
+For the next eight years all is silence, but we may suppose that the
+building was occasionally let for special entertainments such as those
+just enumerated.
+
+In 1611 Henslowe undertook to manage the Lady Elizabeth's Men,
+promising among other things to furnish them with a suitable
+playhouse. Having disposed of the Rose in 1605, he rented the Swan and
+established his company there. In 1613, however, he built the Hope,
+and transferred the Lady Elizabeth's Men thither.
+
+The Swan seems thereafter to have been occupied for a time by Prince
+Charles's Men. But the history of this company and its intimate
+connection with the Lady Elizabeth's Company is too vague to admit of
+definite conclusions. So far as we can judge, the Prince's Men
+continued at the Swan until 1615, when Henslowe transferred them to
+the Hope.[273]
+
+[Footnote 273: These dates are in a measure verified by the records of
+the Overseers of the Poor for the Liberty of Paris Garden, printed by
+Mr. Wallace (_Englische Studien_, XLIII, 390, note 1). Mr. Wallace
+seems to labor under the impression that this chapter in the history
+of the Swan (1611-1615) was unknown before, but it was adequately
+treated by Fleay and later by Mr. Greg.]
+
+After 1615 the Swan was deserted for five years so far as any records
+show. But in 1621 the old playhouse seems to have been again used by
+the actors. The Overseers of the Poor in the Liberty of Paris Garden
+record in their Account Book: "Monday, April the 9th, 1621, received
+of the players £5 3_s._ 6_d._"[274] From this it is evident that in
+the spring of 1621 some company of players, the name of which has not
+yet been discovered, was occupying the Swan. Apparently, however, the
+company did not remain there long, for the Account Book records no
+payment the following year; nor, although it extends to the year 1671,
+does it again record any payments from actors at the Swan. There is,
+indeed, no evidence to connect the playhouse with dramatic
+performances after 1621.[275] In the map of 1627 it is represented as
+still standing, but is labeled "the _old_ playhouse," and is not even
+named.
+
+[Footnote 274: Wallace, _op. cit._, p. 390, note 1.]
+
+[Footnote 275: Rendle quotes a license of 1623 for "T.B. and three
+assistants to make shows of Italian motions at the Princes Arms or the
+Swan." (_The Antiquarian Magazine_, 1885, VII, 211.) But this may be a
+reference to an inn rather than to the large playhouse.]
+
+Five years later it is referred to in Nicolas Goodman's _Holland's
+Leaguer_ (1632), a pamphlet celebrating one of the most notorious
+houses of ill fame on the Bankside.[276] Dona Britannica Hollandia,
+the proprietress of this house, is represented as having been much
+pleased with its situation:
+
+ Especially, and above all the rest, she was most taken with
+ the report of three famous amphitheatres, which stood so
+ near situated that her eye might take view of them from the
+ lowest turret. One was the _Continent of the World_ [i.e.,
+ the Globe], because half the year a world of beauties and
+ brave spirits resorted unto it; the other was a building of
+ excellent _Hope_, and though wild beasts and gladiators did
+ most possess it, yet the gallants that came to behold those
+ combats, though they were of a mixt society, yet were many
+ noble worthies amongst them; the last which stood, and, as
+ it were, shak'd hands with this fortress, being in times
+ past as famous as any of the other, was now fallen to decay,
+ and like a dying _Swanne_, hanging down her head, seemed to
+ sing her own dirge.
+
+[Footnote 276: What seems to be a picture of this famous house may be
+seen in Merian's _View of London_, 1638 (see opposite page 256), with
+a turret, and standing just to the right of the Swan.]
+
+This is the last that we hear of the playhouse, that was "in times
+past as famous as any of the other." What finally became of the
+building we do not know. It is not shown in Hollar's _View of London_,
+in 1647, and probably it had ceased to exist before the outbreak of
+the Civil War.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+THE SECOND BLACKFRIARS
+
+
+In 1596 Burbage's lease of the plot of ground on which he had erected
+the Theatre was drawing to a close, and all his efforts at a renewal
+had failed. The owner of the land, Gyles Alleyn, having, in spite of
+the terms of the original contract, refused to extend the lease until
+1606, was craftily plotting for a substantial increase in the rental;
+moreover, having become puritanical in his attitude towards the drama,
+he was insisting that if the lease were renewed, the Theatre should be
+used as a playhouse for five years only, and then should either be
+torn down, or be converted into tenements. Burbage tentatively agreed
+to pay the increased rental, but, of course, he could not possibly
+agree to the second demand; and when all negotiations on this point
+proved futile, he realized that he must do something at once to meet
+the awkward situation.
+
+In the twenty years that had elapsed since the erection of the Theatre
+and the Curtain in Holywell, the Bankside had been developed as a
+theatrical district, and the Rose and the Swan, not to mention the
+Bear Garden, had made the south side of the river the popular place
+for entertainments. Naturally, therefore, any one contemplating the
+erection of a playhouse would immediately think of this locality.
+Burbage, however, was a man of ideas. He believed that he could
+improve on the Bankside as a site for his theatre. He remembered how,
+at the outset of his career as a theatrical manager, he had had to
+face competition with Richard Farrant who had opened a small "private"
+playhouse in Blackfriars. Although that building had not been used as
+a "public" playhouse, and had been closed up after a few years of sore
+tribulation, it had revealed to Burbage the possibilities of the
+Blackfriars precinct for theatrical purposes. In the first place, the
+precinct was not under the jurisdiction of the city, so that actors
+would not there be subject to the interference of the Lord Mayor and
+his Aldermen. As Stevens writes in his _History of Ancient Abbeys,
+Monasteries, etc._: "All the inhabitants within it were subject to
+none but the King ... neither the Mayor, nor the sheriffs, nor any
+other officers of the City of London had the least jurisdiction or
+authority therein." Blackfriars, therefore, in this fundamental
+respect, was just as desirable a location for theatres as was Holywell
+to the north of the city, or the Bankside to the south. In the second
+place, Blackfriars had a decided advantage over those two suburban
+localities in that it was "scituated in the bosome of the
+Cittie,"[277] near St. Paul's Cathedral, the centre of London life,
+and hence was readily accessible to playgoers, even during the
+disagreeable winter season. In the third place, the locality was
+distinctly fashionable. To give some notion of the character of its
+inhabitants, I record below the names of a few of those who lived in
+or near the conventual buildings at various times after the
+dissolution: George Brooke, Lord Cobham; William Brooke, Lord Cobham,
+Lord Chamberlain of the Queen's Household; Henry Brooke, Lord Cobham,
+Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports; Sir Thomas Cheney, Treasurer of the
+Queen's Household, and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports; Henry Carey,
+Lord Hunsdon, Lord Chamberlain of the Queen's Household; George Carey,
+Lord Hunsdon, who as Lord Chamberlain was the patron of Shakespeare's
+troupe; Sir Thomas Cawarden, Master of the Revels; Sir Henry
+Jerningham, Fee Chamberlain to the Queen's Highness; Sir Willam More,
+Chamberlain of the Exchequer; Lord Zanche; Sir John Portynary; Sir
+William Kingston; Sir Francis Bryan; Sir John Cheeke; Sir George
+Harper; Sir Philip Hoby, Lady Anne Gray; Sir Robert Kyrkham; Lady
+Perrin; Sir Christopher More; Sir Henry Neville; Sir Thomas Saunders;
+Sir Jerome Bowes; and Lady Jane Guildford.[278] Obviously the
+locality was free from the odium which the public always associated
+with Shoreditch and the Bankside, the recognized homes of the London
+stews.[279]
+
+[Footnote 277: The Petition of 1619, in The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 93.]
+
+[Footnote 278: It is true that poor people also, feather-dealers and
+such-like, lived in certain parts of Blackfriars, but this, of course,
+did not affect the reputation of the precinct as the residence of
+noblemen.]
+
+[Footnote 279: In Samuel Rowlands's _Humors Looking Glass_ (1608), a
+rich country gull is represented as filling his pockets with money and
+coming to London. Here a servant "of the Newgate variety" shows him
+the sights of the city:
+
+ Brought him to the Bankside where bears do dwell,
+ And unto Shoreditch where the whores keep hell.]
+
+Thus, a playhouse erected in the precinct of Blackfriars would escape
+all the grave disadvantages of situation which attached to the
+existing playhouses in the suburbs, and, on the other hand, would gain
+several very important advantages.
+
+Burbage's originality, however, did not stop with the choice of
+Blackfriars as the site of his new theatre; he determined to improve
+on the form of building as well. The open-air structure which he had
+designed in 1576, and which had since been copied in all public
+theatres, had serious disadvantages in that it offered no protection
+from the weather. Burbage now resolved to provide a large "public"
+playhouse, fully roofed in, with the entire audience and the actors
+protected against the inclemency of the sky and the cold of winter. In
+short, his dream was of a theatre centrally located, comfortably
+heated, and, for its age, luxuriously appointed.
+
+With characteristic energy and courage he at once set about the task
+of realizing this dream. He found in the Blackfriars precinct a large
+building which, he thought, would admirably serve his purpose. This
+building was none other than the old Frater of the Monastery, a
+structure one hundred and ten feet long and fifty-two feet wide, with
+stone walls three feet thick, and a flat roof covered with lead. From
+the Loseley documents, which M. Feuillerat has placed at the disposal
+of scholars,[280] we are now able to reconstruct the old Frater
+building, and to point out exactly that portion which was made into a
+playhouse.[281]
+
+[Footnote 280: _Blackfriars Records_, in The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, (1913).]
+
+[Footnote 281: For a reconstruction of the Priory buildings and
+grounds, and for specific evidence of statements made in the following
+paragraphs, the reader is referred to J.Q. Adams, _The Conventual
+Buildings of Blackfriars, London_, in the University of North Carolina
+_Studies in Philology_, XIV, 64.]
+
+At the time of the dissolution, the top story consisted of a single
+large room known as the "Upper Frater," and also as the "Parliament
+Chamber" from the fact that the English Parliament met here on several
+occasions; here, also, was held the trial before Cardinals Campeggio
+and Wolsey for the divorce of the unhappy Queen Catherine and Henry
+VIII--a scene destined to be reënacted in the same building by
+Shakespeare and his fellows many years later. In 1550 the room was
+granted, with various other properties in Blackfriars, to Sir Thomas
+Cawarden.[282]
+
+[Footnote 282: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, pp. 7, 12.]
+
+[Illustration: PLAN ILLUSTRATING THE SECOND BLACKFRIARS PLAYHOUSE
+
+The Playhouse was made by combining the Hall and the Parlor.]
+
+The space below the Parliament Chamber was divided into three units.
+At the northern end was a "Hall" extending the width of the building.
+It is mentioned in the Survey[283] of 1548 as "a Hall ... under the
+said Frater"; and again in the side-note: "Memorandum, my Lorde Warden
+claimeth the said Hall." Just to the south of the Hall was a "Parlor,"
+or dining-chamber, "where commonly the friars did use to break their
+fast." It is described in the Survey as being "under the said Frater,
+of the same length and breadth." The room could not have been of the
+"same length and breadth" as the great Parliament Chamber, for not
+only would such dimensions be absurd for an informal dining-room, but,
+as we are clearly told, the "Infirmary" was also under the Parliament
+Chamber, and was approximately one-third the size of the latter.[284]
+Accordingly I have interpreted the phrase, "of the same length and
+breadth," to mean that the Parlor was square. When the room was sold
+to Burbage it was said to be fifty-two feet in length from north to
+south, which is exactly the breadth of the building from east to west.
+The Parlor, as well as the Hall, was claimed by the Lord Warden; and
+both were granted to Sir Thomas Cawarden in 1550.
+
+[Footnote 283: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, p. 7.]
+
+[Footnote 284: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, pp. 105-06.]
+
+South of the Parlor was the Infirmary, described as being "at the
+western corner of the Inner Cloister" (of which the Frater building
+constituted the western side), as being under the Parliament Chamber,
+and as being approximately one-third the size of the Parliament
+Chamber. The Infirmary seems to have been structurally distinct from
+the Hall and Parlor.[285] It was three stories high, consisting of a
+"room beneath the Fermary," the Infirmary itself, a "room above the
+same";[286] while the Parliament Chamber, extending itself "over the
+room above the Fermary," constituted a fourth story. Furthermore, not
+only was the Infirmary a structural unit distinct from the Hall and
+the Parlor at the north, but it never belonged to Cawarden or More,
+and hence was not included in the sale to Burbage. It was granted in
+1545 to Lady Mary Kingston,[287] from whom it passed to her son, Sir
+Henry Jerningham, then to Anthony Kempe, who later sold it to Lord
+Hunsdon;[288] and at the time the playhouse was built, the Infirmary
+was still in the occupation of Hunsdon.
+
+[Footnote 285: In all probability it was separated from the Hall and
+Parlor by a passage leading through the Infirmary into the Inner
+Cloister yard.]
+
+[Footnote 286: One reason for the greater height may have been the
+slope of the ground towards the river; a second reason was the unusual
+height of the Parlor.]
+
+[Footnote 287: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, p. 105.]
+
+[Footnote 288: _Ibid._, p. 124.]
+
+At the northern end of the Frater building, and extending westward,
+was a narrow structure fifty feet in length, sixteen feet in breadth,
+and three stories in height, regarded as a "part of the frater
+parcel." The middle story, which was on the same level with the
+Parliament Chamber, was known as the "Duchy Chamber," possibly because
+of its use in connection with the sittings of Parliament, or with the
+meetings of the Privy Council there. The building was granted to
+Cawarden in 1550.[289]
+
+[Footnote 289: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, p. 8.]
+
+Upon the death of Cawarden all his Blackfriars holdings passed into
+the possession of Sir William More. From More, in 1596, James Burbage
+purchased those sections of the Frater building which had originally
+been granted to Cawarden[290]--that is, all the Frater building except
+the Infirmary--for the sum of £600, in modern valuation about
+$25,000.[291] Evidently he had profited by Farrant's experience with
+More and by his own experience with Gyles Alleyn, and had determined
+to risk no more leases, but in the future to be his own landlord, cost
+what it might.
+
+[Footnote 290: For the deed of sale see _ibid._, p. 60.]
+
+[Footnote 291: It should be observed, however, that Burbage paid only
+£100 down, and that he immediately mortgaged the property for more
+than £200. The playhouse was not free from debt until 1605. See
+Wallace, _The First London Theatre_, p. 23.]
+
+The properties which he thus secured were:
+
+(1) The Parliament Chamber, extending over the Hall, Parlor, and
+Infirmary. This great chamber, it will be recalled, had previously
+been divided by Cawarden into the Frith and Cheeke Lodgings;[292] but
+now it was arranged as a single tenement of seven rooms, and was
+occupied by the eminent physician William de Lawne:[293] "All those
+seven great upper rooms as they are now divided, being all upon one
+floor, and sometime being one great and entire room, with the roof
+over the same, covered with lead." Up into this tenement led a special
+pair of stairs which made it wholly independent of the rest of the
+building.
+
+[Footnote 292: The northern section of the Cheeke Lodging (a portion
+of the old Buttery) which had constituted Farrant's private theatre,
+and which was no real part of the Frater building, had been converted
+by More into the Pipe Office.]
+
+[Footnote 293: A prosperous physician. His son was one of the
+illustrious founders of the Society of Apothecaries, and one of its
+chief benefactors. His portrait may be seen to-day in Apothecaries'
+Hall. See C.R.B. Barrett, _The History of the Society of Apothecaries
+of London_.]
+
+(2) The friar's "Parlor," now made into a tenement occupied by Thomas
+Bruskett, and called "the Middle Rooms, or Middle Stories"--possibly
+from the fact that it was the middle of three tenements, possibly from
+the fact that having two cellars under its northern end it was the
+middle of three stories. It is described as being fifty-two feet in
+length north and south, and thirty-seven feet in width. Why a strip of
+nine feet should have been detached on the eastern side is not clear;
+but that this strip was also included in the sale to Burbage is shown
+by later documents.
+
+(3) The ancient "Hall" adjoining the "Parlor" on the north, and now
+made into two rooms. These rooms were combined with the ground floor
+of the Duchy Chamber building to constitute a tenement occupied by
+Peter Johnson: "All those two lower rooms now in the occupation of the
+said Peter Johnson, lying directly under part of the said seven great
+upper rooms." The dimensions are not given, but doubtless the two
+rooms together extended the entire width of the building and were
+approximately as broad as the Duchy Chamber building, with which they
+were united.
+
+(4) The Duchy Chamber building "at the north end of the said seven
+great upper rooms, and at the west side thereof." At the time of the
+sale the ground floor of this building was occupied by Peter Johnson,
+who had also the Hall adjoining it on the west; the middle story was
+occupied by Charles Bradshaw; and the top story by Edward Merry.[294]
+
+[Footnote 294: Mr. Wallace's description of the building and the way
+in which it was converted into a playhouse (_The Children of the
+Chapel at Blackfriars_, pp. 37-41) is incorrect. For the various
+details cited above see the deed of sale to Burbage.]
+
+Out of this heterogeneous property Burbage was confronted with the
+problem of making a playhouse. Apparently he regarded the Parliament
+Chamber as too low, or too inaccessible for the purposes of a theatre;
+this part of his property, therefore, he kept as a lodging, and for
+many years it served as a dormitory for the child-actors. The Duchy
+Chamber building, being small and detached from the Frater building,
+he reserved also as a lodging.[295] In the Hall and the Parlor,
+however, he saw the possibility of a satisfactory auditorium. Let us
+therefore examine this section of the Frater building more in detail,
+and trace its history up to the time of the purchase.
+
+[Footnote 295: This may have contained the two rooms in which Evans
+lived, and "the schoolhouse and the chamber over the same," which are
+described (see the documents in Fleay's _A Chronicle History of the
+London Stage_, p. 210 ff.) as being "severed from the said great
+hall." In another document this schoolhouse is described as "schola,
+anglice _schoolhouse_, ad borealem finem Aulæ prædictæ." (Wallace,
+_The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 40.)]
+
+The Parlor was described as "a great room, paved," and was said to
+have been "used and occupied by the friars themselves to their own
+proper use as a parlor to dine and sup in."[296] Sir John Portynary,
+whose house adjoined the Duchy Chamber, tells us that in 1550, when
+King Edward granted the Blackfriars property to Cawarden, "Sir Thomas
+Cawarden, knight, entered into the same house in the name of all that
+which the King had given him within the said friars, and made his
+lodging there; and about that time did invite this examinant and his
+wife to supper there, together with diverse other gentlemen; and they
+all supped together with the said Sir Thomas Cawarden, in the same
+room [the Parlor] where the said school of fence is now kept, and did
+there see a play."[297]
+
+[Footnote 296: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, pp. 43, 47, 48.]
+
+[Footnote 297: _Ibid._, p. 52.]
+
+Later Cawarden leased the Parlor to a keeper of an ordinary: "One
+Woodman did hold the said house where the said school of fence is
+kept, and another house thereby of Sir Thomas Cawarden, and in the
+other room kept an ordinary table, and had his way to the same through
+the said house where the said school of fence is kept."[298]
+
+[Footnote 298: _Ibid._, p. 51.]
+
+In 1563 William Joyner established in the rooms the school of fence
+mentioned above, which was still flourishing in 1576.[299]
+
+[Footnote 299: Feuillerat, _Blackfriars Records_, p. 121.]
+
+When in 1583 John Lyly became interested in the First Blackfriars
+Playhouse, he obtained a lease of the rooms, but it is not clear for
+what purpose. Later he sold the lease to Rocho Bonetti, the Italian
+fencing-master, who established there his famous school of fence.[300]
+In George Silver's _Paradoxes of Defence_, 1599, is a description of
+Bonetti's school, which will, I think, help us to reconstruct in our
+imagination the "great room, paved" which was destined to become
+Shakespeare's playhouse:
+
+ He caused to be fairely drawne and set round about the
+ schoole all the Noblemen's and Gentlemen's Armes that were
+ his schollers, and, hanging right under their Armes, their
+ Rapiers, Daggers, Gloves of Male, and Gantlets. Also he had
+ benches and stooles, the roome being verie large, for
+ Gentlemen to sit about his schoole to behold his teaching.
+
+ He taught none commonly under twentie, fortie, fifty, or an
+ hundred pounds. And because all things should be verie
+ necessary for the Noblemen and Gentlemen, he had in his
+ schoole a large square table, with a green carpet, done
+ round with a verie brode rich fringe of gold; alwaies
+ standing upon it a verie faire standish covered with crimson
+ velvet, with inke, pens, pen-dust, and sealing-waxe, and
+ quiers of verie excellent fine paper, gilded, readie for the
+ Noblemen and Gentlemen (upon occasion) to write their
+ letters, being then desirous to follow their fight, to send
+ their men to dispatch their businesse.
+
+ And to know how the time passed, he had in one corner of his
+ Schoole, a Clocke, with a verie faire large diall; he had
+ within that Schoole a roome the which he called his privie
+ schoole, with manie weapons therein, where he did teach his
+ schollers his secret fight, after he had perfectly taught
+ them their rules. He was verie much loved in the Court.
+
+[Footnote 300: _Ibid._, p. 122.]
+
+We are further told by Silver that Bonetti took it upon himself "to
+hit anie Englishman with a thrust upon anie button." It is no wonder
+that Shakespeare ridiculed him in _Romeo and Juliet_ as "the very
+butcher of a silk button," and laughed at his school and his fantastic
+fencing-terms:
+
+ _Mercutio._ Ah! the immortal "passado"! the "punto reverso"!
+ the "hay"!
+
+ _Benvolio._ The what?
+
+ _Mercutio._ The pox of such antick, lisping, affecting
+ fantasticoes! These new tuners of accents!--"By Jesu, a very
+ good blade!"
+
+At the date of the sale to Burbage, February 4, 1596, the fencing
+school of Bonetti, had become "those rooms and lodgings, with the
+kitchen thereunto adjoining, called the Middle Rooms or Middle
+Stories, late being in the tenure or occupation of Rocco Bonetti, and
+now being in the tenure or occupation of Thomas Bruskett, gentleman."
+
+To make his playhouse Burbage removed all the partitions in the Middle
+Rooms, and restored the Parlor to its original form--a great room
+covering the entire breadth of the building, and extending fifty-two
+feet in length from north to south. To this he added the Hall at the
+north, which then existed as two rooms in the occupation of Peter
+Johnson. The Hall and Parlor when combined made an auditorium
+described as "per estimacionem in longitudine ab australe ad borealem
+partem eiusdem sexaginta et sex pedes assissæ sit plus sive minus, et
+in latitudine ab occidentale ad orientalem partem eiusdem quadraginto
+et sex pedes assissæ sit plus sive minus."[301] The forty-six feet of
+width corresponds to the interior width of the Frater building, for
+although it was fifty-two feet wide in outside measurement, the stone
+walls were three feet thick. The sixty-six feet of length probably
+represents the fifty-two feet of the Parlor plus the breadth of the
+Hall.
+
+[Footnote 301: Wallace, _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_,
+p. 39, note 1.]
+
+The ceiling of these two rooms must have been of unusual height. The
+Infirmary, which was below the Parliament Chamber at the south, was
+three stories high; and the windows of the Parlor, if we may believe
+Pierce the Ploughman, were "wrought as a chirche":
+
+ An halle for an heygh kinge · an household to holden,
+ With brode bordes abouten · y-benched well clene,
+ With windowes of glas · wrought as a chirche.
+
+[Illustration: REMAINS OF BLACKFRIARS
+
+This remnant of the old monastery was discovered in 1872 on the
+rebuilding of the offices of _The Times_. It illustrates the
+substantial character of the Blackfriars buildings, and may even be a
+part of the old Frater, for _The Times_ occupies that portion of the
+monastery. The windows of the Frater, according to Pierce the
+Ploughman, were "wrought as a chirche." (From a painting in the
+Guildhall Museum.)]
+
+As a result Burbage was able to construct within the auditorium at
+least two galleries,[302] after the manner of the public theatres.
+The Parliament Chamber above was kept, as I have stated, for
+residential purposes. This is why the various legal documents almost
+invariably refer to the playhouse as "that great hall or room, with
+the rooms over the same."[303]
+
+[Footnote 302: Mr. Wallace, _The Children of the Chapel at
+Blackfriars_, p. 42, quotes from the Epilogue to Marston's _The Dutch
+Courtesan_, acted at Blackfriars, "And now, my fine Heliconian
+gallants, and you, my worshipful friends in the middle region," and
+adds that the "reference to 'the middle region' makes it clear there
+were three" galleries. Does it not, however, indicate that there were
+only two galleries?]
+
+[Footnote 303: See the documents printed in Fleay's _A Chronicle
+History of the London Stage_, pp. 211, 215, 240, etc. Mr. Wallace,
+however (_The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 40 ff.),
+would have us believe that an additional story was added: "the roof
+was changed, and rooms, probably of the usual dormer sort, were built
+above." I am quite sure he is mistaken.]
+
+The main entrance to the playhouse was at the north, over the "great
+yard" which extended from the Pipe Office to Water Lane.[304] The
+stage was opposite this entrance, or at the southern end of the hall,
+as is shown by one of the documents printed by Mr. Wallace.[305] Since
+the building was not, like the other playhouses of London, open to the
+sky, the illumination was supplied by candles, hung in branches over
+the stage; as Gerschow noted, after visiting Blackfriars, "alle bey
+Lichte agiret, welches ein gross Ansehen macht."[306] The obvious
+advantage of artificial light for producing beautiful stage effects
+must have added not a little to the popularity of the Blackfriars
+Playhouse.
+
+[Footnote 304: Cf. Playhouse Yard in the London of to-day.]
+
+[Footnote 305: _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 43,
+note 3.]
+
+[Footnote 306: _The Diary of the Duke of Stettin-Pomerania_, in
+_Transactions of the Royal Historical Society_ (1892), VI, 26.]
+
+The cost of all the alterations and the equipment could hardly have
+been less than £300, so that the total cost of the property was at
+least £900, or in modern valuation approximately $35,000. Burbage's
+sons, in referring to the building years later, declared that their
+father had "made it into a playhouse with great charge."
+
+"And," they added significantly, "with great trouble." The
+aristocratic inhabitants of the Blackfriars precinct did not welcome
+the appearance in their midst of a "public," or, as some more
+scornfully designated it, a "common," playhouse; and when they
+discovered the intentions of Burbage, they wrote a strong petition to
+the Privy Council against the undertaking. This petition, presented to
+the Council in November, 1596, I quote below in part:
+
+ To the right honorable the Lords and others of Her Majesty's
+ most honorable Privy Council.--Humbly shewing and beseeching
+ your honors, the inhabitants of the precinct of the
+ Blackfriars, London, that whereas one Burbage hath lately
+ bought certain rooms in the same precinct near adjoining
+ unto the dwelling houses of the right honorable the Lord
+ Chamberlaine [Lord Cobham] and the Lord of Hunsdon, which
+ rooms the said Burbage is now altering, and meaneth very
+ shortly to convert and turn the same into a common
+ playhouse, which will grow to be a very great annoyance and
+ trouble, not only to all the noblemen and gentlemen
+ thereabout inhabiting, but also a general inconvenience to
+ all the inhabitants of the same precinct, both by reason of
+ the great resort and gathering together of all manner of
+ vagrant and lewd persons ... as also for that there hath not
+ at any time heretofore been used any common playhouse within
+ the same precinct, but that now all players being banished
+ by the Lord Mayor from playing within the city ... they now
+ think to plant themselves in liberties, etc.[307]
+
+[Footnote 307: For the full document see Halliwell-Phillipps,
+_Outlines_, I, 304. For the date, see The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 91.]
+
+The first person to sign the petition was the Dowager Lady Elizabeth
+Russell; the second was none other than George Cary, Lord Hunsdon, at
+the time the patron of Burbage's company of actors.[308] It is not
+surprising, therefore, that as a result of this petition the Lords of
+the Privy Council (of which Lord Cobham was a conspicuous member)
+issued an order in which they "forbad the use of the said house for
+plays."[309] This order wrecked the plans of Burbage quite as
+effectively as did the stubbornness of Gyles Alleyn.
+
+[Footnote 308: Shortly after this he was appointed Lord Chamberlain,
+under which name his troupe was subsequently known.]
+
+[Footnote 309: Petition of 1619, The Malone Society's _Collections_,
+I, 91.]
+
+Possibly the mental distress Burbage suffered at the hands of the
+Privy Council and of Gyles Alleyn affected his health; at least he did
+not long survive this last sling of fortune. In February, 1597, just
+before the expiration of the Alleyn lease, he died, leaving the
+Theatre to his son Cuthbert, the bookseller, Blackfriars to his
+actor-son, Richard, the star of Shakespeare's troupe, and his troubles
+to both. With good reason Cuthbert declared many years later that the
+ultimate success of London theatres had "been purchased by the
+infinite cost and pains of the family of Burbages."
+
+When later in 1597 the Lord Chamberlain's Players were forced to leave
+Cuthbert's Theatre, Richard Burbage was not able to establish them in
+his comfortable Blackfriars house; instead, they first went to the old
+Curtain in Shoreditch, and then, under the leadership of the Burbage
+sons, erected for themselves a brand-new home on the Bankside, called
+"The Globe."
+
+The order of the Privy Council had summarily forbidden the use of
+Blackfriars as a "public" playhouse. Its proprietor, however, Richard
+Burbage, might take advantage of the precedent established in the days
+of Farrant, and let the building for use as a "private" theatre.[310]
+Exactly when he was first able to lease the building as a "private"
+house we do not know, for the history of the building between 1597
+(when it was completed) and 1600 (when it was certainly occupied by
+the Children of the Chapel) is very indistinct. We have no definite
+evidence to connect the Chapel Children, or, indeed, any specific
+troupe, with Blackfriars during these years. Yet prior to 1600 the
+building seems to have been used for acting. Richard Burbage himself
+seems to say so. In leasing the building to Evans, in 1600, he says
+that he considered "with himself that" Evans could not pay the rent
+"except the said Evans could erect and keep a company of playing-boys
+or others to play plays and interludes in the said playhouse in such
+sort _as before time had been there used_."[311] Now, unless this
+refers to Farrant's management of the Chapel Boys in Blackfriars--nearly
+a quarter of a century earlier--it means that before 1600 some actors,
+presumably "playing-boys," had used Burbage's theatre. Moreover, there
+seems to be evidence to show that the troupe thus vaguely referred to
+was under the management of Evans; for, in referring to his lease of
+Blackfriars in 1600, Evans describes the playhouse as "then or late in
+the tenure or occupation of your said oratour."[312] What these vague
+references mean we cannot now with our limited knowledge determine.
+But there is not sufficient evidence to warrant the usual assumption
+that Evans and Giles had opened the Blackfriars with the Children of
+the Chapel in 1597.[313]
+
+[Footnote 310: The constables and other officers in the Petition of
+1619 say: "The owner of the said playhouse, doth under the name of a
+private house ... convert the said house to a public playhouse." (The
+Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 91.)]
+
+[Footnote 311: Fleay, _A Chronicle History of the London Stage_, p.
+234.]
+
+[Footnote 312: _Ibid._, p. 211.]
+
+[Footnote 313: This theory has been urged by Fleay, by Mr. Wallace in
+_The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, and by others.]
+
+The known history of Blackfriars as a regular theatre may be said to
+begin in the autumn of 1600. On September 2 of that year, Henry Evans
+signed a lease of the playhouse for a period of twenty-one years, at
+an annual rental of £40. This interesting step on the part of Evans
+calls for a word of explanation as to his plans.
+
+The Children of the Chapel Royal, who had attained such glory at
+Blackfriars during the Farrant-Hunnis-Evans-Oxford-Lyly régime, had
+thereafter sunk into dramatic insignificance. Since 1584, when Lyly
+was forced to give up his playhouse, they had not presented a play at
+Court. Probably they did not entirely cease to act, for they can be
+vaguely traced in the provinces during a part of this period; but
+their dramatic glory was almost wholly eclipsed. Evans, who had
+managed the Boys under Hunnis, Oxford, and Lyly, hoped now to
+reëstablish the Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars as they had been
+in his younger days. Like James Burbage, he was a man of ideas. His
+plan was to interest in his undertaking the Master of the Chapel,
+Nathaniel Giles, who had succeeded to the office at the death of
+Hunnis in 1597, and then to make practical use of the patent granted
+to the Masters of the Children to take up boys for Her Majesty's
+service. Such a patent, in the normal course of events, had been
+granted to Giles, as it had been to his predecessors. It read in part
+as follows:
+
+ Elizabeth, by the grace of God, &c., to all mayors,
+ sheriffs, bailiffs, constables, and all other our officers,
+ greeting. For that it is meet that our Chapel Royal should
+ be furnished with well-singing children from time to time,
+ we have, and by these presents do authorize our
+ well-beloved servant, Nathaniel Giles, Master of our
+ Children of our said Chapel, or his deputy, being by his
+ bill subscribed and sealed, so authorized, and having this
+ our present commission with him, to take such and so many
+ children as he, or his sufficient deputy, shall think meet,
+ in all cathedral, collegiate, parish churches, chapels, or
+ any other place or places, as well within liberty as
+ without, within this our realm of England, whatsoever they
+ be.[314]
+
+[Footnote 314: The full commission is printed in Wallace, _The
+Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 61.]
+
+In such a commission Evans saw wonderful possibilities. He reasoned
+that since the Queen had forced upon the Chapel Children the twofold
+service of singing at royal worship and of acting plays for royal
+entertainment, this twofold service should be met by a twofold
+organization, the one part designed mainly to furnish sacred music,
+the other designed mainly to furnish plays. Such a dual organization,
+it seemed to him, was now more or less necessary, since the number of
+boy choristers in the Chapel Royal was limited to twelve, whereas the
+acting of plays demanded at least twice as many. Once the principle
+that the Chapel Royal should supply the Queen with plays was granted,
+the commission could be used to furnish the necessary actors; and the
+old fiction, established by Farrant and Hunnis, of using a "private"
+playhouse as a means of exercising or training the boys for Court
+service, would enable the promoters to give public performances and
+thus handsomely reimburse themselves for their trouble.
+
+Such was Evans's scheme, based upon his former experience with the
+Children at Farrant's Blackfriars, and suggested, perhaps, by the
+existence of Burbage's Blackfriars now forbidden to the "common"
+players. He presented his scheme to Giles, the Master of the Children;
+and Giles, no doubt, presented it at Court; for he would hardly dare
+thus abuse the Queen's commission, or thus make a public spectacle of
+the royal choristers, without in some way first consulting Her
+Majesty, and securing at least her tacit consent. That Giles and Evans
+did secure royal permission to put their scheme into operation is
+certain, although the exact nature of this permission is not clear.
+Later, for misdemeanors on the part of the management, the Star
+Chamber ordered "that all assurances made to the said Evans concerning
+the said house, or plays, or interludes, should be utterly void, and
+to be delivered up to be cancelled."[315]
+
+[Footnote 315: Fleay, _A Chronicle History of the London Stage_, p.
+248.]
+
+Armed with these written "assurances," and with the royal commission
+to take up children, Evans and Giles began to form their company. This
+explains the language used by Heminges and Burbage: "let the said
+playhouse unto Henry Evans ... who intended then presently to erect or
+set up a company of boys."[316] Their method of recruiting players
+may best be told by Henry Clifton, in his complaint to the Queen:
+
+ But so it is, most excellent Sovereign, that the said
+ Nathaniel Giles, confederating himself with one James
+ Robinson, Henry Evans, and others,[317] yet unto Your
+ Majesty's said subject unknown how [many], by color of Your
+ Majesty's said letters patents, and the trust by Your
+ Highness thereby to him, the said Nathaniel Giles,
+ committed, endeavoring, conspiring, and complotting how to
+ oppress diverse of Your Majesty's humble and faithful
+ subjects, and thereby to make unto themselves an unlawful
+ gain and benefit, they, the said confederates, devised,
+ conspired, and concluded, for their own corrupt gain and
+ lucre, to erect, set up, furnish, and maintain a playhouse,
+ or place in the Blackfriars, within Your Majesty's city of
+ London; and to the end they might the better furnish their
+ said plays and interludes with children, whom they thought
+ most fittest to act and furnish the said plays, they, the
+ said confederates, abusing the authority and trust by Your
+ Highness to him, the said Nathaniel Giles, and his deputy or
+ deputies, by Your Highness's said letters patents given and
+ reposed, hath, sithence Your Majesty's last free and general
+ pardon, most wrongfully, unduly, and unjustly taken diverse
+ and several children from diverse and sundry schools of
+ learning and other places, and apprentices to men of trade
+ from their masters, no way fitting for Your Majesty's
+ service in or for your Chapel Royal, but the children have
+ so taken and employed in acting and furnishing of the said
+ plays and interludes, so by them complotted and agreed to
+ be erected, furnished, and maintained, against the wills of
+ the said children, their parents, tutors, masters, and
+ governors, and to the no small grief and oppressions [of]
+ Your Majesty's true and faithful subjects. Amongst which
+ numbers, so by the persons aforesaid and their agents so
+ unjustly taken, used and employed, they have unduly taken
+ and so employed one John Chappell, a grammar school scholar
+ of one Mr. Spykes School near Cripplegate, London; John
+ Motteram, a grammar scholar in the free school at
+ Westminster; Nathaniel Field, a scholar of a grammar school
+ in London kept by one Mr. Monkaster;[318] Alvery Trussell,
+ an apprentice to one Thomas Gyles; one Phillipp Pykman and
+ [one] Thomas Grymes, apprentices to Richard and George
+ Chambers; Salmon Pavy,[319] apprentice to one Peerce; being
+ children no way able or fit for singing, nor by any the said
+ confederates endeavoured to be taught to sing, but by them,
+ the said confederates, abusively employed, as aforesaid,
+ only in plays and interludes.[320]
+
+[Footnote 316: _Ibid._, p. 234. Note that Evans is not to "continue" a
+troupe there, as Fleay and Wallace believe, but to "erect" one.]
+
+[Footnote 317: Possibly Robinson and the "others" were merely
+deputies.]
+
+[Footnote 318: Field became later famous both as an actor and
+playwright. His portrait is preserved at Dulwich College.]
+
+[Footnote 319: Salathiel Pavy, whose excellent acting is celebrated in
+Jonson's tender elegy, quoted in part below.]
+
+[Footnote 320: Star Chamber Proceedings, printed in full by Fleay,
+_op. cit._, p. 127.]
+
+In spite of the obvious animosity inspiring Clifton's words, we get
+from his complaint a clear notion of how Evans and Giles supplemented
+the Children of the Chapel proper with actors. In a short time they
+brought together at Blackfriars a remarkable troupe of boy-players,
+who, with Jonson and Chapman as their poets, began to astonish London.
+For, in spite of certain limitations, "the children" could act with a
+charm and a grace that often made them more attractive than their
+grown-up rivals. Middleton advises the London gallant "to call in at
+the Blackfriars, where he should see a nest of boys able to ravish a
+man."[321] Jonson gives eloquent testimony to the power of little
+Salathiel Pavy to portray the character of old age:
+
+ Years he numbered scarce thirteen
+ When Fates turned cruel,
+ Yet three filled zodiacs had he been
+ The stage's jewel;
+ And did act, what now we moan,
+ Old men so duly,
+ As, sooth, the Parcae thought him one,
+ He played so truly.[322]
+
+[Footnote 321: _Father Hubbard's Tales_ (ed. Bullen, VIII, 77).]
+
+[Footnote 322: Jonson, _Epigrams_, CXX, _An Epitaph on Salathiel Pavy,
+a Child of Queen Elizabeth's Chapel_.]
+
+And Samuel Pepys records the effectiveness of a child-actor in the
+rôle of women: "One Kinaston, a boy, acted the Duke's sister, but made
+the loveliest lady that ever I saw in my life."[323]
+
+[Footnote 323: _Diary_, August 18, 1660.]
+
+Moreover, to expert acting these Boys of the Chapel Royal added the
+charms of vocal and instrumental music, for which many of them had
+been specially trained. The Duke of Stettin-Pomerania, who upon his
+grand tour of the European countries in 1602 attended a play at
+Blackfriars, bears eloquent testimony to the musical powers of the
+children: "For a whole hour before the play begins, one listens to
+charming [_köstliche_] instrumental music played on organs, lutes,
+pandorins, mandolins, violins, and flutes; as, indeed, on this
+occasion, a boy sang _cum voce tremula_ to the accompaniment of a
+bass-viol, so delightfully [_lieblich_] that, if the Nuns at Milan did
+not excel him, we had not heard his equal in our travels."[324] In
+addition, the Children were provided with splendid apparel--though not
+at the cost of the Queen, as Mr. Wallace contends.[325] Naturally they
+became popular. On January 6, 1601, they were summoned to Court to
+entertain Her Majesty--the first recorded performance of the Children
+of the Chapel at Court since the year 1584, when Sir William More
+closed the first Blackfriars.
+
+[Footnote 324: _The Diary of the Duke of Stettin-Pomerania_, printed
+in _Transactions of the Royal Historical Society_ (1890). The diary
+was written by the Duke's tutor, Gerschow, at the express command of
+the Duke.]
+
+[Footnote 325: It is hard to believe Mr. Wallace's novel theory that
+the Children of the Chapel were subsidized by Elizabeth, as presented
+in his otherwise valuable _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_.
+Burbage and Heminges knew nothing of such a royal patronage at
+Blackfriars (see Fleay, _op. cit._, p. 236), nor did Kirkham, the
+Yeoman of the Revels (_ibid._, p. 248). Kirkham and his partners spent
+£600 on apparel, etc., according to Kirkham's statement.]
+
+Perhaps the most interesting testimony to the success of the Chapel
+Children in their new playhouse is that uttered by Shakespeare in
+_Hamlet_ (1601), in which he speaks of the performances by the "little
+eyases" as a "late innovation." The success of the "innovation" had
+driven Shakespeare and his troupe of grown-up actors to close the
+Globe and travel in the country, even though they had _Hamlet_ as an
+attraction. The good-natured way in which Shakespeare treats the
+situation is worthy of special observation:
+
+ _Ham._ What players are they?
+
+ _Ros._ Even those you were wont to take delight in, the
+ tragedians of the city.[326]
+
+ _Ham._ How chances it they travel? their residence, both in
+ reputation and profit, was better both ways.[327]
+
+ _Ros._ I think their inhibition comes by means of the late
+ innovation.
+
+ _Ham._ Do they hold the same estimation they did when I was
+ in the city? are they so followed?
+
+ _Ros._ No, indeed, they are not!
+
+ _Ham._ How comes it? do they grow rusty?
+
+ _Ros._ Nay, their endeavour keeps in the wonted pace; but
+ there is, sir, an aerie of children,[328] little eyases,
+ that cry out on the top of question, and are most
+ tyrannically clapped for 't. These are now the fashion, and
+ so berattle the "common stages"--so they call them--that
+ many wearing rapiers [i.e., gallants] are afraid of
+ goose-quills, and dare scarce come thither.
+
+ _Ham._ What! are they children? who maintains 'em? how are
+ they escoted? Will they pursue the quality no longer than
+ they can sing?
+
+[Footnote 326: The Children were acting light comedies such as
+_Cynthia's Revels_; the Lord Chamberlain's Men were acting _Hamlet_.]
+
+[Footnote 327: Shakespeare's troupe is known to have been traveling in
+the spring of 1601.]
+
+[Footnote 328: Cf. Middleton's _Father Hubbard's Tales_, already
+quoted, "a nest of boys." Possibly the idea was suggested by the fact
+that the children were lodged and fed in the building.]
+
+The passage ends with the question from Hamlet: "Do the boys carry it
+away?" which gives Rosencrantz an opportunity to pun on the sign of
+the Globe Playhouse: "Ay, that they do, my lord; Hercules and his
+load, too."
+
+Shortly after the great dramatist had penned these words, the
+management of Blackfriars met with disaster. The cause, however, went
+back to December 13, 1600, when Giles and Evans were gathering their
+players. In their overweening confidence they made a stupid blunder in
+"taking up" for their troupe the only son and heir of Henry Clifton, a
+well-to-do gentleman of Norfolk, who had come to London for the
+purpose of educating the boy. Clifton says in his complaint that
+Giles, Evans, and their confederates, "well knowing that your
+subject's said son had no manner of sight in song, nor skill in
+music," on the 13th day of December, 1600, did "waylay the said Thomas
+Clifton" as he was "walking quietly from your subject's said house
+towards the said school," and "with great force and violence did seize
+and surprise, and him with like force and violence did, to the great
+terror and hurt of him, the said Thomas Clifton, haul, pull, drag, and
+carry away to the said playhouse." As soon as the father learned of
+this, he hurried to the playhouse and "made request to have his said
+son released." But Giles and Evans "utterly and scornfully refused to
+do" this. Whereupon Clifton threatened to complain to the Privy
+Council. But Evans and Giles "in very scornful manner willed your said
+subject to complain to whom he would." Clifton suggested that "it was
+not fit that a gentleman of his sort should have his son and heir
+(and that his only son) to be so basely used." Giles and Evans "most
+arrogantly then and there answered that they had authority sufficient
+so to take any nobleman's son in this land"; and further to irritate
+the father, they immediately put into young Thomas's hand "a scroll of
+paper, containing part of one of their said plays or interludes, and
+him, the said Thomas Clifton, commanded to learn the same by heart,"
+with the admonition that "if he did not obey the said Evans, he should
+be surely whipped."[329]
+
+[Footnote 329: The full complaint is printed by Fleay, _op. cit._, p.
+127.]
+
+Clifton at once appealed to his friend, Sir John Fortescue, a member
+of the Privy Council, at whose order young Thomas was released and
+sent back to his studies. Apparently this ended the episode. But
+Clifton, nourishing his animosity, began to investigate the management
+of Blackfriars, and to collect evidence of similar abuses of the
+Queen's commission, with the object of making complaint to the Star
+Chamber. In October, 1601, Evans, it seems, learned of Clifton's
+purpose, for on the 21st of that month he deeded all his property to
+his son-in-law, Alexander Hawkins.[330] Clifton finally presented his
+complaint to the Star Chamber on December 15, 1601,[331] but his
+complaint was probably not acted on until early in 1602, for during
+the Christmas holidays the Children were summoned as usual to present
+their play before the Queen.[332]
+
+[Footnote 330: _Ibid._, pp. 244-45.]
+
+[Footnote 331: Wallace, _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_,
+p. 84, note 4.]
+
+[Footnote 332: On December 29, 1601, Sir Dudley Carleton wrote to his
+friend John Chamberlain: "The Queen dined this day privately at My
+Lord Chamberlain's. I came even now from the Blackfriars, where I saw
+her at the play with all her _candidæ auditrices_." From this it has
+been generally assumed that Elizabeth visited the playhouse in
+Blackfriars to see the Children act there; and Mr. Wallace, in his
+_The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, pp. 26, 87, 95-97, lays
+great emphasis upon it to show that the Queen was directly responsible
+for establishing and managing the Children at Blackfriars. But the
+assumption that the Queen attended a performance at the Blackfriars
+Playhouse is, I think, unwarranted. The Lord Chamberlain at this time
+was Lord Hunsdon, who lived "in the Blackfriars." No doubt on this
+Christmas occasion he entertained the Queen with a great dinner, and
+after the dinner with a play given, not in a playhouse, but in his
+mansion. (Lord Cobham, who was formerly Lord Chamberlain, and who also
+lived in Blackfriars, had similarly entertained the Queen with plays
+"in Blackfriars"; cf. also The Malone Society's _Collections_, II,
+52.) Furthermore, the actors on this occasion were probably not the
+Children of the Chapel, as Mr. Wallace thinks, but Lord Hunsdon's own
+troupe. Possibly one of Shakespeare's new plays (_Hamlet_?) was then
+presented before the Queen for the first time.]
+
+Shortly after this, however, the Star Chamber passed on Clifton's
+complaint. The decree itself is lost, but the following reference to
+it is made in a subsequent lawsuit: "The said Evans ... was censured
+by the right honorable Court of Star Chamber for his unorderly
+carriage and behaviour in taking up of gentlemen's children against
+their wills and to employ them for players, and for other misdemeanors
+in the said Decree contained; and further that all assurances made to
+the said Evans concerning the said house or plays or interludes
+should be utterly void, and to be delivered up to be canceled."[333]
+Doubtless the decree fell with equal force upon Giles and the others
+connected with the enterprise, for after the Star Chamber decree Giles
+and Robinson disappear from the management of the playhouse. Evans was
+forbidden to have any connection with plays there; and for a time, no
+doubt, the building was closed.
+
+[Footnote 333: Fleay, _op. cit._, p. 248.]
+
+Evans, however, still held the lease, and was under the necessity of
+paying the rent as before. Then came forward Edward Kirkham, who, in
+his official capacity as Yeoman of the Revels, had become acquainted
+with the dramatic activities of the Children of the Chapel. He saw an
+opportunity to take over the Blackfriars venture now that Evans and
+probably Giles had been forbidden by the Star Chamber to have any
+connection with plays in that building. Having associated with him
+William Rastell, a merchant, and Thomas Kendall,[334] a haberdasher,
+he made overtures to Evans, the owner of the lease. Evans, however,
+was determined to retain a half-interest in the playhouse, and to
+evade the order of the Star Chamber by using his son-in-law, Alexander
+Hawkins, as his agent. Accordingly, on April 20, 1602, "Articles of
+Agreement" were signed between Evans and Hawkins on the one part, and
+Kirkham, Rastell, and Kendall on the other part, whereby the latter
+were admitted to a half-interest in the playhouse and in the troupe of
+child-actors. Kirkham, Rastell, and Kendall agreed to pay one-half of
+the annual rent of £40,[335] to pay one-half of the repairs on the
+building, and in addition to spend £400 on apparel and furnishings for
+the troupe. Under this reorganization--with Evans as a secret
+partner--the Children continued to act with their customary success.
+
+[Footnote 334: We find in Henslowe's _Diary_ a player named William
+Kendall, but we do not know that he was related to Thomas.]
+
+[Footnote 335: The agreements remind one of the organization of the
+Globe. It seems clear that Kirkham, Rastell, and Kendall held their
+moiety in joint tenancy.]
+
+About a month later, however, Lord Hunsdon, the Lord Chamberlain,
+whose house adjoined Blackfriars, seems to have inquired into the
+affairs of the new organization.[336] What Kirkham told him led him to
+order Evans off the premises. Evans informs us that he was "commanded
+by his Lordship to avoid and leave the same; for fear of whose
+displeasure, the complainant [Evans] was forced to leave the
+country."[337] He felt it prudent to remain away from London "for a
+long space and time"; yet he "lost nothing," for "he left the said
+Alexander Hawkins to deal for him and to take such benefit of the said
+house as should belong unto him in his absence."[338]
+
+[Footnote 336: Fleay, _op. cit._, pp. 211-13; 216; 220.]
+
+[Footnote 337: _Ibid._, p. 220.]
+
+[Footnote 338: _Ibid._, p. 217.]
+
+If we may judge from the enthusiastic account given by the Duke of
+Stettin-Pomerania, who visited Blackfriars in the September
+following, the Children were just as effective under Kirkham's
+management as they had been under the management of Giles and Evans.
+It is to be noted, however, that Elizabeth did not again invite the
+Blackfriars troupe to the Court.
+
+The death of the Queen in 1603 led to the closing of all playhouses.
+This was followed by a long attack of the plague, so that for many
+months Blackfriars was closed, and "by reason thereof no such profit
+and commodity was raised and made of and by the said playhouse as was
+hoped for."[339] Evans actually "treated" with Richard Burbage "about
+the surrendering and giving up the said lease," but Burbage declined
+to consider the matter.
+
+[Footnote 339: Fleay, _op. cit._, p. 235.]
+
+Shortly after this the plague ceased, and acting, stimulated by King
+James's patronage, was resumed with fervor. The Blackfriars Company
+was reorganized under Edward Kirkham, Alexander Hawkins (acting for
+Evans), Thomas Kendall, and Robert Payne: and on February 4, 1604, it
+secured a royal patent to play under the title "The Children of the
+Queen's Revels."[340] According to this patent, the poet Samuel
+Daniel was specially appointed to license their plays: "Provided
+always that no such plays or shows shall be presented before the said
+Queen our wife by the said Children, or by them anywhere publicly
+acted, but by the approbation and allowance of Samuel Daniel, whom her
+pleasure is to appoint for that purpose." At this time, too, or not
+long after, John Marston was allowed a share in the organization, and
+thus was retained as one of its regular playwrights.
+
+[Footnote 340: For the patent, commonly misdated January 30, see The
+Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 267. Mr. Wallace, in _The Century
+Magazine_ (September, 1910, p. 747), says that the company secured its
+patent "through the intercessions of the poet Samuel Daniel." It is
+true that the Children of Her Majesty's Royal Chamber of Bristol
+secured their patent in 1615 at the intercession of Daniel, but I know
+of no evidence that he intervened in behalf of the Blackfriars
+troupe.]
+
+The success of the new company is indicated by the fact that it was
+summoned to present a play at Court in February, 1604, and again two
+plays in January, 1605. Evans's activity in the management of the
+troupe in spite of the order of the Star Chamber is evident from the
+fact that the payment for the last two court performances was made
+directly to him.
+
+In the spring of 1604 the company gave serious offense by acting
+Samuel Daniel's _Philotas_, which was supposed to relate to the
+unfortunate Earl of Essex; but the blame must have fallen largely on
+Daniel, who not only wrote the play, but also licensed its
+performance. He was summoned before the Privy Council to explain, and
+seems to have fully proved his innocence. Shortly after this he
+published the play with an apology affixed.[341]
+
+[Footnote 341: A letter from Daniel to the Earl of Devonshire
+vindicating the play is printed in Grosart's _Daniel_, I, xxii.]
+
+The following year the Children gave much more serious offense by
+acting _Eastward Hoe_, a comedy in which Marston, Chapman, and Jonson
+collaborated. Not only did the play ridicule the Scots in general, and
+King James's creation of innumerable knights in particular, but one of
+the little actors was actually made, it seems, to mimic the royal
+brogue: "I ken the man weel; he is one of my thirty pound Knights."
+Marston escaped by timely flight, but Jonson and Chapman were arrested
+and lodged in jail, and were for a time in some danger of having their
+nostrils slit and their ears cropped. Both Chapman and Jonson asserted
+that they were wholly innocent, and Chapman openly put the blame of
+the offensive passages on Marston.[342] Marston, however, was beyond
+the reach of the King's wrath, so His Majesty punished instead the men
+in control of Blackfriars. It was discovered that the manager,
+Kirkham, had presented the play without securing the Lord
+Chamberlain's allowance. As a result, he and the others in charge of
+the Children were prohibited from any further connection with the
+playhouse. This doubtless explains the fact that Kirkham shortly after
+appears as one of the managers of Paul's Boys.[343] It explains, also,
+the following statement made by Evans in the course of one of the
+later legal documents: "After the King's most excellent Majesty, upon
+some misdemeanors committed in or about the plays there, _and
+specially upon the defendant's_ [Kirkham's] _acts and doings there_,
+had prohibited that no plays should be more used there," etc.[344] Not
+only was Kirkham driven from the management of the troupe and the
+playhouse closed for a time, but the Children were denied the Queen's
+patronage. No longer were they allowed to use the high-sounding title
+"The Children of the Queen's Majesty's Revels"; instead, we find them
+described merely as "The Children of the Revels," or as "The Children
+of Blackfriars."[345]
+
+[Footnote 342: See Dobell, "Newly Discovered Documents," in _The
+Athenæum_, March 30, 1901.]
+
+[Footnote 343: Cunningham, _Revels_, p. xxxviii.]
+
+[Footnote 344: Fleay, _op. cit._, p. 221.]
+
+[Footnote 345: Except carelessly, as when sometimes called "The
+Children of the Chapel."]
+
+For a time, no doubt, affairs at the playhouse were at a standstill.
+Evans again sought to surrender his lease to Burbage, but without
+success.[346] Marston, having escaped the wrath of the King by flight,
+decided to end his career as a playwright and turn country parson. It
+was shortly after this, in all probability, that he sold his share in
+the Blackfriars organization to one Robert Keysar, a goldsmith of
+London, for the sum of £100.[347]
+
+[Footnote 346: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+82.]
+
+[Footnote 347: _Ibid._, pp. 81, 86, 89, 93.]
+
+Keysar, it seems, undertook to reopen the playhouse, and to continue
+the Children there at his own expense.[348] From the proprietors he
+rented the playhouse, the stock of apparel, the furnishings, and
+playbooks. This, I take it, explains the puzzling statement made by
+Kirkham some years later:
+
+ This repliant [Kirkham] and his said partners [Rastell and
+ Kendall] have had and received the sum of one hundred pounds
+ per annum for their part and moiety in the premises without
+ any manner of charges whatsoever [i.e., during Kirkham's
+ management of the troupe prior to 1605].[349] And after that
+ this replyant and his said partners had received the
+ foresaid profits [i.e., after Kirkham and his partners had
+ to give up the management of the Children in 1605], the said
+ Children, which the said Evans in his answer affirmeth to be
+ the Queen's Children [i.e., they are no longer the Queen's
+ Children, for after 1605 they had been deprived of the
+ Queen's patronage; but Kirkham was in error, for Evans with
+ legal precision had referred to the company as 'The Queen's
+ Majesty's Children of the Revels (for so it was often
+ called)'] were masters themselves [i.e., their own
+ managers], and this complainant and his said partners
+ received of them, and of one Keysar who was interest with
+ them, above the sum of one hundred and fifty pounds per
+ annum only for the use of the said great hall, without all
+ manner of charges, as this replyant will make it manifest to
+ this honorable court.[350]
+
+[Footnote 348: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 80
+ff.]
+
+[Footnote 349: That is, £33, more or less, a share. We have
+documentary evidence to show that a share in the Red Bull produced
+£30, and a share in the Globe £30 to £40 per annum.]
+
+[Footnote 350: Fleay, _op. cit._, p. 249. The yearly rental must have
+included not only the playhouse and its equipment, but the playbooks,
+apparel, properties, etc., belonging to the Children. These were on
+July 26, 1608, divided up among the sharers, Kirkham, Rastell,
+Kendall, and Evans.]
+
+Under Keysar's management the Blackfriars troupe continued to act as
+the Children of the Revels. But, unfortunately, they had not learned
+wisdom from their recent experience, and in the very following year we
+find them again in serious trouble. John Day's _Isle of Guls_, acted
+in February, 1606, gave great offense to the Court. Sir Edward Hoby,
+in a letter to Sir Thomas Edwards,[351] writes: "At this time was much
+speech of a play in the Blackfriars, where, in the _Isle of Guls_,
+from the highest to the lowest, all men's parts were acted of two
+diverse nations. As I understand, sundry were committed to
+Bridewell."[352]
+
+[Footnote 351: Birch, _Court and Times of James the First_, I, 60;
+quoted by E.K. Chambers, in _Modern Language Review_, IV, 158.]
+
+[Footnote 352: Possibly an aftermath of the King's displeasure is to
+be found in the cancellation of Giles's long-standing commission to
+take up boys for the Chapel, and the issuance of a new commission to
+him, November 7, 1606, with the distinct proviso that "none of the
+said choristers or children of the Chapel so to be taken by force of
+this commission shall be used or employed as commedians or stage
+players." (The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 357.)]
+
+The Children, however, were soon allowed to resume playing, and they
+continued for a time without mishap. But in the early spring of 1608
+they committed the most serious offense of all by acting Chapman's
+_Conspiracy and Tragedy of Charles, Duke of Byron_. The French
+Ambassador took umbrage at the uncomplimentary representation of the
+contemporary French Court, and had an order made forbidding them to
+act the play. But the Children, "voyant toute la Cour dehors, ne
+laisserent de la faire, et non seulement cela, mais y introduiserent
+la Reine et Madame de Verneuil, traitant celle-ci fort mal de
+paroles, et lui donnant un soufflet." Whereupon the French Ambassador
+made special complaint to Salisbury, who ordered the arrest of the
+author and the actors. "Toutefois il ne s'en trouva que trois, qui
+aussi-tôt furent menés à la prison où ils sont encore; mais le
+principal, qui est le compositeur, échapa."[353] The Ambassador
+observes also that a few days before the Children of the Revels had
+given offense by a play on King James: "Un jour ou deux avant, ils
+avoient dépêché leur Roi, sa mine d'Ecosse, et tous ses Favoris d'une
+étrange sorte; car aprés lui avoir fait dépiter le Ciel sur le vol
+d'un oisseau, et fait battre un Gentilhomme pour avoir rompu ses
+chiens, ils le dépeignoient ivre pour le moins une fois le jour."[354]
+As a result of these two offenses, coming as a climax to a long series
+of such offenses, the King was "extrêmement irrité contre ces
+marauds-là," and gave order for their immediate suppression. This
+marked the end of the child-actors at Blackfriars.
+
+[Footnote 353: From the report of the French Ambassador, M. de la
+Boderie, to M. de Puisieux at Paris, _Ambassades de Monsieur de la
+Boderie en Angleterre_, 1750, III, 196; quoted by E.K. Chambers in
+_Modern Language Review_, IV, 158.]
+
+[Footnote 354: The name of this play is not known; probably the King
+was satirized in a comic scene foisted upon an otherwise innocent
+piece. Mr. Wallace, in _The Century Magazine_ (September, 1910, p.
+747), says: "From a document I have found in France the Blackfriars
+boys now satirized the King's efforts to raise money, made local jokes
+on the recent discovery of his silver mine in Scotland, brought him on
+the stage as drunk, and showed such to be his condition at least three
+times a day, caricatured him in his favorite pastime of hawking, and
+represented him as swearing and cursing at a gentleman for losing a
+bird." I do not know what document Mr. Wallace has found; the French
+document quoted above has been known for a long time.]
+
+Naturally Kirkham, Rastell, and Kendall, since there was "no profit
+made of the said house, but a continual rent of forty pounds to be
+paid for the same," became sick of their bargain with Evans. An
+additional reason for their wishing to withdraw finally from the
+enterprise was the rapid increase of the plague, which about July 25
+closed all playhouses. So Kirkham, "at or about the 26 of July, 1608,
+caused the apparrels, properties, and goods belonging to the
+copartners, sharers, and masters" to be divided. Kirkham and his
+associates took away their portions, and "quit the place," the
+one-time manager using to Evans some unkind words: "said he would deal
+no more with it, 'for,' quod he, 'it is a base thing,' or used words
+to such or very like effect."[355] Evans, thus deserted by Kirkham,
+Rastell, and Kendall, regarded the organization of the Blackfriars as
+dissolved; he "delivered up their commission which he had under the
+Great Seal authorizing them to play, and discharged diverse of the
+partners and poets."
+
+[Footnote 355: Fleay, _op. cit._, pp. 221-22.]
+
+Robert Keysar, however, the old manager, laid plans to keep the
+Children together, and continue them as a troupe after the cessation
+of the plague. For a while, we are told, he maintained them at his own
+expense, "in hope to have enjoyed his said bargain ... upon the
+ceasing of the general sickness."[356] And he expected, by virtue of
+the share he had purchased from John Marston, to be able to use the
+Blackfriars Playhouse for his purpose.
+
+[Footnote 356: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, pp.
+83, 97.]
+
+In the meanwhile Evans began negotiations with Burbage for the
+surrender of the lease: "By reason the said premises lay then and had
+long lyen void and without use for plays, whereby the same became not
+only burthensome and unprofitable unto the said Evans, but also ran
+far into decay for want of reparations ... the said Evans began to
+treat with the said Richard Burbage about a surrender of the said
+Evans his said lease."[357] This time Burbage listened to the
+proposal, for he and his fellow-actors at the Globe "considered that
+the house would be fit for themselves." So in August, 1608, he agreed
+to take over the building for the use of the King's Men.
+
+[Footnote 357: _Ibid._, p. 87.]
+
+Even after Evans's surrender of the lease, Keysar, it seems, made an
+effort to keep the Children together. On the following Christmas,
+1608-09, we find a record of payment to him for performances at Court,
+by "The Children of Blackfriars." But soon after this the troupe must
+have been disbanded. Keysar says that they were "enforced to be
+dispersed and turned away to the abundant hurt of the said young
+men";[358] and the Burbages and Heminges declare that the children
+"were dispersed and driven each of them to provide for himself by
+reason that the plays ceasing in the City of London, either through
+sickness, or for some other cause, he, the said complainant [Keysar],
+was no longer able to maintain them together."[359] In the autumn of
+1609, however, Keysar assembled the Children again, reorganized them
+with the assistance of Philip Rosseter, and placed them in Whitefriars
+Playhouse, recently left vacant by the disruption of the Children of
+His Majesty's Revels. Their subsequent history will be found related
+in the chapter dealing with that theatre.
+
+[Footnote 358: _Ibid._, p. 90.]
+
+[Footnote 359: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+97.]
+
+When in August, 1608, Richard Burbage secured from Evans the surrender
+of the Blackfriars lease, he at once proceeded to organize from the
+Globe Company a syndicate to operate the building as a playhouse. He
+admitted to partnership in the new enterprise all of the then sharers
+in the Globe except Witter and Nichols, outsiders who had secured
+their interest through marriage with the heirs of Pope and Phillips,
+and who, therefore, were not entitled to any consideration. In
+addition, he admitted Henry Evans, doubtless in fulfillment of a
+condition in the surrender of the lease. The syndicate thus formed was
+made up of seven equal sharers, as follows: Richard Burbage, Cuthbert
+Burbage, Henry Evans, William Shakespeare, John Heminges, Henry
+Condell, and William Slye. These sharers leased the building from
+Richard Burbage for a period of twenty-one years,[360] at the old
+rental of £40 per annum, each binding himself to pay annually the sum
+of £5 14_s._ 4_d._[361] The method of distributing the profits between
+the sharers (known as "housekeepers") and the actors (known as the
+"company") was to be the same as that practiced at the Globe.[362]
+
+[Footnote 360: Twenty-one years was a very common term for a lease to
+run; but in this case, no doubt, it was intended that the lease of
+Blackfriars should last as long as the lease of the Globe, which then
+had exactly twenty-one years to run.]
+
+[Footnote 361: Shortly after this agreement had been made William Slye
+died, and his executrix delivered up his share to Richard Burbage "to
+be cancelled and made void." See the Heminges-Osteler documents
+printed by Mr. Wallace in the London _Times_, October 4, 1909. In 1611
+Burbage let William Osteler have this share.]
+
+[Footnote 362: The method is clearly explained in the documents of
+1635 printed by Halliwell-Phillipps, in _Outlines_, I, 312.]
+
+Soon after this organization was completed, the King's Men moved from
+the Globe to the Blackfriars. They did not, of course, intend to
+abandon the Globe. Their plan was to use the Blackfriars as a "winter
+home," and the Globe as a "summer house."[363] Malone observed from
+the Herbert Manuscript that "the King's Company usually began to play
+at the Globe in the month of May";[364] although he failed to state at
+what time in the autumn they usually moved to the Blackfriars, the
+evidence points to the first of November.
+
+[Footnote 363: See Wright, _Historia Histrionica_, Hazlitt's Dodsley,
+XV, 406.]
+
+[Footnote 364: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 71.]
+
+Such a plan had many advantages. For one thing, it would prevent the
+pecuniary losses often caused by a severe winter. In the _Poetaster_
+(1601), Jonson makes Histrio, representing the Globe Players, say: "O,
+it will get us a huge deal of money, and we have need on't, for this
+winter has made us all poorer than so many starved snakes; nobody
+comes at us."[365] This could not be said of the King's Men after they
+moved to the Blackfriars. Edward Kirkham, a man experienced in
+theatrical finances, offered to prove to the court in 1612 that the
+King's Men "got, and as yet doth, more in one winter in the said great
+hall by a thousand pounds than they were used to get on the
+Bankside."[366]
+
+[Footnote 365: Act III, scene iv. Cf. also Webster's Preface to _The
+White Devil_, acted at the Red Bull about 1610.]
+
+[Footnote 366: Fleay, _A Chronicle History of the London Stage_, p.
+248.]
+
+Kirkham's testimony as to the popularity of the King's Men in their
+winter home is borne out by a petition to the city authorities made by
+"the constables and other officers and inhabitants of Blackfriars" in
+January, 1619. They declared that to the playhouse "there is daily
+such resort of people, and such multitudes of coaches (whereof many
+are hackney-coaches, bringing people of all sorts), that sometimes all
+our streets cannot contain them, but that they clog up Ludgate also,
+in such sort that both they endanger the one the other, break down
+stalls, throw down men's goods from their shops, and the inhabitants
+there cannot come to their houses, nor bring in their necessary
+provisions of beer, wood, coal, or hay, nor the tradesmen or
+shopkeepers utter their wares, nor the passenger go to the common
+water stairs without danger of their lives and limbs." "These
+inconveniences" were said to last "every day in the winter time from
+one or two of the clock till six at night."[367]
+
+[Footnote 367: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 91.]
+
+As a result of this petition the London Common Council ordered,
+January 21, 1619, that "the said playhouses be suppressed, and that
+the players shall from thenceforth forbear and desist from playing in
+that house."[368] But the players had at Court many influential
+friends, and these apparently came to their rescue. The order of the
+Common Council was not put into effect; and so far as we know the only
+result of this agitation was that King James on March 27 issued to his
+actors a new patent specifically giving them--described as his
+"well-beloved servants"--the right henceforth to play unmolested in
+Blackfriars. The new clause in the patent runs: "as well within their
+two their now usual houses called the Globe, within our County of
+Surrey, and their private house situate in the precinct of the
+Blackfriars, within our city of London."[369] At the accession of King
+Charles I, the patent was renewed, June 24, 1625, with the same clause
+regarding the use of Blackfriars.[370]
+
+[Footnote 368: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 311.]
+
+[Footnote 369: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 281.]
+
+[Footnote 370: _Ibid._, I, 282.]
+
+In 1631, however, the agitation was renewed, this time in the form of
+a petition from the churchwardens and constables of the precinct of
+Blackfriars to William Laud, then Bishop of London. The document gives
+such eloquent testimony to the popularity of the playhouse that I have
+inserted it below in full:
+
+ To the Right Honorable and Right Reverend Father in God,
+ William, Lord Bishop of London, one of His Majesty's
+ Honorable Privy Council. The humble petition of the
+ churchwardens and constables of Blackfriars, on the behalf
+ of the whole Parish, showing that by reason of a playhouse,
+ exceedingly frequented, in the precinct of the said
+ Blackfriars, the inhabitants there suffer many grievances
+ upon the inconveniences hereunto annexed, and many other.
+
+ May it therefore please your Lordship to take the said
+ grievances into your honorable consideration for the
+ redressing thereof. And for the reviving the order, which
+ hath been heretofore made by the Lords of the Council, and
+ the Lord Mayor and the Court of Aldermen, for the removal of
+ them. And they shall, according to their duties, ever pray
+ for your Lordship.
+
+ Reasons and Inconveniences Inducing the Inhabitants of
+ Blackfriars, London, to Become Humble Suitors to Your
+ Lordship for Removing the Playhouse in the Said Blackfriars:
+
+ 1. The shopkeepers in divers places suffer much, being
+ hindered by the great recourse to the plays (especially of
+ coaches) from selling their commodities, and having their
+ wares many times broken and beaten off their stalls.
+
+ 2. The recourse of coaches is many times so great that the
+ inhabitants cannot in an afternoon take in any provision of
+ beer, coals, wood, or hay, the streets being known to be so
+ exceeding straight and narrow.
+
+ 3. The passage through Ludgate to the water [i.e., Water
+ Lane] is many times stopped up, people in their ordinary
+ going much endangered, quarrels and bloodshed many times
+ occasioned, and many disorderly people towards night
+ gathered thither, under pretense of attending and waiting
+ for those at the plays.
+
+ 4. If there should happen any misfortune of fire, there is
+ not likely any present order could possibly be taken, for
+ the disorder and number of the coaches, since there could be
+ no speedy passage made for quenching the fire, to the
+ endangering of the parish and city.
+
+ 5. Christenings and burials, which usually are in the
+ afternoon, are many times disturbed, and persons endangered
+ in that part, which is the greatest part of the parish.
+
+ 6. Persons of honor and quality that dwell in the parish are
+ restrained by the number of coaches from going out, or
+ coming home in seasonable time, to the prejudice of their
+ occasions. And some persons of honor have left, and others
+ have refused houses for this very inconvenience, to the
+ prejudice and loss of the parish.
+
+ 7. The Lords of the Council in former times have by order
+ directed that there shall be but two playhouses tolerated,
+ and those _without the city_, the one at the Bankside, the
+ other near Golding Lane (which these players still have and
+ use all summer), which the Lords did signify by their
+ letters to the Lord Mayor; and in performance thereof the
+ Lord Mayor and the Court of Aldermen did give order that
+ they should forbear to play any longer there, which the
+ players promised to the Lord Chief Justice of the Common
+ Pleas (while he was Recorder of London) to observe,
+ entreating only a little time to provide themselves
+ elsewhere.[371]
+
+[Footnote 371: Collier, _History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879),
+I, 455.]
+
+Bishop Laud endorsed the petition with his own hand "To the Coun.
+Table," and in all probability he submitted it to the consideration of
+the Privy Council. If so, the Council took no action.
+
+But in 1633, as a result of further complaints about the crowding of
+coaches, the Privy Council appointed a committee to estimate the value
+of the Blackfriars Theatre and "the buildings thereunto belonging,"
+with the idea of removing the playhouse and paying the owners
+therefor. The committee reported that "the players demanded £21,000.
+The commissioners [Sir Henry Spiller, Sir William Beecher, and
+Laurence Whitaker] valued it at near £3000. The Parishioners offered
+towards the removing of them £100."[372] Obviously the plan of removal
+was not feasible, if indeed the Privy Council seriously contemplated
+such action. The only result of this second agitation was the
+issuance on November 20 of special instructions to coachmen: "If any
+persons, men or women, of what condition soever, repair to the
+aforesaid playhouse in coach, as soon as they are gone out of their
+coaches, the coachmen shall depart thence and not return till the end
+of the play."[373] Garrard, in a letter to the Lord Deputy dated
+January 9, 1633, says: "Here hath been an order of the Lords of the
+Council hung up in a table near Paul's and the Blackfriars to command
+all that resort to the playhouse there to send away their coaches, and
+to disperse abroad in Paul's Churchyard, Carter Lane, the Conduit in
+Fleet Street, and other places, and not to return to fetch their
+company, but they must trot afoot to find their coaches. 'Twas kept
+very strictly for two or three weeks, but now I think it is disordered
+again."[374] The truth is that certain distinguished patrons of the
+theatre did not care "to trot afoot to find their coaches," and so
+made complaint at Court. As a result it was ordered, at a sitting of
+the Council, December 29, 1633 (the King being present): "Upon
+information this day given to the Board of the discommodity that
+diverse persons of great quality, especially Ladies and Gentlewomen,
+did receive in going to the playhouse of Blackfriars by reason that no
+coaches may stand ... the Board ... think fit to explain the said
+order in such manner that as many coaches as may stand within the
+Blackfriars Gate may enter and stay there."[375]
+
+[Footnote 372: The _Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1633_, p. 293.
+The report of the commissioners in full, as printed by Collier in _New
+Facts_ (1835), p. 27, and again in _History of English Dramatic
+Poetry_ (1879), I, 477, is not above suspicion, although Mr. E.K.
+Chambers is inclined to think it genuine. According to this document
+the actors estimated the property to be worth £21,990, but the
+committee thought that the actors might be persuaded to accept £2900
+13_s._ 4_d._]
+
+[Footnote 373: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 99; 387.]
+
+[Footnote 374: _The Earl of Strafforde's Letters_ (Dublin, 1740), I,
+175.]
+
+[Footnote 375: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 388.]
+
+All this agitation about coaches implies a fashionable and wealthy
+patronage of the Blackfriars. An interesting glimpse of high society
+at the theatre is given in a letter written by Garrard, January 25,
+1636: "A little pique happened betwixt the Duke of Lenox and the Lord
+Chamberlain about a box at a new play in the Blackfriars, of which the
+Duke had got the key, which, if it had come to be debated betwixt
+them, as it was once intended, some heat or perhaps other
+inconvenience might have happened."[376] The Queen herself also
+sometimes went thither. Herbert records, without any comment, her
+presence there on the 13 of May, 1634.[377] It has been generally
+assumed that she attended a regular afternoon performance; but this, I
+am sure, was not the case. The Queen engaged the entire building for
+the private entertainment of herself and her specially invited guests,
+and the performance was at night. In a bill presented by the King's
+Men for plays acted before the members of the royal family during the
+year 1636 occurs the entry: "The 5th of May, at the Blackfryers, for
+the Queene and the Prince Elector ... _Alfonso_." Again, in a similar
+bill for the year 1638 (see the bill on page 404) is the entry: "At
+the Blackfryers, the 23 of Aprill, for the Queene ... _The
+Unfortunate Lovers_." The fact that the actors did not record the loss
+of their "day" at their house, and made their charge accordingly,
+shows that the plays were given at night and did not interfere with
+the usual afternoon performances before the public.
+
+[Footnote 376: _The Earl of Strafforde's Letters_ (Dublin, 1740), I,
+511.]
+
+[Footnote 377: The Herbert MS., Malone, _Variorum_, III, 167.]
+
+The King's Men continued to occupy the Blackfriars as their winter
+home until the closing of the theatres in 1642. Thereafter the
+building must have stood empty for a number of years. In 1653 Sir
+Aston Cokaine, in a poem prefixed to Richard Brome's _Plays_, looked
+forward prophetically to the happy day when
+
+ Black, and White Friars too, shall flourish again.
+
+But the prophecy was not to be fulfilled; for although Whitefriars
+(i.e., Salisbury Court) did flourish as a Restoration playhouse, the
+more famous Blackfriars had ceased to exist before acting was allowed
+again. The manuscript note in the Phillipps copy of Stow's _Annals_
+(1631) informs us that "the Blackfriars players' playhouse in
+Blackfriars, London, which had stood many years, was pulled down to
+the ground on Monday the 6 day of August, 1655, and tenements built in
+the room."[378]
+
+[Footnote 378: See _The Academy_, 1882, XXII, 314. Exactly the same
+fate had overtaken the Globe ten years earlier.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+THE GLOBE
+
+
+As related more fully in the chapter on "The Theatre," when Cuthbert
+and Richard Burbage discovered that Gyles Alleyn not only refused to
+renew the lease for the land on which their playhouse stood, but was
+actually planning to seize the building and devote it to his private
+uses, they took immediate steps to thwart him. And in doing so they
+evolved a new and admirable scheme of theatrical management. They
+planned to bring together into a syndicate or stock-company some of
+the best actors of the day, and allow these actors to share in the
+ownership of the building. Hitherto playhouses had been erected merely
+as pecuniary investments by profit-seeking business men,--Burbage,[379]
+Brayne, Lanman, Henslowe, Cholmley, Langley,--and had been conducted
+in the interests of the proprietors rather than of the actors.[380] As
+a result, these proprietors had long reaped an unduly rich harvest
+from the efforts of the players, taking all or a large share of the
+income from the galleries. The new scheme was designed to remedy these
+faults.
+
+[Footnote 379: That even James Burbage is to be put in this class
+cannot be disputed.]
+
+[Footnote 380: Cuthbert Burbage in 1635 says: "The players that lived
+in those first times had only the profits arising from the doors, but
+now the players receive all the comings-in at the doors to themselves
+and half the galleries from the housekeepers." (Halliwell-Phillipps,
+_Outlines_, I, 317.)]
+
+[Illustration: RICHARD BURBAGE
+
+(Reproduced by permission from a painting in the Dulwich Picture
+Gallery; photograph by Emery Walker, Ltd.)]
+
+For participation in this scheme the Burbages selected the following
+men: William Shakespeare, not only a successful actor, but a poet who
+had already made his reputation as a writer of plays, and who gave
+promise of greater attainments; John Heminges, a good actor and an
+exceptionally shrewd man of business, who until his death managed the
+pecuniary affairs of the company with distinguished success; Augustine
+Phillips and Thomas Pope, both ranked with the best actors of the
+day;[381] and William Kempe, the greatest comedian since Tarleton,
+described in 1600 as "a player in interludes, and partly the Queen's
+Majesty's jester." When to this group we add Richard Burbage himself,
+the Roscius of his age, we have an organization of business,
+histrionic, and poetic ability that could not be surpassed. It was
+carefully planned, and it deserved the remarkable success which it
+attained. The superiority of the Globe Company over all others was
+acknowledged in the days of James and Charles, and to-day stands out
+as one of the most impressive facts in the history of the early drama.
+
+[Footnote 381: See, for example, Thomas Heywood's _Apology for Actors_
+(1612). In enumerating the greatest actors of England he says:
+"Gabriel, Singer, Pope, Phillips, Sly--all the right I can do them is
+but this, that though they be dead, their deserts yet live in the
+remembrance of many."]
+
+According to the original plan there were to be ten shares in the new
+enterprise, the Burbage brothers holding between them one-half the
+stock, or two and a half shares each, and the five actors holding the
+other half, or one share each. All the expenses of leasing a site,
+erecting a building, and subsequently operating the building as a
+playhouse, and likewise all the profits to accrue therefrom, were to
+be divided among the sharers according to their several holdings.
+
+This organization, it should be understood, merely concerned the
+ownership of the building. Its members stood in the relation of
+landlords to the players, and were known by the technical name of
+"housekeepers." Wholly distinct was the organization of the players,
+known as the "company." The company, too, was divided into shares for
+the purpose of distributing its profits. The "housekeepers," in return
+for providing the building, received one-half of the income from the
+galleries; the company, for entertaining the public, received the
+other half of the income from the galleries, plus the takings at the
+doors. Those actors who were also "housekeepers" shared twice in the
+profits of the playhouse; and it was a part of the plan of the
+"housekeepers" to admit actors to be sharers in the building as soon
+as they attained eminence, or otherwise made their permanent
+connection with the playhouse desirable. Thus the two organizations,
+though entirely distinct, were interlocking.
+
+Such a scheme had many advantages. In the first place, it prevented
+the company from shifting from one playhouse to another, as was
+frequently the case with other troupes. In the second place, it
+guaranteed both the excellence and the permanency of the company. Too
+often good companies were dissolved by the desertion of a few
+important members; as every student of the drama knows, the constant
+reorganization of troupes is one of the most exasperating features of
+Elizabethan theatrical history. In the third place, the plan, like all
+profit-sharing schemes, tended to elicit from each member of the
+organization his best powers. The opportunity offered to a young actor
+ultimately to be admitted as a sharer in the ownership of the building
+was a constant source of inspiration,[382] and the power to admit at
+any time a new sharer enabled the company to recruit from other
+troupes brilliant actors when such appeared; as, for example, William
+Osteler and Nathaniel Field, who had attained fame with the Children
+at Blackfriars and elsewhere. Finally, the plan brought the actors
+together in a close bond of friendship that lasted for life. Heminges
+was loved and trusted by them all. Shakespeare was admired and
+revered; three members of the troupe seem to have named their sons
+for him. Indeed, there is nothing more inspiring in a close study of
+all the documents relating to the Globe than the mutual loyalty and
+devotion of the original sharers. The publication of Shakespeare's
+plays by Heminges and Condell is merely one out of many expressions of
+this splendid comradeship.
+
+[Footnote 382: "The petitioners have a long time with much patience
+expected to be admitted sharers in the playhouses of the Globe and the
+Blackfriars, whereby they might reap some better fruit of their labour
+than hitherto they have done, and be encouraged to proceed therein
+with cheerfulness." (The Young Players' Petition, 1635, printed by
+Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 312.)]
+
+The plan of organization having been evolved, and the original members
+having been selected, the first question presenting itself was, Where
+should the new playhouse be erected? Burbage, Heminges, and the
+rest--including Shakespeare--probably gave the question much thought.
+Their experience in Holywell had not been pleasant; the precinct of
+Blackfriars, they now well realized, was out of the question; so they
+turned their eyes to the Bankside. That section had recently become
+the theatrical centre of London. There were situated the Rose, the
+Swan, and the Bear Garden, and thither each day thousands of persons
+flocked in search of entertainment. Clearly the Bankside was best
+suited to their purpose. Near the fine old church of St. Mary Overies,
+and not far from the Rose and the Bear Garden, they found a plot of
+land that met their approval. Its owner, Sir Nicholas Brend, was
+willing to lease it for a long term of years, and at a very reasonable
+rate. They made a verbal contract with Brend, according to which the
+lease was to begin on December 25, 1598.
+
+[Illustration: WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE
+
+Shakespeare seems to have been equally with Burbage a leader in erecting
+the Globe. In 1599 the building is officially described as "vna domo de
+novo edificata ... in occupacione Willielmi Shakespeare et aliorum."]
+
+Three days later, on December 28, Richard and Cuthbert Burbage, having
+secured the services of the carpenter, Peter Street, and his workmen,
+tore down the old Theatre and transported the timber and other
+materials to this new site across the river; and shortly after the
+Globe began to lift itself above the houses of the Bankside--a
+handsome theatre surpassing anything then known to London playgoers.
+
+In the meantime the lawyers had drawn up the lease, and this was
+formally signed on February 21, 1599. The company had arranged a
+"tripartite lease," the three parties being Sir Nicholas Brend, the
+Burbage brothers, and the five actors.[383] To the Burbages Sir
+Nicholas leased one-half of the property at a yearly rental of £7
+5_s._; and to the five actors, he leased the other half, at the same
+rate. Thus the total rent paid for the land was £14 10_s._ The lease
+was to run for a period of thirty-one years.
+
+[Footnote 383: Exact information about the lease and the organization
+of the company is derived from the Heminges-Osteler and the
+Witter-Heminges documents, both discovered and printed by Mr. Wallace.
+And with these one should compare the article by the same author in
+the London _Times_, April 30, May 1, 1914.]
+
+The five actors, not satisfied with tying up the property in the
+"tripartite lease," proceeded at once to arrange their holdings in the
+form of a "joint tenancy." This they accomplished by the following
+device:
+
+ William Shakespeare, Augustine Phillips, Thomas Pope, John
+ Heminges, and William Kempe did shortly after grant and
+ assign all the said moiety of and in the said gardens and
+ grounds unto William Levison and Thomas Savage, who
+ regranted and reassigned to every one of them severally a
+ fifth part of the said moiety of the said gardens and
+ grounds.[384]
+
+[Footnote 384: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+53. Shakespeare's leadership in the erection of the Globe is indicated
+in several documents; for example, the post-mortem inquisition of the
+estate of Sir Thomas Brend, May 16, 1599.]
+
+The object of the "joint tenancy" was to prevent any member of the
+organization from disposing of his share to an outsider. Legally at
+the death of a member his share passed into the possession of the
+other members, so that the last survivor would receive the whole. In
+reality, however, the members used the "joint tenancy" merely to
+control the disposition of the shares, and they always allowed the
+heirs-at-law to receive the share of a deceased member.
+
+The wisdom of this arrangement was quickly shown, for "about the time
+of the building of said playhouse and galleries, or shortly after,"
+William Kempe decided to withdraw from the enterprise. He had to
+dispose of his share to the other parties in the "joint tenancy,"
+Shakespeare, Heminges, Phillips, and Pope, who at once divided it
+equally among themselves, and again went through the process necessary
+to place that share in "joint tenancy." After the retirement of Kempe,
+the organization, it will be observed, consisted of six men, and the
+shares were eight in number, owned as follows: Richard Burbage and
+Cuthbert Burbage, each two shares, Shakespeare, Heminges, Phillips,
+and Pope, each one share.
+
+[Illustration: A PLAN OF THE GLOBE PROPERTY
+
+Based on the lease and on other documents and references to the
+property.]
+
+The tract of land on which the new playhouse was to be erected is
+minutely described in the lease[385] as follows:
+
+ All that parcel of ground just recently before enclosed and
+ made into four separate garden plots, recently in the tenure
+ and occupation of Thomas Burt and Isbrand Morris, diers, and
+ Lactantius Roper, salter, citizen of London, containing in
+ length from east to west two hundred and twenty feet in
+ assize or thereabouts, lying and adjoining upon a way or
+ lane there on one [the south] side, and abutting upon a
+ piece of land called The Park[386] upon the north, and upon
+ a garden then or recently in the tenure or occupation of one
+ John Cornishe toward the west, and upon another garden plot
+ then or recently in the tenure or occupation of one John
+ Knowles toward the east, with all the houses, buildings,
+ structures, ways, easements, commodities, and appurtenances
+ thereunto belonging.... And also all that parcel of land
+ just recently before enclosed and made into three separate
+ garden plots, whereof two of the same [were] recently in the
+ tenure or occupation of John Roberts, carpenter, and another
+ recently in the occupation of one Thomas Ditcher, citizen
+ and merchant tailor of London ... containing in length from
+ east to west by estimation one hundred fifty and six feet of
+ assize or thereabouts, and in breadth from the north to the
+ south one hundred feet of assize by estimation or
+ thereabouts, lying and adjoining upon the other side of the
+ way or lane aforesaid, and abutting upon a garden plot there
+ then or recently just before in the occupation of William
+ Sellers toward the east, and upon one other garden plot
+ there, then or recently just before, in the tenure of John
+ Burgram, sadler, toward the west, and upon a lane there
+ called Maiden Lane towards the south, with all the
+ houses....
+
+[Footnote 385: The lease is incorporated in the Heminges-Osteler
+documents, which Mr. Wallace has translated from the Anglicized Latin.
+The original Latin text may be found in Martin, _The Site of the Globe
+Playhouse of Shakespeare_, pp. 161-62. Since, however, that text is
+faultily reproduced, I quote Mr. Wallace's translation.]
+
+[Footnote 386: What is meant by "The Park" is a matter of dispute.
+Some contend that the Park of the Bishop of Winchester is meant; it
+may be, however, that some small estate is referred to. In support of
+the latter contention, one might cite Collier's _Memoirs of Edward
+Alleyn_, p. 91. Part of the document printed by Collier may have been
+tampered with, but there is no reason to suspect the two references to
+"The Parke."]
+
+This document clearly states that the Globe property was situated to
+the north of Maiden Lane, and consequently near the river. Virtually
+all the contemporary maps of London show the Globe as so situated. Mr.
+Wallace has produced some very specific evidence to support the
+document cited above, and he claims to have additional evidence as yet
+unpublished. On the other hand, there is at least some evidence to
+indicate that the Globe was situated to the south of Maiden Lane.[387]
+
+[Footnote 387: For the discussions of the subject, see the
+Bibliography.]
+
+For the purposes of this book it is sufficient to know that the Globe
+was "situate in Maiden Lane"; whether on the north side or the south
+side is of less importance. More important is the nature of the site.
+Strype, in his edition of Stow's _Survey_, gives this description:
+"Maiden Lane, a long straggling place, with ditches on each side, the
+passage to the houses being over little bridges, with little garden
+plots before them, especially on the north side, which is best both
+for houses and inhabitants." In Maiden Lane, near one of these ditches
+or "sewers," the Globe was erected; and like the other houses there
+situated, it was approached over a bridge.[388] In February, 1606,
+the Sewer Commission ordered that "the owners of the playhouse called
+the Globe, in Maid Lane, shall before the 20 day of April next pull up
+and take clean out of the sewer the props or posts which stand under
+their bridge on the north side of Maid Lane."[389] The ground on which
+the building was erected was marshy, and the foundations were made by
+driving piles deep into the soil. Ben Jonson tersely writes:[390]
+
+ The Globe, the glory of the Bank.... Flanked with a ditch,
+ and forced out of a marish.
+
+[Footnote 388: This was probably not the only means of approach.]
+
+[Footnote 389: Wallace, in the London _Times_, April 30, 1914, p. 10;
+_Notes and Queries_ (XI series), XI, 448.]
+
+[Footnote 390: _An Execration upon Vulcan._]
+
+Into the construction of the new playhouse went the timber and other
+materials secured from the old Theatre; but much new material, of
+course, had to be added. It is a mistake to believe that the Globe was
+merely the old "Theatre" newly set up on the Bankside, and perhaps
+strengthened here and there. When it was completed, it was regarded as
+the last word in theatrical architecture. Dekker seems to have had the
+Globe in mind in the following passage: "How wonderfully is the world
+altered! and no marvel, for it has lyein sick almost five thousand
+years: so that it is no more like the old _Theater du munde_, than old
+Paris Garden is like the King's garden at Paris. What an excellent
+workman therefore were he, that could cast the _Globe_ of it into a
+new mould."[391] In 1600 Henslowe and Alleyn used the Globe as
+the model of their new and splendid Fortune. They sought, indeed, to
+show some originality by making their playhouse square instead of
+round; but this, the one instance in which they departed from the
+Globe, was a mistake; and when the Fortune was rebuilt in 1623 it was
+made circular in shape.
+
+[Footnote 391: _The Guls Hornbook_, published in 1609, but written
+earlier.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITES OF THE BEAR GARDEN, THE ROSE, AND THE GLOBE
+
+Marked by the author on a plan of the Bankside printed in Strype's
+_Survey of London_, 1720.]
+
+[Illustration: THE BEAR GARDEN, THE ROSE, AND THE FIRST GLOBE
+
+Compare this view of the Bankside with the preceding map. (From an
+equestrian portrait of King James I, by Delaram. The city is
+represented as it was when James came to the throne in 1603.)]
+
+A few quotations from the Fortune contract will throw some light upon
+the Globe:
+
+ With such-like stairs, conveyances, and divisions [to the
+ galleries], without and within, as are made and contrived in
+ and to the late-erected playhouse ... called the Globe.
+
+ And the said stage to be in all other proportions contrived
+ and fashioned like unto the stage of the said playhouse
+ called the Globe.
+
+ And the said house, and other things before mentioned to be
+ made and done, to be in all other contrivations,
+ conveyances, fashions, thing, and things, effected, finished
+ and done according to the manner and fashion of the said
+ house called the Globe, saving only that all the principal
+ and main posts ... shall be square and wrought pilasterwise,
+ with carved proportions called satyrs to be placed and set
+ on the top of every of the said posts.
+
+What kind of columns were used in the Globe and how they were
+ornamented, we do not know, but presumably they were round. Jonson, in
+_Every Man Out of His Humour_, presented on the occasion of, or
+shortly after, the opening of the Globe in 1599, says of one of his
+characters: "A well-timbered fellow! he would have made a good column
+an he had been thought on when the house was abuilding."[392] That
+Jonson thought well of the new playhouse is revealed in several
+places; he speaks with some enthusiasm of "this fair-fitted
+Globe,"[393] and in the passage already quoted he calls it "the glory
+of the Bank."
+
+[Footnote 392: _Jonson's Works_, ed. Cunningham, I, 71.]
+
+[Footnote 393: In the first quarto edition of _Every Man Out of His
+Humour_.]
+
+In shape the building was unquestionably polygonal or circular, most
+probably polygonal on the outside and circular within. Mr. E.K.
+Chambers thinks it possible that it was square;[394] but there is
+abundant evidence to show that it was not. The very name, Globe, would
+hardly be suitable to a square building; Jonson describes the interior
+as a "round";[395] the ballad on the burning of the house refers to
+the roof as being "round as a tailor's clew"; and the New Globe, which
+certainly was not square, was erected on the old foundation.[396] The
+frame, we know, was of timber, and the roof of thatch. In front of
+the main door was suspended a sign of Hercules bearing the globe upon
+his shoulders,[397] under which was written, says Malone, the old
+motto, _Totus mundus agit histrionem_.[398]
+
+[Footnote 394: _The Stage of the Globe_, p. 356.]
+
+[Footnote 395: Induction to _Every Man Out of His Humour_ (ed.
+Cunningham, I, 66).]
+
+[Footnote 396: I have not space to discuss the question further. The
+foreign traveler who visited a Bankside theatre, probably the Globe,
+on July 3, 1600, described it as "Theatrum ad morem antiquorum
+Romanorum constructum ex lignis" (London _Times_, April 11, 1914).
+Thomas Heywood, in his _Apology for Actors_ (1612), describing the
+Roman playhouses, says: "After these they composed others, but
+differing in form from the theatre or amphitheatre, and every such was
+called _Circus_, the frame _globe_-like and merely round." The
+evidence is cumulative, and almost inexhaustible.]
+
+[Footnote 397: See _Hamlet_, II, ii, 378.]
+
+[Footnote 398: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 67.]
+
+The earliest representation of the building is probably to be found in
+the Delaram _View of London_ (opposite page 246), set in the
+background of an engraving of King James on horseback. This view,
+which presents the city as it was in 1603 when James came to the
+throne, shows the Bear Garden at the left, polygonal in shape, the
+Rose in the centre, circular in shape, and the Globe at the right,
+polygonal in shape. It is again represented in Visscher's magnificent
+_View of London_, which, though printed in 1616, presents the city as
+it was several years earlier (see page 253). The Merian _View_ of 1638
+(opposite page 256) is copied from Visscher, and the _View_ in
+Howell's _Londinopolis_ (1657) is merely a slavish copy of Merian;
+these two views, therefore, so far as the Globe is concerned, have no
+special value.[399]
+
+[Footnote 399: The circular playhouse in Delaram's _View_ is commonly
+accepted as a representation of the First Globe, but without reason.
+The evidence which establishes the identity of the several playhouses
+pictured in the various maps of the Bankside comes from a careful
+study of the Bear Garden, the Hope, the Rose, the First Globe, the
+Second Globe, and their sites, together with a study of all the maps
+and views of London, considered separately and in relation to one
+another. Such evidence is too complicated to be given here in full,
+but it is quite conclusive.]
+
+[Illustration: THE FIRST GLOBE
+
+From an old drawing in an extra-illustrated copy of Pennant's _London_
+now in the British Museum. Apparently the drawing is based on Visscher's
+_View_.]
+
+The cost of the finished building is not exactly known. Mr. Wallace
+observes that it was erected "at an original cost, according to a
+later statement, of £600, but upon better evidence approximately
+£400."[400] I am not aware of the "better evidence" to which Mr.
+Wallace refers,[401] nor do I know whether the estimate of £400
+includes the timber and materials of the old Theatre furnished by the
+Burbages. If the Theatre of 1576 cost nearly £700, and the second
+Globe cost £1400, the sum of £400 seems too small.
+
+[Footnote 400: The London _Times_, October 2, 1909.]
+
+[Footnote 401: Possibly he gives this evidence in his _The Children of
+the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 29, note 4.]
+
+Nor do we know exactly when the Globe was finished and opened to the
+public. On May 16, 1599, a post-mortem inquisition of the estate of
+Sir Thomas Brend, father of Sir Nicholas, was taken. Among his other
+properties in Southwark was listed the Globe playhouse, described as
+"vna domo de novo edificata ... in occupacione Willielmi Shakespeare
+et aliorum."[402] From this statement Mr. Wallace infers that the
+Globe was finished and opened before May 16, 1599. Though this is
+possible, the words used seem hardly to warrant the conclusion.
+However, we may feel sure that the actors, the Lord Chamberlain's Men,
+had moved into the building before the end of the summer.
+
+[Footnote 402: Wallace, in the London _Times_, May 1, 1914.]
+
+Almost at once they rose to the position of leadership in the drama,
+for both Shakespeare and Burbage were now at the height of their
+powers. It is true that in 1601 the popularity of the Children at
+Blackfriars, and the subsequent "War of the Theatres" interfered
+somewhat with their success; but the interference was temporary, and
+from this time on until the closing of the playhouses in 1642, the
+supremacy of the Globe players was never really challenged. When James
+came to the throne, he recognized this supremacy by taking them under
+his royal patronage. On May 19, 1603, he issued to them a patent to
+play as the King's Men[403]--an honor that was as well deserved as it
+was signal.
+
+[Footnote 403: Printed in The Malone Society _Collections_, I, 264.]
+
+In the autumn of 1608 the proprietors of the Globe acquired the
+Blackfriars Theatre for the use of their company during the severe
+winter months. This splendid building, situated in the very heart of
+the city, was entirely roofed in, and could be comfortably heated in
+cold weather. Henceforth the open-air Globe was used only during the
+pleasant season of the year; that is, according to the evidence of the
+Herbert Manuscript, from about the first of May until the first of
+November.
+
+On June 29, 1613, the Globe caught fire during the performance of a
+play, and was burned to the ground--the first disaster of the sort
+recorded in English theatrical history. The event aroused great
+interest in London, and as a result we have numerous accounts of the
+catastrophe supplying us with full details. We learn that on a warm
+"sunne-shine" afternoon the large building was "filled with
+people"--among whom were Ben Jonson, John Taylor (the Water-Poet), and
+Sir Henry Wotton--to witness a new play by William Shakespeare and
+John Fletcher, called _All is True_, or, as we now know it, _Henry
+VIII_, produced with unusual magnificence. Upon the entrance of the
+King in the fourth scene of the first act, two cannon were discharged
+in a royal salute. One of the cannon hurled a bit of its wadding upon
+the roof and set fire to the thatch; but persons in the audience were
+so interested in the play that for a time they paid no attention to
+the fire overhead. As a result they were soon fleeing for their lives;
+and within "one short hour" nothing was left of the "stately" Globe.
+
+I quote below some of the more interesting contemporary accounts of
+this notable event. Howes, the chronicler, thus records the fact in
+his continuation of Stow's _Annals_:
+
+ Upon St. Peter's Day last, the playhouse or theatre called
+ the Globe, upon the Bankside, near London, by negligent
+ discharge of a peal of ordnance, close to the south side
+ thereof, the thatch took fire, and the wind suddenly
+ dispersed the flames round about, and in a very short space
+ the whole building was quite consumed; and no man hurt: the
+ house being filled with people to behold the play, _viz._ of
+ Henry the Eight.[404]
+
+[Footnote 404: Howes's continuation of Stow's _Annals_ (1631), p.
+1003.]
+
+Sir Henry Wotton, in a letter to a friend, gives the following gossipy
+account:
+
+ Now to let matters of state sleep. I will entertain you at
+ the present with what happened this week at the Bankside.
+ The King's Players had a new play, called _All is True_,
+ representing some principal pieces of the reign of Henry the
+ Eighth, which was set forth with many extraordinary
+ circumstances of pomp and majesty, even to the matting of
+ the stage; the Knights of the Order with their Georges and
+ Garter, the guards with their embroidered coats, and the
+ like--sufficient in truth within awhile to make greatness
+ very familiar, if not ridiculous. Now King Henry, making a
+ masque at the Cardinal Wolsey's house, and certain cannons
+ being shot off at his entry, some of the paper or other
+ stuff wherewith one of them was stopped, did light on the
+ thatch, where being thought at first but an idle smoke, and
+ their eyes more attentive to the show, it kindled inwardly,
+ and ran round like a train, consuming within less than an
+ hour the whole house to the very ground. This was the fatal
+ period of that virtuous fabrick; wherein yet nothing did
+ perish but wood and straw, and a few forsaken cloaks; only
+ one man had his breeches set on fire, that would perhaps
+ have broiled him, if he had not, by the benefit of a
+ provident wit, put it out with bottle ale.[405]
+
+[Footnote 405: _Reliquiæ Wottonianæ_ (ed. 1672), p. 425.]
+
+John Chamberlain, writing to Sir Ralph Winwood, July 8, 1613, refers
+to the accident thus:
+
+ The burning of the Globe or playhouse on the Bankside on St.
+ Peter's Day cannot escape you; which fell out by a peal of
+ chambers (that I know not upon what occasion were to be used
+ in the play), the tampin or stopple of one of them lighting
+ in the thatch that cover'd the house, burn'd it down to the
+ ground in less than two hours, with a dwelling house
+ adjoining; and it was a great marvel and fair grace of God
+ that the people had so little harm, having but two narrow
+ doors to get out.[406]
+
+[Footnote 406: Ralph Winwood, _Memorials of Affairs of State_ (ed.
+1725), III, 469.]
+
+[Illustration: THE FIRST GLOBE
+
+From Visscher's _View of London_, published in 1616, but representing
+the city as it was several years earlier.]
+
+The Reverend Thomas Lorkin writes from London to Sir Thomas Puckering
+under the date of June 30, 1613:
+
+ No longer since than yesterday, while Burbage's company were
+ acting at the Globe the play of _Henry VIII_, and there
+ shooting off certain chambers in way of triumph, the fire
+ catched and fastened upon the thatch of the house, and there
+ burned so furiously, as it consumed the whole house, all in
+ less than two hours, the people having enough to do to save
+ themselves.[407]
+
+[Footnote 407: Printed in Birch, _The Court and Times of James the
+First_ (1849), I, 251.]
+
+A contemporary ballad[408] gives a vivid and amusing account of the
+disaster:
+
+ _A Sonnet upon the Pitiful Burning of the Globe
+ Playhouse in London_
+
+ Now sit thee down, Melpomene,
+ Wrapt in a sea-coal robe,
+ And tell the dolefull tragedy
+ That late was played at Globe;
+ For no man that can sing and say
+ Was scared on St. Peter's day.
+ _Oh sorrow, pitiful sorrow, and yet all this is true._[409]
+
+ All you that please to understand,
+ Come listen to my story;
+ To see Death with his raking brand
+ Mongst such an auditory;
+ Regarding neither Cardinall's might,
+ Nor yet the rugged face of Henry the eight.
+ _Oh sorrow_, etc.
+
+ This fearful fire began above,
+ A wonder strange and _true_,
+ And to the stage-house did remove,
+ As round as taylor's clew,
+ And burnt down both beam and snagg,
+ And did not spare the silken flagg.
+ _Oh sorrow_, etc.
+
+ Out run the Knights, out run the lords,
+ And there was great ado;
+ Some lost their hats, and some their swords;
+ Then out run Burbage, too.
+ The reprobates, though drunk on Monday,
+ Prayd for the fool and Henry Condy.
+ _Oh sorrow_, etc.
+
+ The periwigs and drum-heads fry
+ Like to a butter firkin;
+ A woeful burning did betide
+ To many a good buff jerkin.
+ Then with swolen eyes, like drunken Flemminges
+ Distressed stood old stuttering Heminges.
+ _Oh sorrow_, etc.
+
+[Footnote 408: Printed by Haslewood in _The Gentleman's Magazine_
+(1816), from an old manuscript volume of poems. Printed also by
+Halliwell-Phillipps (_Outlines_, I, 310) "from a manuscript of the
+early part of the seventeenth century of unquestionable authenticity."
+Perhaps it is the same as the "Doleful Ballad" entered in the
+Stationers' Register, 1613. I follow Halliwell-Phillipps's text, but
+omit the last three stanzas.]
+
+[Footnote 409: Punning on the title _All is True_.]
+
+Ben Jonson, who saw the disaster, left us the following brief account:
+
+ The Globe, the glory of the Bank,
+ Which, though it were the fort of the whole parish,
+ Flanked with a ditch, and forced out of a marish,
+ I saw with two poor chambers taken in,
+ And razed ere thought could urge this might have been!
+ See the world's ruins! nothing but the piles
+ Left--and wit since to cover it with tiles.[410]
+
+[Footnote 410: _An Execration upon Vulcan._]
+
+The players were not seriously inconvenienced, for they could shift to
+their other house, the Blackfriars, in the city. The owners of the
+building, however, suffered a not inconsiderable pecuniary loss. For a
+time they hesitated about rebuilding, one cause of their hesitation
+being the short term that their lease of the ground had to run.
+Possibly a second cause was a doubt as to the ownership of the ground,
+arising from certain transactions recorded below. In October, 1600,
+Sir Nicholas Brend had been forced to transfer the Globe estate, with
+other adjacent property, to Sir Matthew Brown and John Collett as
+security for a debt of £2500; and a few days after he died. Since the
+son and heir, Matthew Brend, was a child less than two years old, an
+uncle, Sir John Bodley, was appointed trustee. In 1608 Bodley, by
+unfair means, it seems, purchased from Collett the Globe property, and
+thus became the landlord of the actors. But young Matthew Brend was
+still under age, and Bodley's title to the property was not regarded
+as above suspicion.[411]
+
+[Footnote 411: These interesting facts were revealed by Mr. Wallace in
+the London _Times_, April 30 and May 1, 1914.]
+
+[Illustration: MERIAN'S VIEW OF LONDON
+
+A section from Merian's _View_, showing the Bankside playhouses. This
+_View_, printed in Ludvig Gottfried's _Neuwe Archontologia Cosmica_
+(Frankfurt am Mayn, 1638), represents London as it was about the year
+1612, and was mainly based on Visscher's _View_, with some additions
+from other sources.]
+
+Four months after the burning of the Globe, on October 26, 1613, Sir
+John Bodley granted the proprietors of the building a renewal of the
+lease with an extension of the term until December 25, 1635.[412] But
+a lease from Bodley alone, in view of the facts just indicated, was
+not deemed sufficient; so on February 14, 1614, Heminges, the two
+Burbages, and Condell visited the country-seat of the Brends, and
+secured the signature of the young Matthew Brend, and of his mother as
+guardian, to a lease of the Globe site with a term ending on December
+25, 1644.
+
+[Footnote 412: Did he increase the amount of the rental to £25 per
+annum? The rent paid for the Blackfriars was £40 per annum; in 1635
+the young actors state that the housekeepers paid for both playhouses
+"not above £65."]
+
+Protected by these two leases, the Globe sharers felt secure; and they
+went forward apace with the erection of their new playhouse. They made
+an assessment of "£50 or £60" upon each share.[413] Since at this time
+there were fourteen shares, the amount thus raised was £700 or £840.
+This would probably be enough to erect a building as large and as well
+equipped as the old Globe. But the proprietors determined upon a
+larger and a very much handsomer building. As Howes, the continuer of
+Stow's _Annals_, writes, "it was new builded in far fairer manner than
+before"; or as John Taylor, the Water-Poet, puts it:
+
+ As gold is better that's in fire tried,
+ So is the Bankside _Globe_ that late was burn'd.[414]
+
+[Footnote 413: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+60.]
+
+[Footnote 414: _Works_ (1630), p. 31; The Spenser Society reprint, p.
+515.]
+
+Naturally the cost of rebuilding exceeded the original estimate.
+Heminges tells us that on one share, or one-fourteenth, he was
+required to pay for "the re-edifying about the sum of £120."[415]
+This would indicate a total cost of "about" £1680. Heminges should
+know, for he was the business manager of the organization; and his
+truthfulness cannot be questioned. Since, however, the adjective
+"about," especially when multiplied by fourteen, leaves a generous
+margin of uncertainty, it is gratifying to have a specific statement
+from one of the sharers in 1635 that the owners had "been at the
+charge of £1400 in building of the said house upon the burning down of
+the former."[416] Heminges tells us that "he found that the
+re-edifying of the said playhouse would be a very great charge," and
+that he so "doubted what benefit would arise thereby" that he actually
+gave away half of one share "to Henry Condell, _gratis_."[417] But his
+fears were unfounded. We learn from Witter that after the rebuilding
+of the Globe the "yearly value" of a share was greater "by much" than
+it had been before.[418]
+
+[Footnote 415: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+61.]
+
+[Footnote 416: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 316. This evidence
+seems to me unimpeachable. I should add, however, that Mr. Wallace
+considers the estimate "excessive," and says that he has "other
+contemporary documents showing the cost was far less than £1400." (The
+London _Times_, October 2, 1909.)]
+
+[Footnote 417: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+61. There is, I think, no truth in the statement made by the
+inaccurate annotator of the Phillipps copy of Stow's _Annals_, that
+the Globe was built "at the great charge of King James and many
+noblemen and others." (See _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314.)
+The Witter-Heminges documents sufficiently disprove that. We may well
+believe, however, that the King and his noblemen were interested in
+the new building, and encouraged the actors in many ways.]
+
+[Footnote 418: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+70.]
+
+The New Globe, like its predecessor, was built of timber,[419] and on
+the same site--indeed the carpenters made use of the old foundation,
+which seems not to have been seriously injured. In a "return" of 1634,
+preserved at St. Saviour's, we read: "The Globe playhouse, near Maid
+Lane, built by the company of players, with a dwelling house thereto
+adjoining, built with timber, about 20 years past, upon an old
+foundation."[420] In spite of the use made of the old foundation, the
+new structure was unquestionably larger than the First Globe; Marmion,
+in the Prologue to _Holland's Leaguer_, acted at Salisbury Court in
+1634, speaks of "the vastness of the Globe," and Shirley, in the
+Prologue to _Rosania_, applies the adjective "vast" to the building.
+Moreover, the builders had "the wit," as Jonson tells us, "to cover it
+with tiles." John Taylor, the Water-Poet, writes:
+
+ For where before it had a thatched hide,
+ Now to a stately theatre is turn'd.
+
+[Footnote 419: I see no reason to accept Mr. Wallace's suggestion
+(_The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_, p. 34, note 7) that "it
+seems questionable, but not unlikely, that the timber framework was
+brick-veneered and plastered over." Mr. Wallace mistakenly accepts
+Wilkinson's view of the second Fortune as genuine.]
+
+[Footnote 420: Rendle, _Bankside_, p. xvii.]
+
+The Second Globe is represented, but unsatisfactorily, in Hollar's
+_View of London_, dated 1647 (opposite page 260). It should be noted
+that the artist was in banishment from 1643 (at which time the Globe
+was still standing) until 1652, and hence, in drawing certain
+buildings, especially those not reproduced in earlier views of London,
+he may have had to rely upon his memory. This would explain the
+general vagueness of his representation of the Globe.
+
+The construction was not hurried, for the players had Blackfriars as a
+home. Under normal conditions they did not move from the city to the
+Bankside until some time in May; and shortly after that date, in the
+early summer of 1614, the New Globe was ready for them. John
+Chamberlain writes to Mrs. Alice Carleton on June 30, 1614:
+
+ I have not seen your sister Williams since I came to town,
+ though I have been there twice. The first time she was at a
+ neighbor's house at cards, and the next she was gone to the
+ New Globe to a play. Indeed, I hear much speech of this new
+ playhouse, which is said to be the fairest that ever was in
+ England.[421]
+
+[Footnote 421: Birch, _The Court and Times of James the First_, I,
+329; quoted by Wallace, _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars_,
+p. 35.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SECOND GLOBE
+
+From Hollar's _View of London_ (1647).]
+
+With this New Globe Shakespeare had little to do, for his career as a
+playwright had been run, and probably he had already retired from
+acting. Time, indeed, was beginning to thin out the little band of
+friends who had initiated and made famous the Globe organization.
+Thomas Pope had died in 1603, Augustine Phillips in 1605, William Slye
+in 1608, and, just a few months after the opening of the new
+playhouse, William Osteler, who had been admitted to the
+partnership in 1611. He had begun his career as a child-actor at
+Blackfriars, had later joined the King's Men, and had married
+Heminges's daughter Thomasine.
+
+A more serious blow to the company, however, fell in April, 1616, when
+Shakespeare himself died. To the world he had been "the applause,
+delight, the wonder" of the stage; but to the members of the Globe
+Company he had been for many years a "friend and fellow." Only Burbage
+and Heminges (described in 1614 as "old Heminges"), now remained of
+the original venturers. And Burbage passed away on March 13, 1619:
+
+ He's gone! and with him what a world are dead
+ Which he reviv'd--to be revived so
+ No more. Young Hamlet, old Hieronimo,
+ Kind Lear, the grieved Moor, and more beside
+ That lived in him have now for ever died![422]
+
+[Footnote 422: From a folio MS. in the Huth Library, printed by J.P.
+Collier in _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 411,
+and by various others.]
+
+Many elegies in a similar vein were written celebrating his wonderful
+powers as an actor; yet the tribute that perhaps affects us most deals
+with him merely as a man. The Earl of Pembroke, writing to the
+Ambassador to Germany, gives the court news about the mighty ones of
+the kingdom: "My Lord of Lenox made a great supper to the French
+Ambassador this night here, and even now all the company are at a
+play; which I, being tender-hearted, could not endure to see so soon
+after the loss of my old acquaintance Burbage."[423]
+
+[Footnote 423: Printed by Mrs. Stopes, _Burbage and Shakespeare's
+Stage_, p. 117, with many other interesting references to the great
+actor.]
+
+[Illustration: THE TRADITIONAL SITE OF THE GLOBE
+
+From Wilkinson's _Theatrum Illustrata_ (1825). This site is still
+advocated by some scholars. Compare page 245.]
+
+In 1623 Heminges and Condell, with great "care and paine," collected
+and published the plays of Shakespeare, "onely to keep the memory of
+so worthy a Friend and Fellow alive"; and shortly after, they too
+died, Condell in 1627 and Heminges in 1630.
+
+After the passing of this group of men, whose names are so familiar to
+us, the history of the playhouse seems less important, and may be
+chronicled briefly.
+
+When young Matthew Brend came of age he recovered possession of the
+Globe property by a decree of the Court of Wards. Apparently he
+accepted the lease executed by his uncle and guardian, Bodley, by
+which the actors were to remain in possession of the Globe until
+December 25, 1635; but in 1633 he sought to cancel the lease he
+himself had executed as a minor, by which the actors were to remain in
+possession until 1644. His purpose in thus seeking to gain possession
+of the Globe was to lease it to other actors at a material increase in
+his profits.[424] Naturally the owners of the Globe were alarmed, and
+they brought suit in the Court of Requests. In 1635, one of the
+sharers, John Shanks, declares that he "is without any hope to renew"
+the lease; and he refers thus to the suit against Brend: "When your
+suppliant purchased his parts [in 1634] he had no certainty thereof
+more than for one year in the Globe, and there was a chargeable suit
+then pending in the Court of Requests between Sir Mathew Brend,
+Knight, and the lessees of the Globe and their assigns, for the adding
+of nine years to their lease in consideration that their predecessors
+had formerly been at the charge of £1400 in building of the said
+house."[425] The lessees ultimately won their contention, and thus
+secured the right to occupy the Globe until December 25, 1644--a term
+which, as it happened, was quite long enough, for the Puritans closed
+all playhouses in 1642.
+
+[Footnote 424: Wallace, "Shakespeare and the Globe," in the London
+_Times_, April 30 and May 1, 1914.]
+
+[Footnote 425: The Petition of the Young Actors, printed by
+Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 312. Mrs. Stopes, in _Burbage and
+Shakespeare's Stage_, p. 129, refers to a record of the suit mentioned
+by Shanks, dated February 6, 1634.]
+
+What disposition, if any, the sharers made of the Globe between 1642
+and 1644 we do not know. But before the lease expired, it seems, Brend
+demolished the playhouse and erected tenements on its site. In the
+manuscript notes to the Phillipps copy of Stow's _Annals_, we find the
+statement that the Globe was "pulled down to the ground by Sir Mathew
+Brend, on Monday the 15 of April, 1644, to make tenements in the room
+of it";[426] and the statement is verified by a mortgage, executed in
+1706, between Elizabeth, the surviving daughter and heir of Thomas
+Brend, and one William James, citizen of London. The mortgage concerns
+"all those messuages or tenements ... most of which ... were erected
+and built where the late playhouse called the Globe stood, and upon
+the ground thereunto belonging."[427]
+
+[Footnote 426: Printed in _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314.
+Should we read the date as 1644/5?]
+
+[Footnote 427: William Martin, _The Site of the Globe_, p. 171.]
+
+After this the history of the property becomes obscure. Mrs. Thrale
+(later Mrs. Piozzi), the friend of Samuel Johnson, whose residence was
+near by in Deadman's Place, thought that she saw certain "remains of
+the Globe" discovered by workmen in the employ of her husband:[428]
+"For a long time, then,--or I thought it such,--my fate was bound up
+with the old Globe Theatre, upon the Bankside, Southwark; the alley it
+had occupied having been purchased and [the tenements] thrown down by
+Mr. Thrale to make an opening before the windows of our
+dwelling-house. When it lay desolate in a black heap of rubbish, my
+mother one day in a joke called it the Ruins of Palmyra; and after
+that they had laid it down in a grass-plot Palmyra was the name it
+went by.... But there were really curious remains of the old Globe
+Playhouse, which though hexagonal in form without, was round within."
+In spite of serious difficulties in this narrative it is possible that
+the workmen, in digging the ground preparatory to laying out the
+garden, uncovered the foundation of the Globe, which, it will be
+recalled, was formed of piles driven deep into the soil, and so well
+made that it resisted the fire of 1613.[429]
+
+[Footnote 428: Printed in _The Builder_, March 26, 1910, from the
+Conway MSS. in Mrs. Thrale's handwriting.]
+
+[Footnote 429: For later discoveries of supposed Globe relics, all
+very doubtful, see the London _Times_, October 8, 1909; George
+Hubbard, _The Site of the Globe Theatre_; and William Martin, _The
+Site of the Globe_, p. 201.]
+
+At the present time the site of the Globe is covered by the extensive
+brewery of Messrs. Barclay, Perkins, and Company. Upon one of the
+walls of the brewery, on the south side of Park Street, which was
+formerly Maiden Lane, has been placed a bronze memorial tablet[430]
+showing in relief the Bankside, with what is intended to be the Globe
+Playhouse conspicuously displayed in the foreground. This is a
+circular building designed after the circular playhouse in the
+Speed-Hondius _View of London_, and represents, as I have tried to
+show, not the Globe, but the Rose. At the left side of the tablet is
+a bust of the poet modeled after the Droeshout portrait. At the right
+is the simple inscription:
+
+ HERE STOOD THE GLOBE PLAYHOUSE OF SHAKESPEARE
+
+[Footnote 430: The tablet was designed by Dr. William Martin and
+executed by Professor Lanteri. For photographs of it and of the place
+in which it is erected, see _The London Illustrated News_, October 9,
+1909, CXXXV, 500.]
+
+Yet it is very doubtful whether the Globe really stood there. Mr.
+Wallace has produced good evidence to show that the building was on
+the north side of Park Street near the river; and in the course of the
+present study I have found that site generally confirmed.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+THE FORTUNE
+
+
+The erection of the Globe on the Bankside within a few hundred yards
+of the Rose was hardly gratifying to the Admiral's Men. Not only did
+it put them in close competition with the excellent Burbage-Shakespeare
+organization, but it caused their playhouse (now nearly a quarter of a
+century old, and said to be in a state of "dangerous decay") to suffer
+in comparison with the new and far handsomer Globe, "the glory of the
+Bank." Accordingly, before the Globe had been in operation much more
+than half a year, Henslowe and Alleyn decided to move to another
+section of London, and to erect there a playhouse that should surpass
+the Globe both in size and in magnificence. To the authorities,
+however, they gave as reasons for abandoning the Rose, first, "the
+dangerous decay" of the building, and secondly, "for that the same
+standeth very noisome for resort of people in the winter time."
+
+The new playhouse was undertaken by Henslowe and Alleyn jointly,
+although the exact arrangement between them is not now clear. Alleyn
+seems to have advanced the money and to have held the titles of
+ownership; but on April 4, 1601, he leased to Henslowe a moiety (or
+one-half interest) in the playhouse and other properties connected
+with it for a period of twenty-four years at an annual rental of £8--a
+sum far below the real value of the moiety.[431]
+
+[Footnote 431: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 25; Wallace, _Three London
+Theatres_, p. 53. Later, Alleyn rented to the actors the playhouse
+alone for £200 per annum. In the document, Alleyn _v._ William
+Henslowe, published by Mr. Wallace in _Three London Theatres_, p. 52,
+it is revealed that this annual rental of £8 was canceled by Alleyn's
+rental of a house from Henslowe on the Bankside; hence no actual
+payments by Henslowe appear in the Henslowe-Alleyn papers.]
+
+Whatever the details of the arrangement between the two partners, the
+main outlines of their procedure are clear. On December 22, 1599,
+Alleyn purchased for £240 a thirty-three-year lease[432] of a plot of
+ground situated to the north of the city, in the Parish of St. Giles
+without Cripplegate. This plot of ground, we are told, stood "very
+tolerable, near unto the Fields, and so far distant and remote from
+any person or place of account as that none can be annoyed
+thereby";[433] and yet, as the Earl of Nottingham wrote, it was "very
+convenient for the ease of people."[434]
+
+[Footnote 432: Later, by a series of negotiations ending in 1610,
+Alleyn secured the freehold of the property. The total cost to him was
+£800. See Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, pp. 14, 17, 108.]
+
+[Footnote 433: _Ibid._, p. 50.]
+
+[Footnote 434: _Ibid._, p. 49; cf. p. 51.]
+
+The property thus acquired lay between Golding Lane and Whitecross
+Street, two parallel thoroughfares running north and south. There were
+tenements on the edge of the property facing Whitecross Street,
+tenements on the edge facing Golding Lane, and an open space between.
+Alleyn and Henslowe planned to erect their new playhouse in this open
+space "between Whitecross Street and Golding Lane," and to make "a way
+leading to it" from Golding Lane. The ground set aside for the
+playhouse is described as "containing in length from east to west one
+hundred twenty and seven feet and a half, a little more or less, and
+in breadth, from north to south, one hundred twenty and nine feet, a
+little more or less."[435]
+
+[Footnote 435: Collier, _The Alleyn Papers_, p. 98. For a slightly
+different measurement of the plot see Collier, _Memoirs of Edward
+Alleyn_, p. 167.]
+
+The lease of this property having been consummated on December 22,
+1599, on January 8, 1600, Henslowe and Alleyn signed a contract with
+the carpenter, Peter Street (who had recently gained valuable
+experience in building the Globe), to erect the new playhouse. The
+contract called for the completion of the building by July 25, 1600,
+provided, however, the workmen were "not by any authority restrained."
+
+The latter clause may indicate that Peter Street anticipated
+difficulties. If so, he was not mistaken, for when early in January
+his workmen began to assemble material for the erection of the
+building, the authorities, especially those of the Parish of St.
+Giles, promptly interfered. Alleyn thereupon appealed to the patron of
+the troupe, the Earl of Nottingham, the Lord Admiral. On January 12,
+1600, Nottingham issued a warrant to the officers of the county "to
+permit and suffer my said servant [Edward Alleyn] to proceed in the
+effecting and furnishing of the said new house, without any your let
+or molestation toward him or any of his workmen."[436] This warrant,
+however, seems not to have prevented the authorities of St. Giles from
+continuing their restraint. Alleyn was then forced to play his trump
+card--through his great patron to secure from the Privy Council itself
+a warrant for the construction of the building. First, however, by
+offering "to give a very liberal portion of money weekly" towards the
+relief of "the poor in the parish of St. Giles," he persuaded many of
+the inhabitants to sign a document addressed to the Privy Council, in
+which they not only gave their full consent to the erection of the
+playhouse, but actually urged "that the same might proceed."[437] This
+document he placed in the hands of Nottingham to use in influencing
+the Council. The effort was successful. On April 8 the Council issued
+a warrant "to the Justices of the Peace of the County of Middlesex,
+especially of St. Giles without Cripplegate, and to all others whom it
+shall concern," that they should permit Henslowe and Alleyn "to
+proceed in the effecting and finishing of the same new house."[438]
+
+[Footnote 436: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 49.]
+
+[Footnote 437: _Ibid._, p. 50.]
+
+[Footnote 438: _Ibid._, p. 51.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE FORTUNE PLAYHOUSE
+
+The site of the Fortune is marked by Playhouse Yard, connecting Golden
+Lane and Whitecross Street. (From Ogilby and Morgan's _Map of London_,
+1677.)]
+
+This warrant, of course, put an end to all interference by local
+authorities. But as the playhouse reared itself high above the walls
+of the city to the north, the Puritans were aroused to action. They
+made this the occasion for a most violent attack on actors and
+theatres in general, and on the Fortune in particular. With this
+attack the city authorities, for reasons of their own, heartily
+sympathized, but they had no jurisdiction over the Parish of St.
+Giles, or over the other localities in which playhouses were situated.
+Since the Privy Council had specially authorized the erection of the
+Fortune, the Lord Mayor shifted the attack to that body, and himself
+dispatched an urgent request to the Lords for reformation. In response
+to all this agitation the Lords of the Privy Council on June 22, 1600,
+issued the following order:
+
+ Whereas divers complaints have heretofore been made unto the
+ Lords and other of Her Majesty's Privy Council of the
+ manifold abuses and disorders that have grown and do
+ continue by occasion of many houses erected and employed in
+ and about London for common stage-plays; and now very lately
+ by reason of some complaint exhibited by sundry persons
+ against the building of the like house in or near Golding
+ Lane ... the Lords and the rest of Her Majesty's Privy
+ Council with one and full consent have ordered in manner and
+ form as follows. First, that there shall be about the city
+ two houses, and no more, allowed to serve for the use of the
+ common stage-plays; of the which houses, one [the Globe]
+ shall be in Surrey, in that place which is commonly called
+ the Bankside or thereabouts, and the other [the Fortune] in
+ Middlesex. Secondly, ... it is likewise ordered that the two
+ several companies of players assigned unto the two houses
+ allowed may play each of them in their several houses twice
+ a week and no oftener; and especially that they shall
+ refrain to play on the Sabbath day ... and that they shall
+ forbear altogether in the time of Lent.
+
+The first part of this order, limiting the playhouses and companies to
+two, was merely a repetition of the order of 1598.[439] It meant that
+the Lords of the Privy Council formally licensed the Admiral's and the
+Lord Chamberlain's Companies to play in London (of course the Lords
+might, when they saw fit, license other companies for specific
+periods). The second part of the order, limiting the number of
+performances, was more serious, for no troupe could afford to act only
+twice a week. The order if carried out would mean the ruin of the
+Fortune and the Globe Companies. But it was not carried out. The
+actors, as we learn from Henslowe's _Diary_, did not restrict
+themselves to two plays a week. Why, then, did the Lords issue this
+order, and why was it not put into effect? A study of the clever way
+in which Alleyn, Nottingham, and the Privy Council overcame the
+opposition of the puritanical officers of St. Giles who were
+interfering with the erection of the Fortune will suggest the
+explanation. The Lords were making a shrewd move to quiet the noisy
+enemies of the drama. They did not intend that the Admiral's and the
+Chamberlain's Men should be driven out of existence; they were merely
+meeting fanaticism with craft.
+
+[Footnote 439: See page 174.]
+
+Alleyn and Henslowe must have understood this,--possibly they learned
+it directly from their patron Nottingham,--for they proceeded with the
+erection of their expensive building. The work, however, had been so
+seriously delayed by the restraints of the local authorities that the
+foundations were not completed until May 8.[440] On that day
+carpenters were brought from Windsor, and set to the task of erecting
+the frame. Since the materials had been accumulating on the site since
+January 17, the work of erection must have proceeded rapidly. The
+daily progress of this work is marked in Henslowe's _Diary_ by the
+dinners of Henslowe with the contractor, Peter Street. On August 8,
+these dinners ceased, so that on that date, or shortly after, we may
+assume, the building proper was finished.[441]
+
+[Footnote 440: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 10.]
+
+[Footnote 441: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 158-59.]
+
+For erecting the building Street received £440. But this did not
+include the painting of the woodwork (which, if we may judge from De
+Witt's description of the Swan, must have been costly), or the
+equipment of the stage. We learn from Alleyn's memoranda that the
+final cost of the playhouse was £520.[442] Hence, after Street's work
+of erection was finished in August, the entire building had to be
+painted, and the stage properly equipped with curtains, hangings,
+machines, etc. This must have occupied at least two months. From
+Henslowe's _Diary_ it appears that the playhouse was first used about
+the end of November or the early part of December, 1600.[443]
+
+[Footnote 442: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 108.]
+
+[Footnote 443: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 124.]
+
+The original contract of Henslowe and Alleyn with Peter Street for the
+erection of the Fortune, preserved among the papers at Dulwich
+College, supplies us with some very exact details of the size and
+shape of the building. Although the document is long, and is couched
+in the legal verbiage of the day, it will repay careful study. For the
+convenience of the reader I quote below its main specifications:[444]
+
+ _Foundation._ A good, sure, and strong foundation, of piles,
+ brick, lime, and sand, both without and within, to be
+ wrought one foot of assize at the least above the ground.
+
+ _Frame._ The frame of the said house to be set square, and
+ to contain fourscore foot of lawful assize every way square
+ without, and fifty-five foot of like assize square every way
+ within.
+
+ _Materials._ And shall also make all the said frame in every
+ point for scantlings larger and bigger in assize than the
+ scantlings of the said new-erected house called the Globe.
+
+ _Exterior._ To be sufficiently enclosed without with lath,
+ lime, and hair.
+
+ _Stairs._ With such like stairs, conveyances, and divisions,
+ without and within, as are made and contrived in and to the
+ late erected playhouse ... called the Globe.... And the
+ staircases thereof to be sufficiently enclosed without with
+ lath, lime, and hair.
+
+ _Height of galleries._ And the said frame to contain three
+ stories in height; the first, or lower story to contain
+ twelve foot of lawful assize in height; the second story
+ eleven foot of lawful assize in height; and the third, or
+ upper story, to contain nine foot of lawful assize in
+ height.
+
+ _Breadth of galleries._ All which stories shall contain
+ twelve foot of lawful assize in breadth throughout. Besides
+ a jutty forward in either of the said two upper stories of
+ ten inches of lawful assize.
+
+ _Protection of lowest gallery._ The lower story of the said
+ frame withinside ... [to be] paled in below with good,
+ strong, and sufficient new oaken boards.... And the said
+ lower story to be also laid over and fenced with strong iron
+ pikes.
+
+ _Divisions of galleries._ With four convenient divisions for
+ gentlemen's rooms, and other sufficient and convenient
+ divisions for two-penny rooms.... And the gentlemen's rooms
+ and two-penny rooms to be ceiled with lath, lime, and hair.
+
+ _Seats._ With necessary seats to be placed and set, as well
+ in those rooms as throughout all the rest of the galleries.
+
+ _Stage._ With a stage and tiring-house to be made, erected,
+ and set up within the said frame; with a shadow or cover
+ over the said stage. Which stage shall be placed and set (as
+ also the staircases of the said frame) in such sort as is
+ prefigured in a plot thereof drawn. [The plot has been
+ lost.] And which stage shall contain in length forty and
+ three foot of lawful assize, and in breadth to extend to
+ the middle of the yard of the said house. The same stage to
+ be paled in below with good, strong, and sufficient new
+ oaken boards.... And the said stage to be in all other
+ proportions contrived and fashioned like unto the stage of
+ the said playhouse called the Globe.... And the said ...
+ stage ... to be covered with tile, and to have a sufficient
+ gutter of lead to carry and convey the water from the
+ covering of the said stage to fall backwards.
+
+ _Tiring-house._ With convenient windows and lights, glazed,
+ to the said tiring-house.
+
+ _Flooring._ And all the floors of the said galleries,
+ stories, and stage to be boarded with good and sufficient
+ new deal boards, of the whole thickness where need shall be.
+
+ _Columns._ All the principal and main posts of the said
+ frame and stage forward shall be square, and wrought
+ pilaster-wise, with carved proportions called satyrs to be
+ placed and set on the top of every of the said posts.
+
+ _Roof._ And the said frame, stage, and staircases to be
+ covered with tile.
+
+ _Miscellaneous._ To be in all other contrivations,
+ conveyances, fashions, thing and things, effected, finished,
+ and done, according to the manner and fashion of the said
+ house called the Globe.
+
+[Footnote 444: For the full document see Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p.
+4.]
+
+It is rather unfortunate for us that the building was to be in so many
+respects a copy of the Globe, for that deprives us of further detailed
+specifications; and it is unfortunate, too, that the plan or drawing
+showing the arrangement of the stage was not preserved with the rest
+of the document. Yet we are able to derive much exact information
+from the contract; and with this information, at least two modern
+architects have made reconstructions of the building.[445]
+
+[Footnote 445: See the Bibliography. A model of the Fortune by Mr.
+W.H. Godfrey is preserved in the Dramatic Museum of Columbia
+University in New York City, and a duplicate is in the Museum of
+European Culture at the University of Illinois. For a description of
+the model see the _Architect and Builders' Journal_ (London), August
+16, 1911.]
+
+No representation of the exterior of the Fortune has come down to us.
+In the so-called Ryther _Map of London_, there is, to be sure, what
+seems to be a crude representation of the playhouse (see page 278);
+but if this is really intended for the Fortune, it does little more
+than mark the location. Yet one can readily picture in his imagination
+the playhouse--a plastered structure, eighty feet square and
+approximately forty feet high,[446] with small windows marking the
+galleries, a turret and flagpole surmounting the red-tiled roof, and
+over the main entrance a sign representing Dame Fortune:
+
+ I'le rather stand here,
+ Like a statue in the fore-front of your house,
+ For ever, like the picture of Dame Fortune
+ Before the Fortune Playhouse.[447]
+
+[Footnote 446: The three galleries (twelve, eleven, and nine feet,
+respectively) were thirty-two feet in height; but to this must be
+added the elevation of the first gallery above the yard, the space
+occupied by the ceiling and flooring of the several galleries, and,
+finally, the roof.]
+
+[Footnote 447: Thomas Heywood, _The English Traveller_ (1633), ed.
+Pearson, IV, 84. We do not know when the play was written, but the
+reference is probably to the New Fortune, built in 1623. Heywood
+generally uses "picture" in the sense of "statue."]
+
+[Illustration: THE FORTUNE PLAYHOUSE (?)
+
+The curious structure with the flag may be intended to mark the site
+of the Fortune. (From the so-called Ryther _Map of London_, drawn
+about 1630-40.)]
+
+Nor is there any pictorial representation of the interior of the
+playhouse. In the absence of such, I offer the reader a verbal picture
+of the interior as seen from the stage during the performance of a
+play. In Middleton and Dekker's _The Roaring Girl_, acted at the
+Fortune, Sir Alexander shows to his friends his magnificent house.
+Advancing to the middle of the stage, and pointing out over the
+building, he asks them how they like it:
+
+ _Goshawk._ I like the prospect best.
+
+ _Laxton._ See how 't is furnished!
+
+ _Sir Davy._ A very fair sweet room.
+
+ _Sir Alex._ Sir Davy Dapper,
+ The furniture that doth adorn this room
+ Cost many a fair grey groat ere it came here;
+ But good things are most cheap when they're most dear.
+ Nay, when you look into my galleries,
+ How bravely they're trimm'd up, you all shall swear
+ You're highly pleas'd to see what's set down there:
+ Stories of men and women, mix'd together,
+ Fair ones with foul, like sunshine in wet weather;
+ Within one square a thousand heads are laid,
+ So close that all of heads the room seems made;
+ As many faces there, fill'd with blithe looks
+ Shew like the promising titles of new books
+ Writ merrily, the readers being their own eyes,
+ Which seem to move and to give plaudities;
+ And here and there, whilst with obsequious ears
+ Throng'd heaps do listen, a cut-purse thrusts and leers
+ With hawk's eyes for his prey; I need not shew him;
+ By a hanging, villainous look yourselves may know him,
+ The face is drawn so rarely: then, sir, below,
+ The very floor, as 't were, waves to and fro,
+ And, like a floating island, seems to move
+ Upon a sea bound in with shores above.
+
+ _All._ These sights are excellent![448]
+
+[Footnote 448: _The Roaring Girl_, I, i. Pointed out by M.W. Sampson,
+_Modern Language Notes_, June, 1915.]
+
+A closer view of this audience--"men and women, mix'd together, fair
+ones with foul"--is furnished by one of the letters of Orazio
+Busino,[449] the chaplain of the Venetian Embassy, who visited the
+Fortune playhouse shortly after his arrival in London in 1617:
+
+ The other day, therefore, they determined on taking me to
+ one of the many theatres where plays are performed, and we
+ saw a tragedy, which diverted me very little, especially as
+ I cannot understand a word of English, though some little
+ amusement may be derived from gazing at the very costly
+ dresses of the actors, and from the various interludes of
+ instrumental music and dancing and singing; but the best
+ treat was to see such a crowd of nobility so very well
+ arrayed that they looked like so many princes, listening as
+ silently and soberly as possible. These theatres are
+ frequented by a number of respectable and handsome ladies,
+ who come freely and seat themselves among the men without
+ the slightest hesitation. On the evening in question his
+ Excellency [the Venetian Ambassador] and the Secretary were
+ pleased to play me a trick by placing me amongst a bevy of
+ young women. Scarcely was I seated ere a very elegant dame,
+ but in a mask, came and placed herself beside me.... She
+ asked me for my address, both in French and English; and on
+ my turning a deaf ear, she determined to honour me by
+ showing me some fine diamonds on her fingers, repeatedly
+ taking off no fewer than three gloves, which were worn one
+ over the other.... This lady's bodice was of yellow satin
+ richly embroidered, her petticoat of gold tissue with
+ stripes, her robe of red velvet with a raised pile, lined
+ with yellow muslin, with broad stripes of pure gold. She
+ wore an apron of point lace of various patterns; her
+ head-tire was highly perfumed, and the collar of white satin
+ beneath the delicately-wrought ruff struck me as extremely
+ pretty.
+
+[Footnote 449: "Diaries and Despatches of the Venetian Embassy at the
+Court of King James I, in the Years 1617, 1618. Translated by Rawdon
+Brown." (_The Quarterly Review_, CII, 416.) It is true that the notice
+of this letter in _The Calendar of State Papers, Venetian_, XV, 67,
+makes no mention of the Fortune; but the writer in _The Quarterly
+Review_, who had before him the entire manuscript, states positively
+that the Fortune was the playhouse visited. I have not been able to
+examine the manuscript itself, which is preserved in Venice.]
+
+That the players were prepared to entertain distinguished visitors
+both during the performance and after is shown by a letter from John
+Chamberlain, July 21, 1621, to Sir Dudley Carleton. "The Spanish
+Ambassador," he writes, "is grown so affable and familiar, that on
+Monday, with his whole train, he went to a common play at the Fortune
+in Golding Lane; and the players (not to be overcome with courtesy)
+made him a banquet, when the play was done, in the garden
+adjoining."[450]
+
+[Footnote 450: Nichols, _The Progresses of King James_, IV, 67.]
+
+Upon its completion the new building was occupied by the Admiral's
+Men, for whom it had been erected. This troupe of players, long famous
+under the leadership of Edward Alleyn, was now one of the two
+companies authorized by the Privy Council, and the chief rival of the
+Chamberlain's Men at the Globe. Henslowe was managing their affairs,
+and numerous poets were writing plays for them. They continued to act
+at the Fortune under the name, "The Admiral's Men," until May 5, 1603,
+when, as Henslowe put it, they "left off play now at the King's
+coming."[451]
+
+[Footnote 451: Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, I, 174.]
+
+After a short interruption on account of the plague, during a part of
+which time they traveled in the provinces, the Admiral's Men were
+taken under the patronage of the youthful Henry, Prince of Wales, and
+in the early spring of 1604 they resumed playing at the Fortune under
+their new name, "The Prince's Servants."
+
+[Illustration: EDWARD ALLEYN
+
+(Reproduced by permission from a painting in the Dulwich Picture
+Gallery; photograph by Emery Walker, Ltd.)]
+
+For a time all went well. But from July, 1607, until December, 1609,
+the plague was severe in London, and acting was seriously interrupted.
+During this long period of hardship for the players, Henslowe and
+Alleyn seem to have made an attempt to hold the troupe together by
+admitting its chief members to a partnership in the building, just as
+the Burbages had formerly admitted their chief players to a
+partnership in the Globe. At this time there were in the troupe eight
+sharers, or chief actors.[452] Henslowe and Alleyn, it seems, proposed
+to allot to these eight actors one-fourth of the Fortune property. In
+other words, according to this scheme, there were to be thirty-two
+sharers in the new Fortune organization, Alleyn and Henslowe together
+holding three-fourths of the stock, or twelve shares each, and the
+eight actors together holding one-fourth of the stock, or one share
+each. A document was actually drawn up by Henslowe and Alleyn, with
+the name of the leader of the Fortune troupe, Thomas Downton,
+inserted;[453] but since the document was not executed, the scheme,
+it is to be presumed, was unsuccessful--at least, we hear nothing
+further about it.[454]
+
+[Footnote 452: See the Company's Patent of 1606, in The Malone
+Society's _Collections_, I, 268.]
+
+[Footnote 453: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 13.]
+
+[Footnote 454: For an ordinance concerning "lewd jiggs" at the Fortune
+in 1612, see _Middlesex County Records_, II, 83.]
+
+On November 6, 1612, the death of the young Prince of Wales left the
+company without a "service." On January 4, 1613, however, a new patent
+was issued to the players, placing them under the protection of the
+Palsgrave, or Elector Palatine, after which date they are known as
+"The Palsgrave's Men."
+
+On January 9, 1616, Henslowe, so long associated with the company and
+the Fortune, died; and a year later his widow, Agnes, followed him. As
+a result the entire Fortune property passed into the hands of Alleyn.
+But Alleyn, apparently, did not care to be worried with the management
+of the playhouse; so on October 31, 1618, he leased it to the
+Palsgrave's Men for a period of thirty-one years, at an annual rental
+of £200 and two rundlets of wine at Christmas.[455]
+
+[Footnote 455: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 27; Young, _The History of
+Dulwich College_, II, 260.]
+
+On April 24, 1620, Alleyn executed a deed of grant of lands by which
+he transferred the Fortune, along with various other properties, to
+Dulwich College.[456] But he retained during his lifetime the whole of
+the revenues therefrom, and he specifically reserved to himself the
+right to grant leases for any length of years. The transference of
+the title, therefore, in no way affected the playhouse, and Alleyn
+continued to manage the property as he had been accustomed to do in
+the past.
+
+[Footnote 456: The deed is printed by Young, _op. cit._, I, 50. The
+Fortune property, I believe, is still a part of the endowment of the
+college.]
+
+His services in this capacity were soon needed, for on December 9,
+1621, the Fortune was burned to the ground. Alleyn records the event
+in his _Diary_ thus: "_Memorandum._ This night at 12 of the clock the
+Fortune was burnt." In a less laconic fashion John Chamberlain writes
+to Sir Dudley Carleton: "On Sunday night here was a great fire at the
+Fortune in Golding-Lane, the fairest playhouse in this town. It was
+quite burnt down in two hours, and all their apparel and playbooks
+lost, whereby those poor companions are quite undone."[457]
+
+[Footnote 457: Birch, _The Court and Times of James the First_, II,
+280. Howes, in his continuation of Stow's _Annals_ (1631), p. 1004,
+attributes the fire to "negligence of a candle," but gives no
+details.]
+
+The "poor companions" thus referred to were, of course, the players,
+who lost not only their stock of apparel, playbooks, and stage
+furniture, but also their lease, which assured them of a home. Alleyn,
+however, was quite able and ready to reconstruct the building for
+them; and we find him on May 20, 1621, already organizing a syndicate
+to finance "a new playhouse" which "there is intended to be erected
+and set up." The stock of the new enterprise he divided into twelve
+equal shares, which he disposed of, as the custom was, in the form of
+whole and half shares, reserving for himself only one share.[458] The
+plot of ground on which the old playhouse stood he leased to the
+several sharers for a period of fifty-one years at an annual rental of
+£10 13_s._ 10_d._ a share, with the express condition that the
+building to be erected thereon should never be used for any purpose
+other than the acting of stage-plays. The sharers then proceeded to
+the task of constructing their playhouse. It was proposed to make the
+new building larger[459] and handsomer than the old one, and to build
+it of brick[460] with a tiled roof--possibly an attempt at fireproof
+construction. It was decided, also, to abandon the square shape in
+favor of the older and more logical circular shape. Wright, in his
+_Historia Histrionica_, describes the New Fortune as "a large, round,
+brick building,"[461] and Howes assures us that it was "farre fairer"
+than the old playhouse.[462] We do not know how much the building
+cost. At the outset each sharer was assessed £83 6_s._ 8_d._ towards
+the cost of construction,[463] which would produce exactly £1000; but
+the first assessment was not necessarily all that the sharers were
+called upon to pay. For example, when the Globe was rebuilt each
+sharer was at first assessed "£50 or £60," but before the building was
+finished each had paid more than £100. So the Fortune may well have
+cost more than the original estimate of £1000. In 1656 two expert
+assessors appointed by the authorities of Dulwich College to examine
+the playhouse declared that "the said building did in our opinions
+cost building about two thousand pound."[464] This estimate is
+probably not far wrong. The playhouse was completed in June or July of
+1623, and was again occupied by the Palsgrave's Men.[465]
+
+[Footnote 458: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, pp. 28-30; 112. The names of
+the sharers are not inspiring: Thomas Sparks, merchant tailor; William
+Gwalter, innholder; John Fisher, barber-surgeon; Thomas Wigpitt,
+bricklayer; etc.]
+
+[Footnote 459: Prynne, _Histriomastix_, Epistle Dedicatory.]
+
+[Footnote 460: The writer of the manuscript notes in the Phillipps
+copy of Stow's _Annals_ (see _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314),
+who is not trustworthy, says that the Fortune was burned down in 1618,
+and "built again with brick work on the outside," from which Mr.
+Wallace assumed that he meant that the building was merely
+brick-veneered. If the writer meant this he was in error. See the
+report of the commission appointed by Dulwich College to examine the
+building (Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 95).]
+
+[Footnote 461: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 408.]
+
+[Footnote 462: Stow, _Annals_, 1631.]
+
+[Footnote 463: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 29. Half-shares were £41
+13_s._ 4_d._, which Murray (_English Dramatic Companies_) confuses
+with whole shares.]
+
+[Footnote 464: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 95. This estimate was made
+after the interior of the building had been "pulled down," and hence
+refers merely to the cost of erection.]
+
+[Footnote 465: For an account of "a dangerous and great riot committed
+in Whitecross Street at the Fortune Playhouse" in May, 1626, see
+Jeaffreson, _Middlesex County Records_, III, 161-63.]
+
+On November 25, 1626, Edward Alleyn died, and the Fortune property
+came into the full possession of Dulwich College. This, however, did
+not in any way affect the syndicate of the Fortune housekeepers, who
+held from Alleyn a lease of the property until 1672. According to the
+terms of this lease each of the twelve sharers had to pay a yearly
+rental of £10 13_s._ 10_d._; this rental now merely went to the
+College instead of to Alleyn.
+
+In 1631 the Palsgrave's Men seem to have fallen on hard times; at any
+rate, they had to give up the Fortune, and the playhouse was taken
+over, about December, by the King's Revels, who had been playing at
+the small private playhouse of Salisbury Court.[466] The Palsgrave's
+Men were reorganized, taken under the patronage of the infant Prince
+Charles, and placed in the Salisbury Court Playhouse just vacated by
+the King's Revels.
+
+[Footnote 466: For details of this move see the chapter on the
+Salisbury Court Playhouse.]
+
+In 1635 there was a general shifting of houses on the part of the
+London companies. The King's Revels left the Fortune and returned to
+their old quarters at Salisbury Court; the Prince Charles's Men, who
+had been at Salisbury Court, moved to the Red Bull; and the Red Bull
+Company transferred itself to the Fortune.
+
+The stay of the Red Bull Company at the Fortune was not happy. Towards
+the end of 1635 the plague was seriously interfering with their
+performance of plays;[467] and on May 10, 1636, the Privy Council
+closed all theatres, and kept them closed, except for a few days,
+until October 2, 1637.[468] This long inhibition not only impoverished
+the actors and drove them into the country, but came near ruining the
+lessees of the Fortune, who, having no revenue from the playhouse,
+could not make their quarterly payments to the College. On September
+4, 1637, the Court of Assistants at Dulwich noted that the lessees
+were behind in their rent to the extent of £132 12_s._ 11_d._; "and,"
+the court adds, "there will be a quarter's rent more at Michaelmas
+next [i.e., in twenty-five days], which is doubted will be also
+unpaid, amounting to £33 1_s._ 4_d._"[469] The excuse of the lessees
+for their failure to pay was the "restraint from playing."[470]
+
+[Footnote 467: Young, _The History of Dulwich College_, I, 114.]
+
+[Footnote 468: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 391, 392;
+Malone, _Variorum_, III, 239.]
+
+[Footnote 469: Young, _The History of Dulwich College_, I, 114.]
+
+[Footnote 470: The College appealed to the Lord Keeper, who on January
+26 ordered the payment of the sum. But two years later, February,
+1640, we find the College again petitioning the Lord Keeper to order
+the lessees of the Fortune property to pay an arrearage of £104 14_s._
+5_d._ See Collier, _The Alleyn Papers_, pp. 95-98.]
+
+This "restraint" was removed on October 2, 1637, and the players
+resumed their performances at the Fortune. But in the early summer of
+1639 they fell victims to another bit of ill luck even more serious
+than their long inhibition. In a letter of Edmond Rossingham, dated
+May 8, 1639, we read: "Thursday last the players of the Fortune were
+fined £1000 for setting up an altar, a bason, and two candlesticks,
+and bowing down before it upon the stage; and although they allege it
+was an old play revived, and an altar to the heathen gods, yet it was
+apparent that this play was revived on purpose in contempt of the
+ceremonies of the Church."[471]
+
+[Footnote 471: Printed in _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic,
+1639_, p. 140.]
+
+During the Easter period, 1640, the players returned to their old
+quarters at the Red Bull. After their unhappy experiences at the
+Fortune they were apparently glad to occupy again their former home.
+The event is celebrated in a Prologue entitled _Upon the Removing of
+the Late Fortune Players to the Bull_, written by John Tatham, and
+printed in _Fancies Theatre_ (1640):[472]
+
+ Here, gentlemen, our anchor's fixt; and we
+ Disdaining _Fortune's_ mutability,
+ Expect your kind acceptance.
+
+[Footnote 472: The Prologue is printed in full by Malone, _Variorum_,
+III, 79.]
+
+The writer then hurls some uncomplimentary remarks at the Fortune,
+observing complacently: "We have ne'er an actor here has mouth enough
+to tear language by the ears." It is true that during these later
+years the Fortune had fallen into ill repute with persons of good
+taste. But so had the Red Bull, and the actors there had no right to
+throw stones. Apparently the large numbers that could be accommodated
+in the great public theatres, and the quality of the audience
+attracted by the low price of admission, made noise and rant
+inevitable.[473] As chief sinners in this respect the Fortune and the
+Red Bull are usually mentioned together.
+
+[Footnote 473: Not even the Globe was entirely free from this; see the
+Prologue to _The Doubtful Heir_.]
+
+Upon the departure of the Red Bull Company, the Prince Charles's Men
+(originally the Admiral's, and later the Palsgrave's Men), who had
+been occupying the Red Bull, came to the Fortune.[474] Thus after an
+absence of nearly nine years, the old company (though sadly altered in
+personnel), for which the Fortune had been built, returned to its home
+to remain there until the end.
+
+[Footnote 474: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 79.]
+
+On September 2, 1642, the Long Parliament passed an ordinance
+suppressing all stage-plays; but for a time the actors at the Fortune
+seem to have continued their performances. In the fifth number of _The
+Weekly Account_, September 27-October 4, 1643, we find among other
+entries: "The players' misfortune at the Fortune in Golding Lane,
+their players' clothes being seized upon in the time of a play by
+authority from the Parliament."[475] This, doubtless, led to the
+closing of the playhouse.
+
+[Footnote 475: _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1643_, p.
+564.]
+
+After the Fortune was thus closed, the lessees were in a predicament.
+By a specific clause in their lease they were prevented from using the
+building for any purpose other than the acting of stage-plays, and now
+Parliament by a specific ordinance had forbidden the acting of
+stage-plays. Hence the lessees, some of whom were poor persons, being
+unable to make any profit from the building, refused to pay any rent.
+The College entered suit against them, and exhausted all legal means
+to make them pay, but without success.[476]
+
+[Footnote 476: For an interesting comment on the situation, especially
+in the year 1649, see _Notes and Queries_ (series X), I, 85.]
+
+When the ordinance prohibiting plays expired in January, 1648, the
+actors promptly reopened the Fortune, and we learn from _The Kingdom's
+Weekly Intelligencer_ that on January 27 no fewer than one hundred and
+twenty coaches were crowded about the building. But on February 9
+Parliament passed a new and even more stringent ordinance against
+dramatic performances, placing penalties not only upon the players,
+but also upon the spectators. This for ever put an end to acting at
+the Fortune.
+
+In 1649 the arrears of the lessees having reached the sum of £974
+5_s._ 8_d._, the authorities of the College took formal possession of
+the playhouse.
+
+From certain manuscript notes[477] entered in the Phillipps copy of
+Stow's _Annals_ (1631), we learn that "a company of soldiers, set on
+by the sectaries of these sad times, on Saturday, the 24 day of March,
+1649," sacked the Salisbury Court Playhouse, the Phoenix, and the
+Fortune. The note states that the Fortune was "pulled down on the
+inside by the soldiers"; that is, the stage and the seats were
+dismantled[478] so as to render the building unusable for dramatic
+purposes.
+
+[Footnote 477: Printed in _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314.]
+
+[Footnote 478: See _The Journals of the House of Commons_, July 26,
+1648.]
+
+In the following year, 1650, the inhabitants of the Parish of St.
+Giles "represent that they are poor, and unable to build a place of
+worship for themselves, but think it would be convenient if that large
+building commonly known by the name of the Fortune Playhouse might be
+allotted and set apart for that purpose." The request was not
+granted.[479]
+
+[Footnote 479: Warner, _Catalogue_, XXXI; Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_,
+II, 65.]
+
+By July, 1656, the condition of the old playhouse was such that the
+Masters and Wardens of the College appointed two experts to view the
+building and make recommendations. They reported "that by reason the
+lead hath been taken from the said building, the tiling not secured,
+and the foundation of the said playhouse not kept in good repair,
+great part of the said playhouse is fallen to the ground, the timber
+thereof much decayed and rotten, and the brick walls so rent and torn
+that the whole structure is in no condition capable of repair, but in
+great danger of falling, to the hazard of passengers' lives"; and they
+add: "The charge for demolishing the same will be chargeable and
+dangerous. Upon these considerations our opinion is that the said
+materials may not be more worth than eighty pound."[480]
+
+[Footnote 480: The entire report is printed in Greg, _Henslowe
+Papers_, p. 95.]
+
+The authorities of Dulwich took no action on this report. However, on
+March 5, 1660, they ordered that the property be leased, making a
+casual reference to the playhouse as "at present so ruinous that part
+thereof is already fallen down, and the rest will suddenly follow."
+Accordingly, they inserted in the _Mercurius Politicus_ of February
+14-21, 1661, the following advertisement: "The Fortune Playhouse,
+situate between Whitecross Street and Golding Lane, in the parish of
+St. Giles, Cripplegate, with the ground thereto belonging, is to be
+let to be built upon."[481]
+
+[Footnote 481: Discovered by Stevens, and printed in Malone,
+_Variorum_, III, 55, note 5. Mr. W.J. Lawrence, _Archiv für das
+Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen_ (1914), p. 314, says
+that the date of this advertisement is 1660. But the same
+advertisement is reprinted by H.R. Plomer in _Notes and Queries_
+(series X), VI, 107, from _The Kingdom's Intelligencer_ of March 18,
+1661.]
+
+No one seems to have cared to lease the property; so on March 16,
+following, the materials of the building were sold to one William
+Beaven for the sum of £75;[482] and in the records of the College,
+March 4, 1662, we read that "the said playhouse ... is since totally
+demolished."[483]
+
+[Footnote 482: Young, _The History of Dulwich College_, II, 265.]
+
+[Footnote 483: Collier, _The Alleyn Papers_, p. 101. I am aware of the
+fact that there are references to later incidents at the Fortune (for
+example, the statement that it was visited by officers in November,
+1682, in an attempt to suppress secret conventicles that had long been
+held there), but in view of the unimpeachable documentary evidence
+cited above (in 1662 the College authorities again refer to it as "the
+late ruinous and now demolished Fortune playhouse"), we must regard
+these later references either as inaccurate, or as referring to
+another building later erected in the same neighborhood. The so-called
+picture of the Fortune, printed in Wilkinson's _Londina Illustrata_,
+and often reproduced by modern scholars, cannot possibly be that of
+the playhouse erected by Alleyn. For an interesting surmise as to the
+history of this later building see W.J. Lawrence, _Restoration Stage
+Nurseries_, in _Archiv für das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und
+Literaturen_ (1914), p. 301.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+THE RED BULL
+
+
+The builder of the Red Bull Playhouse[484] was "one Aaron Holland,
+yeoman," of whom we know little more than that he "was utterly
+unlearned and illiterate, not being able to read."[485] He had leased
+"for many years" from Anne Beddingfield, "wife and administratrix of
+the goods and chattles of Christopher Beddingfield, deceased," a small
+plot of land, known by the name of "The Red Bull." This plot of land,
+which contained one house, was situated "at the upper end of St.
+John's Street" in the Parish of St. James, Clerkenwell, the exact
+location being marked by "Red Bull Yard" in Ogilby and Morgan's _Map
+of London_, printed in 1677. The property was not much more distant
+from the heart of the city than the Fortune property, and since it
+could be easily reached through St. John's Gate, it was quite as well
+situated for dramatic purposes as was the Fortune.
+
+[Footnote 484: This playhouse is not to be confused with the famous
+Bull Tavern in Bishopsgate Street, for many years used as a theatre.]
+
+[Footnote 485: These statements are based upon the Woodford _v._
+Holland documents, first discovered by Collier, later by Greenstreet,
+and finally printed in full by Wallace, _Three London Theatres_.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE RED BULL PLAYHOUSE
+
+The site is indicated by Red Bull Yard. (From Ogilby and Morgan's _Map
+of London_, 1677.)]
+
+In or before 1605[486] Holland erected on this plot of ground "a
+playhouse for acting and setting forth plays, comedies, and
+tragedies." We may suspect that he did this at the instigation of the
+Earl of Worcester's Men, who had just been taken under the patronage
+of the Queen, and had been selected by the Privy Council as one of
+three companies to be "allowed." The warrant of the Privy Council,
+April 9, 1604, orders the Lord Mayor to "permit and suffer the three
+companies of players to the King, Queen, and Prince publickly to
+exercise their plays in their several and usual houses for that
+purpose, and no other, viz. the Globe, situate in Maiden Lane on the
+Bankside in the county of Surrey, the Fortune in Golding Lane, and the
+Curtain, in Holywell."[487] Among these three companies, as Dekker
+tells us, there was much rivalry.[488] No doubt the Queen's Men,
+forced to occupy the old Curtain Playhouse, suffered by comparison
+with the King's Men at the handsome Globe, and the Prince's Men at the
+new and magnificent Fortune; and this, I suspect, furnished the
+immediate cause for the erection of the Red Bull. In a draft of a
+license to the Queen's Men, made late in 1603 or early in 1604, the
+fact is disclosed that the actors, of whom Thomas Greene was the
+leader, were contemplating a new playhouse. The company was licensed
+to use any "playhouse not used by others, by the said Thomas Greene
+elected, _or by him hereafter to be built_."[489] Whether or no Greene
+and his fellows had some understanding with Holland, we cannot say.
+But in 1605 we find Holland disposing of one share in the new
+playhouse to Thomas Swynnerton, a member of Queen Anne's Troupe; and
+he may at the same time have disposed of other shares to other
+members, for his transaction with Swynnerton comes to our notice only
+through a subsequent lawsuit. The words used in the documents
+connected with the suit clearly suggest that the playhouse was
+completed at the time of the purchase. From the fact that Holland
+granted "a seventh part of the said playhouse and galleries, with a
+gatherer's place thereto belonging or appertaining, unto the said
+Thomas Swynnerton for diverse years,"[490] it appears that the
+ownership of the playhouse had been divided into seven shares, some of
+which, according to custom, may have been subdivided into half-shares.
+
+[Footnote 486: Sir Sidney Lee (_A Life of William Shakespeare_, p. 60)
+says that the Red Bull was "built about 1600." He gives no evidence,
+and the statement seems to be merely a repetition from earlier and
+unauthoritative writers.]
+
+[Footnote 487: The original warrant is preserved at Dulwich, and
+printed by Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 61. Cf. also Dasent, _Acts of
+the Privy Council_, XXXII, 511.]
+
+[Footnote 488: _Raven's Almanack_ (1609); Dekker's _Works_ (ed.
+Grosart), IV, 210.]
+
+[Footnote 489: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 265.]
+
+[Footnote 490: Wallace, _Three London Theatres_, p. 18.]
+
+The name of the playhouse, as in the case of the Rose and the Curtain,
+was taken from the name of the estate on which it was erected. Of the
+building we have no pictorial representation; the picture in Kirkman's
+_The Wits_ (1672), so often reproduced by scholars as "The Interior
+of the Red Bull," has nothing whatever to do with that building. The
+Kirkman picture shows a small enclosed room, with a narrow stage
+illuminated by chandeliers and footlights; the Red Bull, on the
+contrary, was a large, open-air building, with its stage illuminated
+by the sun. It is thus described in Wright's _Historia Histrionica_
+(1699): "The Globe, Fortune, and Bull were large houses, and lay
+partly open to the weather."[491] Before its door was displayed a sign
+on which was painted a red bull; hence the playhouse is sometimes
+referred to simply as "at the sign of the Red Bull."
+
+[Footnote 491: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 408. If the Kirkham picture
+represents the interior of any playhouse, it more likely represents
+the Cockpit, which was standing at the time of the Restoration.]
+
+The building, as I have indicated, seems to have been completed in or
+before 1605; but exactly when the Queen's Men moved thither from the
+Curtain is not clear. The patent issued to the company on April 15,
+1609, gives them license to play "within their now usual houses,
+called the Red Bull in Clerkenwell, and the Curtain in Holywell."[492]
+Since they would hardly make use of two big public playhouses at the
+same time, we might suspect that they were then arranging for the
+transfer. Moreover, Heath, in his _Epigrams_, printed in 1610 but
+probably written a year or two earlier, refers to the three important
+public playhouses of the day as the Globe, the Fortune, and the
+Curtain. Yet, that the Queen's Men were playing regularly at the Red
+Bull in 1609 is clear from Dekker's _Raven's Almanack_,[493] and they
+may have been playing there at intervals after 1605.
+
+[Footnote 492: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 270.]
+
+[Footnote 493: Dekker's _Works_ (ed. Grosart), IV, 210-11. I cannot
+understand why Murray (_English Dramatic Companies_, I, 152-53) and
+others say that Dekker refers to the Fortune, the Globe, and the
+Curtain. His puns are clear: "_Fortune_ must favour some ... the
+_whole world_ must stick to others ... and a third faction must fight
+like _Bulls_."]
+
+Dekker, in the pamphlet just mentioned, predicted "a deadly war"
+between the Globe, the Fortune, and the Red Bull. And he had good
+reasons for believing that the Queen's Men could successfully compete
+with the two other companies, for it numbered among its players some
+of the best actors of the day. The leader of the troupe was Thomas
+Greene, now chiefly known for the amusing comedy named, after him,
+_Greene's Tu Quoque_, but then known to all Londoners as the cleverest
+comedian since Tarleton and Kempe:
+
+ _Scat._ Yes, faith, brother, if it please you; let's go see
+ a play at the Globe.
+
+ _But._ I care not; any whither, so the clown have a part;
+ for, i' faith, I am nobody without a fool.
+
+ _Gera._ Why, then, we'll go to the Red Bull; they say
+ Green's a good clown.[494]
+
+[Footnote 494: _Greene's Tu Quoque_, Hazlitt's Dodsley, XI, 240. In
+May, 1610, there was "a notable outrage at the Playhouse called the
+Red Bull"; see _Middlesex County Records_, II, 64-65.]
+
+The chief playwright for the troupe was the learned and industrious
+Thomas Heywood, who, like Shakespeare, was also an actor and full
+sharer in his company. Charles Lamb, who was an ardent admirer of
+Heywood's plays, enthusiastically styled him "a prose Shakespeare";
+and Wordsworth, with hardly less enthusiasm, declared him to have been
+"a great man."
+
+In 1612 Thomas Greene died, and the leadership of the troupe was taken
+over by Christopher Beeston, a man well known in the theatrical life
+of the time. Late in February, 1617, Beeston transferred the Queen's
+Men to his new playhouse in Drury Lane, the Cockpit; in little more
+than a week the sacking of the Cockpit drove them back to their old
+quarters, where they remained until the following June. But even after
+this they seem not to have abandoned the Red Bull entirely.
+
+Edward Alleyn, in his _Account Book_, writes: "Oct. 1, 1617, I came to
+London in the coach and went to the Red Bull"; and again under the
+date of October 3: "I went to the Red Bull, and received for _The
+Younger Brother_ but £3 6_s._ 4_d._"[495] What these two passages mean
+it is hard to say, for they constitute the only references to the Red
+Bull in all the Alleyn papers; but they do not necessarily imply, as
+some have thought, that Alleyn was part owner of the playhouse;
+possibly he was merely selling to the Red Bull Company the manuscript
+of an old play.[496]
+
+[Footnote 495: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 223; Young, _The History of
+Dulwich College_, II, 51; Warner, _Catalogue_, p. 165; Collier,
+_Memoirs of Edward Alleyn_, p. 107.]
+
+[Footnote 496: The play is not otherwise known; a play with this
+title, however, was entered on the Stationers' Register in 1653.]
+
+At the death of Queen Anne, March 2, 1619, the company was deprived of
+its "service," and after attending her funeral on May 13, was
+dissolved. Christopher Beeston joined Prince Charles's Men, and
+established that troupe at the Cockpit;[497] the other leading members
+of Queen Anne's Men seem to have continued at the Red Bull under the
+simple title "The Red Bull Company."
+
+[Footnote 497: For details of this change, and of the quarrels that
+followed, see the chapter on the Cockpit.]
+
+In April, 1622, a feltmaker's apprentice named John Gill,[498] while
+seated on the Red Bull stage, was accidentally injured by a sword in
+the hands of one of the actors, Richard Baxter. A few days later Gill
+called upon his fellow-apprentices to help him secure damages. In the
+forenoon he sent the following letter, now somewhat defaced by time,
+to Baxter:
+
+ Mr. Blackster [_sic_]. So it is that upon Monday last it ...
+ to be upon your stage, intending no hurt to any one, where I
+ was grievously wounded in the head, as may appear; and in
+ the surgeon's hands, who is to have x_s._ for the cure; and
+ in the meantime my Master to give me maintenance ... [to my]
+ great loss and hindrance; and therefore in kindness I desire
+ you to give me satisfaction, seeing I was wounded by your
+ own hand ... weapon. If you refuse, then look to yourself
+ and avoid the danger which shall this day ensue upon your
+ company and house. For ... as you can, for I am a
+ feltmaker's prentice, and have made it known to at least one
+ hundred and forty of our ... who are all here present, ready
+ to take revenge upon you unless willingly you will give
+ present satisfaction. Consider there ... think fitting. And
+ as you have a care for your own safeties, so let me have
+ answer forthwith.[499]
+
+[Footnote 498: The name is also given, incorrectly, as Richard Gill.]
+
+[Footnote 499: Jeaffreson, _Middlesex County Records_, II, 165-66;
+175-76.]
+
+Baxter turned the letter over to the authorities of Middlesex (hence
+its preservation), who took steps to guard the playhouse and actors.
+The only result was that prentices "to the number of one hundred
+persons on the said day riotously assembled at Clerkenwell, to the
+terror and disquiet of persons dwelling there."
+
+On July 8, 1622, the Red Bull Company secured a license "to bring up
+children in the quality and exercise of playing comedies, histories,
+interludes, morals, pastorals, stage-plays and such like ... to be
+called by the name of the Children of the Revels."[500] The Children
+of the Revels occupied the Red Bull until the summer of the following
+year, 1623, when they were dissolved. The last reference to them is in
+the Herbert Manuscript under the date of May 10, 1623.[501]
+
+[Footnote 500: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 62; The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 284.]
+
+[Footnote 501: Chalmers, _Supplemental Apology_, p. 213.]
+
+In August, 1623, we find the Red Bull occupied by Prince Charles's
+Men,[502] who, after the dissolution of the Revels Company, had moved
+thither from the less desirable Curtain.
+
+[Footnote 502: _Ibid._, pp. 213-14.]
+
+Two years later, in 1625, Prince Charles became King, and took under
+his patronage his father's troupe, the King's Men. Some of the
+members of the Prince Charles Troupe were transferred to the King's
+Men, and the rest constituted a nucleus about which a new company was
+organized, known simply as "The Red Bull Company."
+
+About this time, it seems, the playhouse was rebuilt and enlarged. The
+Fortune had been destroyed by fire in 1621, and had just been rebuilt
+in a larger and handsomer form. In 1625 one W.C., in _London's
+Lamentation for her Sins_, writes: "Yet even then, Oh Lord, were the
+theatres magnified and enlarged."[503] This doubtless refers to the
+rebuilding of the Fortune and the Red Bull. Prynne specifically states
+in his _Histriomastix_ (1633) that the Fortune and Red Bull had been
+"lately reedified [and] enlarged." But nothing further is known of the
+"re-edification and enlargement" of the Red Bull.
+
+[Footnote 503: Quoted by Collier, _The History of English Dramatic
+Poetry_ (1879), III, 121.]
+
+After its enlargement the playhouse seems to have acquired a
+reputation for noise and vulgarity. Carew, in 1630, speaks of it as a
+place where "noise prevails" and a "drowth of wit," and yet as always
+crowded with people while the better playhouses stood empty. In _The
+Careless Shepherdess_, acted at Salisbury Court, we read:
+
+ And I will hasten to the money-box,
+ And take my shilling out again;
+ I'll go to the Bull, or Fortune, and there see
+ A play for two-pence, and a jig to boot.[504]
+
+[Footnote 504: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 70.]
+
+In 1638, a writer of verses prefixed to Randolph's _Poems_ speaks of
+the "base plots" acted with great applause at the Red Bull.[505] James
+Wright informs us, in his _Historia Histrionica_, that the Red Bull
+and the Fortune were "mostly frequented by citizens and the meaner
+sort of people."[506] And Edmund Gayton, in his _Pleasant Notes_,
+wittily remarks: "I have heard that the poets of the Fortune and Red
+Bull had always a mouth-measure for their actors (who were terrible
+tear-throats) and made their lines proportionable to their compass,
+which were sesquipedales, a foot and a half."[507] Probably the ill
+repute of the large public playhouses at this time was chiefly due to
+the rise of private playhouses in the city.
+
+[Footnote 505: Randolph's _Works_ (ed. Hazlitt), p. 504.]
+
+[Footnote 506: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 407.]
+
+[Footnote 507: _Pleasant Notes on Don Quixote_, p. 24.]
+
+In 1635 the Red Bull Company moved to the Fortune, and Prince
+Charles's Men occupied the Red Bull.
+
+Five years later, at Easter, 1640, Prince Charles's Men moved back to
+the Fortune, and the Red Bull Company returned to its old home. In a
+prologue written to celebrate the event,[508] the members of the
+company declared:
+
+ Here, gentlemen, our anchor's fix't.
+
+[Footnote 508: J. Tatham, _Fancies Theatre_. For a fuller discussion
+of the shifting of companies in 1635 and 1640 see the chapter on "The
+Fortune."]
+
+This proved true, for the company remained at the Red Bull until
+Parliament passed the ordinance of 1642 closing the playhouses and
+forbidding all dramatic performances. The ordinance, which was to hold
+good during the continuance of the civil war, was renewed in 1647,
+with January 1, 1648, set as the date of its expiration. Through some
+oversight a new ordinance was not immediately passed, and the actors
+were prompt to take advantage of the fact. They threw open the
+playhouses, and the Londoners flocked in great crowds to hear plays
+again. At the Red Bull, so we learn from the newspaper called _Perfect
+Occurrences_, was given a performance of Beaumont and Fletcher's _Wit
+Without Money_.
+
+But on February 9, 1648, Parliament made up for its oversight by
+passing an exceptionally severe ordinance against dramatic
+exhibitions, directing that actors be publicly flogged, and that each
+spectator be fined the sum of five shillings.
+
+During the dark years that followed, the Red Bull, in spite of this
+ordinance, was occasionally used by venturous actors. James Wright, in
+his _Historia Histrionica_, tells us that upon the outbreak of the war
+the various London actors had gone "into the King's army, and, like
+good men and true, served their old master, though in a different, yet
+more honourable capacity. Robinson was killed at the taking of a place
+(I think Basing House) by Harrison.... Mohun was a captain.... Hart
+was cornet of the same troop, and Shatterel quartermaster. Allen, of
+the Cockpit, was a major.... The rest either lost or exposed their
+lives for their king."[509] He concludes the narrative by saying that
+when the wars were over, those actors who were left alive gathered to
+London, "and for a subsistence endeavoured to revive their old trade
+privately." They organized themselves into a company in 1648 and
+attempted "to act some plays with as much caution and privacy as could
+be at the Cockpit"; but after three or four days they were stopped by
+soldiers. Thereafter, on special occasions "they used to bribe the
+officer who commanded the guard at Whitehall, and were thereupon
+connived at to act for a few days at the Red Bull, but were sometimes,
+notwithstanding, disturbed by soldiers."[510] To such clandestine
+performances Kirkman refers in his Preface to _The Wits, or Sport upon
+Sport_ (1672): "I have seen the Red Bull Playhouse, which was a large
+one, so full that as many went back for want of room as had entered;
+and as meanly as you may now think of these drolls, they were then
+acted by the best comedians then and now in being." Not, however,
+without occasional trouble. In Whitelocke's _Memorials_, p. 435, we
+read: "20 Dec., 1649. Some stage-players in St. John's Street were
+apprehended by troopers, their clothes taken away, and themselves
+carried to prison"; again, in _The Perfect Account_, December
+27-January 3, 1654-1655: "Dec. 30, 1654.--This day the players at the
+Red Bull, being gotten into all their borrowed gallantry and ready to
+act, were by some of the soldiery despoiled of all their bravery; but
+the soldiery carried themselves very civilly towards the
+audience."[511] In the _Weekly Intelligencer_, September 11-18, 1655,
+we find recorded still another sad experience for the actors: "Friday,
+September 11, 1655.--This day proved tragicall to the players at the
+Red Bull; their acting being against the Act of Parliament, the
+soldiers secured the persons of some of them who were upon the stage,
+and in the tiring-house they seized also upon their clothes in which
+they acted, a great part whereof was very rich."[512]
+
+[Footnote 509: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 409.]
+
+[Footnote 510: _Ibid._, 409-10.]
+
+[Footnote 511: Cited by C.H. Firth, in _Notes and Queries_, August 18,
+1888, series VII, vol. VI, p. 122.]
+
+[Footnote 512: _Ibid._]
+
+On this occasion, however, the soldiers, instead of carrying
+themselves "very civilly" towards the audience, undertook to exact
+from each of the spectators the fine of five shillings. The ordinance
+of Parliament, passed February 9, 1648, read: "And it is hereby
+further ordered and ordained, that every person or persons which shall
+be present and a spectator at such stage-play or interlude, hereby
+prohibited, shall for every time he shall be present, forfeit and pay
+the sum of five shillings to the use of the poor of the parish."[513]
+But the spectators did not submit to this fine without a struggle.
+Jeremiah Banks wrote to Williamson on September 16, 1655: "At the
+playhouse this week many were put to rout by the soldiers and had
+broken crowns; the corporal would have been entrapped had he not been
+vigilant."[514] And in the _Weekly Intelligencer_, September 11-18, we
+read: "It never fared worse with the spectators than at this present,
+for those who had monies paid their five shillings apiece; those who
+had none, to satisfy their forfeits, did leave their cloaks behind
+them. The Tragedy of the spectators was the Comedy of the soldiers.
+There was abundance of the female sex, who, not able to pay five
+shillings, did leave some gage or other behind them, insomuch that
+although the next day after the Fair was expected to be a new fair of
+hoods, of aprons, and of scarfs; all which, their poverty being made
+known, and after some check for their trespass, were civilly again
+restored to the owners."[515]
+
+[Footnote 513: Hazlitt, _The English Drama and Stage_, p. 69.]
+
+[Footnote 514: _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1655_, p.
+336.]
+
+[Footnote 515: For a further account of this episode see _Mercurius
+Fumigosus_, No. 69.]
+
+At the period of the Restoration the Red Bull was among the first
+playhouses to reopen. John Downes, in his _Roscius Anglicanus_,
+writes: "The scattered remnant of several of these houses, upon King
+Charles' Restoration, framed a company, who acted again at the
+Bull."[516] Apparently the company was brought together by the famous
+old Elizabethan actor, Anthony Turner. From the _Middlesex County
+Records_ (III, 279) we learn that at first the players were
+interrupted by the authorities:
+
+ 12 May, 1659.--Recognizances, taken before Ra: Hall, esq.
+ J.P., of William Wintershall and Henry Eaton, both of
+ Clerkenwell, gentlemen, in the sum of fifty pounds each;
+ "Upon condition that Antony Turner shall personally appear
+ at the next Quarter Sessions of the Peace to be holden at
+ Hicks Hall for the said County of Middlesex; for the
+ unlawful maintaining of stage-plays and interludes at the
+ Red Bull in St. John's Street, which house he affirms that
+ they hire of the parishioners of Clerkenwell at the rate of
+ twenty shillings a day over and above what they have agreed
+ to pay towards the relief of their poor and repairing their
+ highways, and in the meantime to be of good behaviour and
+ not to depart the Court without license.--Ra: Hall." Also
+ similar Recognizances, taken on the same day, before the
+ same J.P., of the same William Wintershall and Henry Eaton,
+ gentlemen, in the same sum of fifty pounds each; for the
+ appearance of Edward Shatterall at the next. Q.S.P. for
+ Middlesex at Hicks Hall, "to answer for the unlawful
+ maintaining of stage-plays and interludes at the Red Bull in
+ St. John's Street &c." S.P.R., 17, May, 1659.
+
+[Footnote 516: Cf. Wright, _Historia Histrionica_, p. 412; and for the
+general history of the actors at the Red Bull during this period see
+the Herbert records in Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient
+Documents_.]
+
+Later, it seems, they secured a license from the authorities, and
+thenceforth acted without interruption. Samuel Pepys made plans "to go
+to the Red Bull Playhouse" with Mrs. Pierce and her husband on August
+3, 1660, but was prevented by business. An account of his visit there
+on March 23, 1661, is thus given in his _Diary_:
+
+ All the morning at home putting papers in order; dined at
+ home, and then out to the Red Bull (where I had not been
+ since plays came up again), but coming too soon I went out
+ again and walked up and down the Charterhouse Yard and
+ Aldersgate Street. At last came back again and went in,
+ where I was led by a seaman that knew me, but is here as a
+ servant, up to the tiring-room, where strange the confusion
+ and disorder that there is among them in fitting themselves,
+ especially here, where the clothes are very poor and the
+ actors but common fellows. At last into the pit, where I
+ think there was not above ten more than myself, and not one
+ hundred in the whole house. And the play, which is called
+ _All's Lost by Lust_, poorly done; and with so much
+ disorder, among others, that in the musique-room, the boy
+ that was to sing a song not singing it right, his master
+ fell about his ears and beat him so, that it put the whole
+ house in an uproar.
+
+The actors, however, did not remain long at the Red Bull. They built
+for themselves a new theatre in Drury Lane, whither they moved on
+April 8, 1663;[517] and after this the old playhouse was deserted. In
+Davenant's _The Play-House to Be Let_ (1663), I, i, we read:
+
+ Tell 'em the Red Bull stands empty for fencers:[518]
+ There are no tenants in it but old spiders.
+
+[Footnote 517: After November 8, 1660, they acted also in Gibbon's
+Tennis Court in Clare Market, which they had fitted up as a theatre;
+see Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient Documents_, p. 34.]
+
+[Footnote 518: See Pepys' _Diary_, April 25, 1664.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+WHITEFRIARS
+
+
+The district of Whitefriars, lying just outside the city wall to the
+west, and extending from Fleet Street to the Thames, was once in the
+possession of the order of White Friars, and the site of an important
+monastery; but in Elizabeth's time the church had disappeared, most of
+the ancient buildings had been dismantled, and in their place, as Stow
+tells us, were "many fair houses builded, lodgings for noblemen and
+others." Since at the dissolution of the monasteries the property had
+come into the possession of the Crown, it was not under the
+jurisdiction of the London Common Council--a fact which made
+Whitefriars, like Blackfriars, a desirable refuge for players seeking
+to escape the hostility of the city authorities.[519] One might
+naturally expect the appearance of playing here at an early date, but
+the evidence is slight.[520]
+
+[Footnote 519: Whitefriars passed under city control in 1608 by grant
+of King James I, but certain rights remained, notably that of
+sanctuary. This has been celebrated in Shadwell's play, _The Squire of
+Alsatia_, and in Scott's romance, _The Fortunes of Nigel_.]
+
+[Footnote 520: Prynne, in _Histriomastix_ (1633), p. 491, quotes a
+passage from Richard Reulidge's _Monster Lately Found Out and
+Discovered_ (1628), in which there is a reference to a playhouse as
+existing in Whitefriars "not long after" 1580. By "playhouse" Reulidge
+possibly meant an inn used for acting; but the whole passage, written
+by a Puritan after the lapse of nearly half a century, is open to
+grave suspicion, especially in its details. Again Richard Flecknoe, in
+_A Short Discourse of the English Stage_ (1664), states that the
+Children of the Chapel Royal acted in Whitefriars. But that he
+confused the word "Whitefriars" with "Blackfriars" is shown by the
+rest of his statement.]
+
+The first appearance of a regular playhouse in Whitefriars dates from
+the early years of King James's reign. With our present knowledge we
+cannot fix the date exactly, yet we can feel reasonably certain that
+it was not long before 1607--probably about 1605.
+
+The chief spirit in the organization of the new playhouse seems to
+have been the poet Michael Drayton, who had secured a patent from King
+James to "erect" a company of child actors, to be known as "The
+Children of His Majesty's Revels."[521] Obviously his hope was to make
+the Children of His Majesty's Revels at Whitefriars rival the
+successful Children of Her Majesty's Revels at Blackfriars. In this
+ambitious enterprise he associated with himself a wealthy London
+merchant, Thomas Woodford, whom we know as having been interested in
+various theatrical investments.[522] These two men leased from Lord
+Buckhurst for a short period of time a building described as a
+"mansion house" formerly a part of the Whitefriars monastery: "the
+rooms of which are thirteen in number, three below, and ten above;
+that is to say, the great hall, the kitchen by the yard, and a cellar,
+with all the rooms from the Master of the Revells' office as the same
+are now severed and divided."[523] The "great hall" here mentioned,
+once the refectory of the monks, was made into the playhouse. Its
+"great" size may be inferred from the fact that there were ten rooms
+"above"; and its general excellence may be inferred from the fact that
+it was leased at £50 per annum, whereas Blackfriars, in a more
+desirable location and fully equipped as a theatre, was rented for
+only £40.
+
+[Footnote 521: Fleay, Murray, and others are wrong in assuming that
+this troupe was merely a continuation of the Paul's Boys. So far as I
+can discover, there is no official record of the patent issued to
+Drayton; but that such a patent was issued is clear from the lawsuits
+of 1609, printed by Greenstreet in _The New Shakspere Society's
+Transactions_ (1887-90), p. 269.]
+
+[Footnote 522: He was part proprietor of the Red Bull. In the case of
+Witter _v._ Heminges and Condell he was examined as a witness (see
+Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 74), but what
+connection, if any, he had with the Globe does not appear.]
+
+[Footnote 523: Greenstreet, _The New Shakspere Society's Transactions_
+(1887-90), p. 275.]
+
+From an early seventeenth-century survey of the Whitefriars property
+(see the opposite page), we are able to place the building very
+exactly. The part of the monastery used as a playhouse--the
+Frater--was the southern cloister, marked in the plan, "My Lords
+Cloyster." The "kitchen by the yard" mentioned in the document just
+quoted is clearly represented in the survey by the "Scullere." The
+size of the playhouse is hard to ascertain, but it was approximately
+thirty-five feet in width and eighty-five feet in length.[524] In the
+London of to-day it extended roughly from Bouverie Street to
+Ashen-tree Court, and lay just north of George Yard.
+
+[Footnote 524: The stipple walls, in the original survey colored gray,
+were of stone; the thinner walls of the adjoining "tenements," in the
+original colored red, were of brick.]
+
+[Illustration: A PLAN OF WHITEFRIARS
+
+A portion of an early seventeenth-century survey of the Whitefriars
+property. The playhouse adjoined the "Scullere" on the south. (This
+survey was discovered in the Print Room of the British Museum by Mr.
+A.W. Clapham, and reproduced in _The Journal of the British
+Archæological Association_, 1910.)]
+
+Of the career of the Children under the joint management of Drayton
+and Woodford we know almost nothing. But in March, 1608, a new
+management assumed charge of the troupe, and from this point on the
+history of the playhouse is reasonably clear.
+
+The original lease of the building, it seems, expired on March 5,
+1608. But before the expiration--in the latter part of 1607 or in the
+early part of 1608--Drayton and Woodford secured a new lease on the
+property for six years, eight months, and twenty days, or until
+December 25 (one of the four regular feasts of the year), 1614. In
+February, 1608, after having secured this renewal of the lease, Thomas
+Woodford suddenly determined to retire from the enterprise; and he
+sold his moiety to one David Lording Barry,[525] author of the play
+_Ram Alley_. Barry and Drayton at once made plans to divide the
+property into six shares, so as to distribute the expenses and the
+risks as well as the hoped-for profits. Barry induced his friend,
+George Androwes, to purchase one share, and hence the lawsuit from
+which we derive most of our knowledge of the playhouse. From this suit
+I quote below the more significant part relating to the new
+organization:
+
+ Humbly complaining, sheweth unto your honorable lordship,
+ your daily orator, George Androwes, of London, silkweaver,
+ that whereas one Lordinge Barry, about February which was in
+ the year of our Lord 1607 [i.e., 1608], pretending himself
+ to be lawfully possessed of one moiety of a messuage or
+ mansion house, parcel of the late dissolved monastery called
+ the Whitefriars, in Fleet Street, in the suburbs of London,
+ by and under a lease made thereof, about March then next
+ following, from the right honorable Robert, Lord Buckhurst,
+ unto one Michael Drayton and Thomas Woodford, for the term
+ of six years, eight months, and twenty days then following,
+ for and under the yearly rent of fifty pounds reserved
+ thereupon; the moiety of which said lease and premisses, by
+ mean assignment from the said Thomas Woodford, was lawfully
+ settled in the said Lordinge Barry, as he did pretend,
+ together with the moiety of diverse play-books, apparel, and
+ other furnitures and necessaries used and employed in and
+ about the said messuage and the Children of the Revels,[526]
+ there being, in making and setting forth plays, shows, and
+ interludes, and such like. And the said Lordinge Barry ...
+ being desirous to join others with him in the interest of
+ the same, who might be contributory to such future charges
+ as should arise in setting forth of plays and shows there,
+ did thereupon ... solicit and persuade your orator to
+ take from the said Barry an assignment of a sixth part of
+ the messuage, premisses, and profits aforesaid.
+
+[Footnote 525: By a stupid error often called Lodowick Barry. For an
+explanation of the error see an article by the present writer in
+_Modern Philology_, April, 1912, IX, 567. Mr. W.J. Lawrence has
+recently shown (_Studies in Philology_, University of North Carolina,
+April, 1917) that David Barry was the eldest son of the ninth Viscount
+Buttevant, and was called "Lording" by courtesy. At the time he became
+interested in the Whitefriars Playhouse he was twenty-two years old.
+He died in 1610.]
+
+[Footnote 526: At this time the Children of Blackfriars had lost their
+patent, so that the Children at Whitefriars were the only Revels
+troupe.]
+
+[Illustration: MICHAEL DRAYTON
+
+(From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery, London: photograph
+copyrighted by Emery Walker, Ltd.)]
+
+This passage gives us an interesting glimpse of Drayton and Barry in
+their efforts to organize a syndicate for exploiting the Children of
+His Majesty's Revels. They induced several other persons to buy
+half-shares; and then they engaged, as manager of the Children, Martin
+Slaiter,[527] a well-known and thoroughly experienced actor. For his
+services as manager, Slaiter was to receive one whole share in the
+organization, and lodgings for himself and his family of ten in the
+building. The syndicate thus formed was made up of four whole-sharers,
+Michael Drayton, Lordinge Barry, George Androwes, and Martin Slaiter,
+and four half-sharers, William Trevell, William Cooke, Edward
+Sibthorpe, and John Mason.[528]
+
+[Footnote 527: Also spelled Slater, Slaughter, Slather, Slawghter.
+Henslowe often refers to him as "Martin."]
+
+[Footnote 528: Mr. Wallace (_The Century Magazine_, 1910, LXXX, 511)
+incorrectly says that Whitefriars was held by "six equal sharers."]
+
+The "great hall" had, of course, already been fitted up for the acting
+of plays, and the new lessees did not at first contemplate any
+expenditure on the building. Later, however,--if we can believe
+Androwes,--they spent a not inconsiderable sum for improvements. The
+Children already had certain plays, and to these were added some new
+ones. Among the plays in their repertoire were Day's _Humour Out of
+Breath_, Middleton's _Family of Love_, Armin's _The Two Maids of
+Moreclacke_, Sharpham's _Cupid's Whirligig_, Markham and Machin's _The
+Dumb Knight_, Barry's _Ram Alley_, and Mason's _The Turk_. The last
+two writers were sharers, and it seems likely that Drayton, also a
+sharer and experienced as a dramatist, contributed some plays towards
+the stock of the company.
+
+The new organization, with bright prospects for success, was launched
+in March, 1608. Almost at once, however, it began to suffer from ill
+luck. In April the Children at Blackfriars, by their performance of
+_Byron_, caused King James to close all playhouses in London. How long
+he kept them closed we do not know, but we find the lessees of
+Whitefriars joining with the three other London companies in seeking
+to have the inhibition raised. As the French Ambassador informed his
+Government: "Pour lever cette défense, quatres autres compagnies, qui
+y sont encore, offrent déjà cent mille francs, lesquels pourront bien
+leur en ordonner la permission."[529]
+
+[Footnote 529: Letter of M. De La Boderie, the French Ambassador to
+England; quoted by E.K. Chambers, _Modern Language Review_, IV, 159.]
+
+Even if this inhibition was shortly raised, the Whitefriars
+organization was not much better off, for in July the plague set in
+with unusual violence, and acting was seriously if not wholly
+interrupted for the next twelve months and more. As a result, the
+profits from the theatre did not come up to the "fair and false
+flattering speeches" which at the outset Barry had made to prospective
+investors, and this led to bad feeling among the sharers.
+
+The company at Blackfriars, of course, was suffering in a similar way.
+On August 8, 1608, their playhouse was surrendered to the owner,
+Richard Burbage, and the Children being thus left without a home were
+dispersed. Early in 1609, probably in February, Robert Keysar (the
+manager of the Blackfriars troupe), Philip Rosseter, and others
+secured the lease of the Whitefriars Playhouse from Drayton and the
+rest of the discontented sharers, and reassembled there the Children
+of Blackfriars. What became of the Whitefriars troupe we do not know;
+but it is highly likely that the new organization took over the better
+actors from Drayton's company. At any rate, we do not hear again of
+the Children of His Majesty's Revels.
+
+When Keysar and this new troupe of child-actors moved into
+Whitefriars, Slaiter and his family of ten were expelled from the
+building. This led to a lawsuit, and explains much in the legal
+documents printed by Greenstreet. Slaiter complained with no little
+feeling that he had been "riotously, willfully, violently, and
+unlawfully, contrary to the said articles and pretended agreement [by
+which he had been not only engaged as a manager, but also guaranteed a
+home for the period of "all the term of years in the lease"], put and
+kept out of his said rooms of habitation for him, this defendant, and
+his family, and all other his means of livelihood, thereby leaving
+this defendant and his whole family, being ten in number, to the world
+to seek for bread and other means to live by."[530]
+
+[Footnote 530: Greenstreet, _The New Shakspere Society's Transactions_
+(1887-90), p. 283.]
+
+The new Whitefriars troupe acted five plays at Court during the winter
+of 1609-10. Payments therefor were made to Robert Keysar, and the
+company was referred to merely as "The Children of the Whitefriars."
+But on January 4, 1610, the company secured a royal patent authorizing
+the use of the title "The Children of the Queen's Revels."[531] The
+patent was granted to Robert Daborne, Philip Rosseter, John Tarbock,
+Richard Jones, and Robert Browne; but Keysar, though not named in the
+grant, was still one of the important sharers.[532]
+
+[Footnote 531: Printed in The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 271.]
+
+[Footnote 532: See Keysar _v._ Burbage _et al._, printed by Mr.
+Wallace, in his _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, pp. 80 ff.]
+
+The troupe well deserved the patronage of the Queen. Keysar described
+the Blackfriars Children whom he had reorganized as "a company of the
+most expert and skillful actors within the realm of England, to the
+number of eighteen or twenty persons, all or most of them, trained up
+in that service in the reign of the late Queen Elizabeth for ten years
+together."[533] And to these, as I have pointed out, it seems likely
+that the best members of the bankrupt Children of His Majesty's Revels
+had been added. The chief actor of the new organization was
+Nathaniel Field, whose histrionic ability placed him beside Edward
+Alleyn and Richard Burbage. One of the first plays he was called upon
+to act in his new theatre was Jonson's brilliant comedy, _Epicoene_,
+in which he took the leading rôle.
+
+[Footnote 533: _Ibid._, p. 90.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITES OF THE WHITEFRIARS AND THE SALISBURY COURT
+PLAYHOUSES
+
+The Whitefriars Playhouse was just north of "K. 46"; the Salisbury
+Court Playhouse was just south of the court of that name. (From Ogilby
+and Morgan's _Map of London_, 1677.)]
+
+The idea then occurred to Rosseter to secure a monopoly on
+child-acting and on private playhouses. The Children of His Majesty's
+Revels had ceased to exist. The Blackfriars Playhouse had been closed
+by royal command, and its lease had been surrendered to its owner,
+Richard Burbage. The only rival to the Children at Whitefriars was the
+troupe of Paul's Boys acting in their singing-school behind the
+Cathedral. How Rosseter attempted to buy them off is thus recorded by
+Richard Burbage and John Heminges:
+
+ There being, as these defendants verily think, but only
+ three private playhouses in the city of London, the one of
+ which being in the Blackfriars and in the hands of these
+ defendants or of their assigns, one other being in the
+ Whitefriars in the hands or occupation of the said
+ complainant himself [Keysar], his partners [Rosseter, _et
+ al._], or assigns, and the third near St. Paul's Church,
+ then being in the hands of one Mr. Pierce, but then unused
+ for a playhouse. One Mr. Rosseter, a partner of the said
+ complainant [Keysar] dealt for and compounded with the said
+ Mr. Pierce [Master of the Paul's Boys] to the only benefit
+ of him, the said Rosseter, the now complainant [Keysar], the
+ rest of their partners and company, and without the privity,
+ knowledge, or consent of these defendants [the King's
+ Company], or any of them, and that thereby they, the said
+ complainant [Keysar] and the said Rosseter and their
+ partners and company might advance their gains and profit to
+ be had and made in their said house in Whitefriars, that
+ there might be a cessation of playing and plays to be acted
+ in the said house near St. Paul's Church aforesaid, for
+ which the said Rosseter compounded with the said Pierce to
+ give him, the said Pierce, twenty pounds per annum.[534]
+
+[Footnote 534: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p.
+95.]
+
+By this means Rosseter disposed of the competition of the Paul's Boys.
+But, although he secured a monopoly on child-acting, he failed to
+secure a monopoly on private playhouses, for shortly after he had
+sealed this bargain with Pierce, the powerful King's Men opened up at
+Blackfriars. Rosseter promptly requested them to pay half the "dead
+rent" to Pierce, which they good-naturedly agreed to do.
+
+In 1613 Whitefriars was rented by certain London apprentices for the
+performance "at night" of Robert Taylor's _The Hog Hath Lost His
+Pearl_. The episode is narrated by Sir Henry Wotton in a letter to Sir
+Edmund Bacon:
+
+ On Sunday last, at night, and no longer, some sixteen
+ apprentices (of what sort you shall guess by the rest of the
+ story) having secretly learnt a new play without book,[535]
+ entitled _The Hog Hath Lost His Pearl_, took up the
+ Whitefriars for their theatre, and having invited thither
+ (as it should seem) rather their mistresses than their
+ masters, who were all to enter _per buletini_ for a note of
+ distinction from ordinary comedians. Towards the end of the
+ play the sheriffs (who by chance had heard of it) came in
+ (as they say) and carried some six or seven of them to
+ perform the last act at Bridewell. The rest are fled. Now it
+ is strange to hear how sharp-witted the city is, for they
+ will needs have Sir John Swinerton, the Lord Mayor, be meant
+ by the Hog, and the late Lord Treasurer by the Pearl.[536]
+
+[Footnote 535: Miss Gildersleeve, in her valuable _Government
+Regulation of the Elizabethan Drama_, p. 112, says: "Just what is the
+meaning of 'a new Play without Book' no one seems to have
+conjectured." And she develops the theory that "it refers to the
+absence of a licensed play-book," etc. The phrase "to learn without
+book" meant simply "to memorize."]
+
+[Footnote 536: _Reliquiæ Wottonianæ_ (ed. 1672), p. 402. The letter is
+dated merely 1612-13. In connection with the play one should study
+_The Hector of Germany_, 1615.]
+
+Apparently the Children of the Queen's Revels continued successfully
+at Whitefriars until March, 1613. On that date Rosseter agreed with
+Henslowe to join the Revels with the Lady Elizabeth's Men then acting
+at the Swan. The new organization, following the example of the King's
+Men, used Whitefriars as a winter, and the Swan as a summer, house.
+Thus for a time at least Whitefriars came under the management of
+Henslowe.
+
+Rosseter's lease of the building was to expire in the following year.
+He seems to have made plans--possibly with the assistance of
+Henslowe--to erect in Whitefriars a more suitable playhouse for the
+newly organized company; at least that is a plausible interpretation
+of the following curious entry in Sir George Buc's Office Book: "July
+13, 1613, for a license to erect a new playhouse in Whitefriars, &c.
+£20."[537] But the new playhouse thus projected never was built,
+doubtless because of strong local opposition. Instead, Henslowe
+erected for the company a public playhouse on the Bankside, known as
+"The Hope."
+
+[Footnote 537: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 52.]
+
+In March, 1614, at the expiration of one year, Rosseter withdrew from
+his partnership with Henslowe. On December 25, 1614, his lease of the
+Whitefriars expired, and he was apparently unable to renew it.
+Thereupon he attempted to fit up a private playhouse in the district
+of Blackfriars, and on June 3, 1615, he actually secured a royal
+license to do so. But in this effort, too, he was foiled.[538]
+
+[Footnote 538: See the chapter on "Rosseter's Blackfriars." The
+documents concerned in this venture are printed in The Malone
+Society's _Collections_, I, 277.]
+
+After this we hear little or nothing of the Whitefriars Playhouse. Yet
+the building may occasionally have been used for dramatic purposes.
+Cunningham says: "The case of Trevill _v._ Woodford, in the Court of
+Requests, informs us that plays were performed at the Whitefriars
+Theatre as late as 1621; Sir Anthony Ashley, the then landlord of the
+house, entering the theatre in that year, and turning the players out
+of doors, on pretense that half a year's rent was yet unpaid to
+him."[539] I have not been able to examine this document. Neither
+Fleay nor Murray has found any trace of a company at Whitefriars after
+Rosseter's departure; hence for all practical purposes we may regard
+the Whitefriars Playhouse as having come to the end of its career in
+1614.
+
+[Footnote 539: _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV, 90. The
+document printed by Collier in _New Facts Regarding the Life of
+Shakespeare_ (1835), p. 44, as from a manuscript in his possession,
+is, I think, an obvious forgery.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+THE HOPE
+
+
+On August 29, 1611, Henslowe became manager of the Lady Elizabeth's
+Men. Having agreed among other things to furnish them with a
+playhouse,[540] and no longer being in possession of the Rose, he
+rented the old Swan and maintained them there throughout the year
+1612.
+
+[Footnote 540: The agreement has been lost, but for a probably similar
+agreement, made with the actor Nathaniel Field, see Greg, _Henslowe
+Papers_, p. 23.]
+
+In March of the following year, 1613, he entered into a partnership
+with Philip Rosseter (the manager of the private playhouse of
+Whitefriars), and "joined" the Lady Elizabeth's Men with Rosseter's
+excellent troupe of the Queen's Revels. Apparently the intention of
+Henslowe and Rosseter was to form a company strong enough to compete
+on equal terms with the King's Men. In imitation of the King's Men,
+who used the Globe as a summer and the Blackfriars as a winter home,
+the newly amalgamated company was to use the Swan and the
+Whitefriars.[541] And the chief actor of the troupe, corresponding to
+Richard Burbage of the King's Men, was to be Nathaniel Field, then at
+the height of his powers:
+
+ _Cokes._ Which is your Burbage now?
+
+ _Leatherhead._ What mean you by that, sir?
+
+ _Cokes._ Your best actor, your Field.
+
+ _Littlewit._ Good, i' faith! you are even with me, sir.[542]
+
+[Footnote 541: Daborne writes to Henslowe on June 5, 1613: "The
+company told me you were expected there yesterday to conclude about
+their coming over ... my own play which shall be ready before they
+come over." This, I suspect, refers to the moving of the company to
+the Swan for the summer. (See Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 72.) That
+Henslowe was manager of a "private" house in 1613 is revealed by
+another letter from Daborne, dated December 9, 1613. (See Greg,
+_ibid._, p. 79.)]
+
+[Footnote 542: _Bartholomew Fair_, V, iii. The part of Littlewit was
+presumably taken by Field himself.]
+
+Among their playwrights were Ben Jonson, Philip Massinger, John
+Fletcher, and Robert Daborne, not to mention Field, who in addition to
+acting wrote excellent plays.
+
+If it was the purpose of Henslowe and Rosseter to compete with the
+Globe Company in a winter as well as in a summer house, that purpose
+was endangered by the fact that Rosseter's lease of his private
+theatre expired within a year and a half, and could not be renewed.
+Rosseter and Henslowe, as pointed out in the preceding chapter, seem
+to have attempted to erect in Whitefriars a winter home for their
+troupe; so, at least, I have interpreted the curious entry in Sir
+George Buc's Office Book: "July 13, 1613, for a license to erect a new
+playhouse in the Whitefriars, &c. £20."[543] The attempt, however, was
+foiled, probably by the strong opposition of the inhabitants of the
+district.
+
+[Footnote 543: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 52.]
+
+Shortly after this, Henslowe made plans to provide the company with a
+new and better public playhouse on the Bankside, more conveniently
+situated than the Swan. The old Bear Garden was beginning to show
+signs of decay, and, doubtless, would soon have to be rebuilt. This
+suggested to Henslowe the idea of tearing down that ancient structure
+and erecting in its place a larger and handsomer building to serve
+both for the performance of plays and for the baiting of animals. To
+this plan Jacob Meade, Henslowe's partner in the ownership of the Bear
+Garden, agreed.
+
+[Illustration: THE HOPE PLAYHOUSE, OR SECOND BEAR GARDEN
+
+From Hollar's _View of London_ (1647).]
+
+Accordingly, on August 29, 1613, Henslowe and Meade signed a contract
+with a carpenter named Katherens to pull down the Bear Garden and
+erect in its place a new structure. The original contract, preserved
+among the Henslowe Papers, is one of the most valuable documents we
+have relating to the early theatres. It is too long and verbose for
+insertion here, but I give below a summary of its contents.[544]
+Katherens agreed:
+
+ 1. To "pull down" the Bear Garden and "the stable wherein
+ the bulls and horses" had been kept; and "near or upon the
+ said place where the said game-place did heretofore stand,"
+ to "newly erect, build, and set up" a "playhouse, fit and
+ convenient in all things both for players to play in, and
+ for the game of bears and bulls to be baited in."
+
+ 2. "To build the same of such large compass, form, wideness,
+ and height as the playhouse called the Swan."
+
+ 3. To provide for the building "a good sure, and sufficient
+ foundation of bricks ... thirteen inches at the least above
+ the ground."
+
+ 4. To make three galleries: "the inner principal posts of
+ the first story to be twelve feet in height, and ten inches
+ square; in the middle story ... eight inches square; in the
+ upper story ... seven inches square."[545]
+
+ 5. To "make two boxes in the lowermost story, fit and decent
+ for gentlemen to sit in," and in the rest of the galleries
+ "partitions between the rooms as they are in the said
+ playhouse called the Swan."
+
+ 6. To construct "a stage, to be carried and taken away, and
+ to stand upon tressels, good, substantial, and sufficient
+ for the carrying and bearing of such a stage."
+
+ 7. To "build the heavens all over the said stage, to be
+ borne or carried without any posts or supporters to be fixed
+ or set upon the said stage."
+
+ 8. To equip the stage with "a fit and convenient
+ tyre-house."
+
+ 9. To "build two staircases without and adjoining to the
+ said playhouse ... of such largeness and height as the
+ staircases of the said playhouse called the Swan."
+
+ 10. "To new build, erect, and set up the said bull-house and
+ stable ... of that largeness and fitness as shall be
+ sufficient to keep and hold six bulls and three horses."
+
+ 11. "To new tyle with English tyles all the upper roof of
+ the said playhouse ... and stable."
+
+ 12. To have the playhouse finished "upon or before the last
+ day of November," 1613.
+
+[Footnote 544: The contract is printed in full in Greg, _Henslowe
+Papers_, p. 19.]
+
+[Footnote 545: The height is given for the first story only. We may
+assume that the middle and uppermost stories were of diminishing
+heights, as in the case of the Fortune Playhouse, in which the
+galleries were respectively twelve, eleven, and nine feet in height.]
+
+For all this Katherens was to receive the sum of £360; but since
+Henslowe and Meade supplied a large share of the lumber and other
+materials, the total cost of the building may be estimated as not less
+than £600.
+
+When completed, the new playhouse was appropriately christened "The
+Hope."
+
+It has been generally assumed that a picture of the Hope is given in
+Visscher's _View of London_, published in 1616; but this, I think, is
+exceedingly doubtful. In drawing the Bankside, Visscher rather
+slavishly copied the Agas map of 1560, inserting a few new
+buildings,--notably the playhouses,--and it is virtually certain that
+he represented the "Bear Garden" (so he distinctly calls it) and the
+Globe as they were before their reconstruction.[546] The first
+representation of the Hope is to be found in Hollar's splendid _View
+of London_ published in 1647 (see page 326). At this time the
+building, which had for many years been devoted wholly to the royal
+sports of bull- and bear-baiting, was still standing. It is hard to
+believe that an artist who so carefully represented the famous
+edifices of the city should have greatly erred in drawing the "Bear
+Baiting House,"--a structure more curious than they, and quite as
+famous.
+
+[Footnote 546: The Merian _View of London_, published in 1638 at
+Frankfort-am-Main, is merely a copy of the Visscher view with the
+addition of certain details from another and earlier view not yet
+identified. It has no independent value. The _View of London_ printed
+in Howell's _Londinopolis_ (1657), is merely a slavish copy of the
+Merian view. Visscher's representation of the Bear Garden does not
+differ in any essential way from the representation in Hondius's
+_View_ of 1610. For a fuller discussion see pages 126, 146, 248.]
+
+Hollar represents the Hope as circular. According to the contract
+Katherens was "to build the same of such large compass, form,
+wideness, and height as the playhouse called the Swan." Whether the
+word "form" was intended to apply to the exterior of the building we
+do not know. The Swan was decahedral; Visscher represents the "Bear
+Garden" as octagonal (which is correct for the Bear Garden that
+preceded the Hope). But since the exterior was of lime and plaster,
+and a decahedral form had no advantage, Katherens may well have
+constructed a circular building as Hollar indicates. Perhaps it is
+significant in this connection that John Taylor, the Water-Poet, in
+his _Bull, Bear, and Horse_, refers to the Hope as a "sweet,
+_rotuntious_ college." Significant also, perhaps, is the clause in
+the contract by which Katherens was required to "build the heavens all
+over the stage," for this exactly describes the heavens as drawn by
+Hollar. I see no reason to doubt that in the _View_ of 1647 we have a
+reasonably faithful representation of the Hope.
+
+[Illustration: THE HOPE PLAYHOUSE, OR SECOND BEAR GARDEN
+
+The upper view is from Hollar's Post-conflagration map in the Crace
+Collection of the British Museum; the lower view is from Faithorne's
+Map of London (1658).]
+
+The Hope was probably opened shortly after November 30, 1613, the date
+at which Katherens had bound himself to have the building "fully
+finished," and it was occupied, of course, by the Henslowe and
+Rosseter troupe of actors. The arrangement of the movable stage
+enabled Henslowe and Meade to use the building also for
+animal-baiting. According to the contract with the actors, the latter
+were to "lie still one day in fourteen" for the baiting.[547] This may
+not have been a serious interruption for the players; but the presence
+of the stable, the bear dens, and the kennels for the dogs must have
+rendered the playhouse far from pleasant to the audiences. Ben Jonson,
+in the Induction to his _Bartholomew Fair_, acted at the Hope in
+October, 1614, remarks: "And though the Fair be not kept in the same
+region that some here perhaps would have it, yet think that therein
+the author hath observed a special decorum, the place being as dirty
+as Smithfield, and as stinking every whit."[548]
+
+[Footnote 547: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 88; cf. p. 125, where
+animal-baiting is said to be used "one day of every four days"--a
+possible error for "fourteen days." In the manuscript notes to the
+Phillipps copy of Stow's _Survey_ (1631), we are told that baiting was
+used at the Hope on Tuesdays and Thursdays; but the anonymous
+commentator is very inaccurate.]
+
+[Footnote 548: The Rose Playhouse was likewise affected. Dekker, in
+_Satiromastix_, III, iv, says: "Th'ast a breath as sweet as the Rose
+that grows by the Bear Garden."]
+
+In March, 1614,--that is, at the completion of one full year under the
+joint management of Henslowe and Rosseter,--the amalgamated company
+was "broken," and Rosseter withdrew, selling his interest in the
+company's apparel to Henslowe and Meade for £63. The latter at once
+reorganized the actors under the patent of the Lady Elizabeth's Men,
+and continued them at the Hope.[549] The general excellence of the
+troupe thus formed is referred to by John Taylor, the Water-Poet, in
+the lines:
+
+ And such a company (I'll boldly say)
+ That better (nor the like) e'er play'd a play.[550]
+
+[Footnote 549: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 87. The articles of
+agreement between Henslowe and Meade and the company, are printed by
+Greg on page 23.]
+
+[Footnote 550: _Works_, Folio of 1630; The Spenser Society's reprint,
+p. 307.]
+
+But this encomium may have been in large measure due to gratitude, for
+the company had just saved the Water-Poet from a very embarrassing
+situation. The amusing episode which gave occasion to this deserves to
+be chronicled in some detail.
+
+With "a thousand bills posted over the city" Taylor had advertised to
+the public that at the Hope Playhouse on October 7, 1614, he would
+engage in a contest of wit with one William Fennor, who proudly styled
+himself "The King's Majesty's Riming Poet."[551] On the appointed day
+the house was "fill'd with a great audience" that had paid extra money
+to hear the contest between two such well-known extemporal wits. But
+Fennor did not appear. The result may best be told by Taylor himself:
+
+ I then stept out, their angers to appease;
+ But they all raging, like tempestuous seas,
+ Cry'd out, their expectations were defeated,
+ And how they all were cony-catch'd and cheated.
+ Some laught, some swore, some star'd and stamp'd and curst,
+ And in confusèd humors all out burst.
+ I (as I could) did stand the desp'rate shock,
+ And bid the brunt of many dang'rous knock.
+ For now the stinkards, in their ireful wraths,
+ Bepelted me with lome, with stones, with laths.
+ One madly sits like bottle-ale and hisses;
+ Another throws a stone, and 'cause he misses,
+ He yawnes and bawles, ...
+ Some run to th' door to get again their coin ...
+ One valiantly stepped upon the stage,
+ And would tear down the hangings in his rage ...
+ What I endur'd upon that earthly hell
+ My tongue or pen cannot describe it well.[552]
+
+[Footnote 551: Fennor is not to be confused (as is commonly done) with
+Vennar (see p. 177). Such wit-contests were popular; Fennor had
+recently challenged Kendall, on the Fortune Stage.]
+
+[Footnote 552: John Taylor's _Works_, Folio of 1630, p. 142; The
+Spenser Society's reprint, p. 304.]
+
+At this point the actors came to his rescue and presented a play that
+mollified the audience. Taylor had to content himself with a printed
+justification. The bitter invective of Taylor against Fennor,
+Fennor's reply, and Taylor's several answers are to be found in the
+folio edition of the Water-Poet's works. The episode doubtless
+furnished much amusement to the city.
+
+Some three weeks after this event, on October 31, 1614, the Lady
+Elizabeth's Men produced with great success Jonson's _Bartholomew
+Fair_; and on November 1 they were called upon to give the play at
+Court. But the career of the company was in the main unhappy. Henslowe
+managed their affairs on the theory that "should these fellows come
+out of my debt, I should have no rule with them."[553] Accordingly in
+three years he "broke" and again reorganized them no fewer than five
+times.
+
+[Footnote 553: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 89.]
+
+At last, in February, 1615, he not only "broke" the company, but
+severed his connection with them for ever. He turned the hired men
+over to other troupes, and sold the stock of apparel "to strangers"
+for £400. The indignant actors, in June, 1615, drew up "Articles of
+Grievance" in which they charged Henslowe with having extorted from
+the company by unjust means the sum of £567; and also "Articles of
+Oppression" in which they accused him of various dishonorable
+practices in his dealings with them.[554]
+
+[Footnote 554: _Ibid._, pp. 86, 89.]
+
+Shortly after severing his connection with the Lady Elizabeth's Men,
+Henslowe, in March, 1615, seems to have taken over Prince Charles's
+Men, who, it appears, had been acting at the Swan. To this new
+company--the "strangers" referred to, I think--he had already
+transferred some of the hirelings, and had sold the Hope stock of
+apparel for £400.
+
+Henslowe died early in January of the following year, 1616, and his
+interest in the theatre passed to Edward Alleyn. On March 20, 1616,
+Alleyn and Meade engaged Prince Charles's Men to continue at the Hope
+"according to the former articles of agreement had and made with the
+said Philip [Henslowe] and Jacob [Meade]."[555] The actors
+acknowledged themselves indebted to Henslowe "for a stock of apparel
+used for playing apparel, to the value of £400, heretofore delivered
+unto them by the said Philip,"[556]--the stock formerly used by the
+Lady Elizabeth's Men; and Alleyn and Meade agreed to accept £200 in
+full discharge of that debt.[557]
+
+[Footnote 555: Collier, _Memoirs of Edward Alleyn_, p. 127; Greg,
+_Henslowe Papers_, p. 91.]
+
+[Footnote 556: Collier, _Memoirs of Edward Alleyn_, p. 127.]
+
+[Footnote 557: My interpretation of the relation of Henslowe to Prince
+Charles's Men differs from the interpretation given by Fleay and
+adopted by Greg and others. For the evidence bearing on the case see
+Fleay, _Stage_, pp. 188, 262; Greg, _Henslowe's Diary_, II, 138; Greg,
+_Henslowe Papers_, p. 90, note; Chambers, _Modern Language Review_,
+IV, 165; Cunningham, _Revels_, p. xliv; Wallace, _Englische Studien_,
+XLIII, 390; Murray, _English Dramatic Companies_.]
+
+In the winter of 1616-17, Prince Charles's Men quarreled with Meade,
+who had appropriated an extra day for his bear-baiting. Rosseter had
+just completed a new private theatre in Porter's Hall, Blackfriars,
+and that stood invitingly open. So about February they abandoned the
+Hope, and wrote a letter of explanation to Edward Alleyn: "I hope you
+mistake not our removal from the Bankside. We stood the intemperate
+weather, 'till more intemperate Mr. Meade thrust us over, taking the
+day from us which by course was ours."[558]
+
+[Footnote 558: Greg, _Henslowe Papers_, p. 93. Cf. also the chapter on
+"Rosseter's Blackfriars."]
+
+After the company quarreled with Meade and deserted the Hope, there is
+no evidence that the building was again used for plays. It became
+associated almost entirely with animal-baiting, fencing, feats of
+activity, and such-like performances; and gradually the very name
+"Hope," which was identified with acting, gave way to the earlier
+designation "Bear Garden." In 1632 the author of _Holland's Leaguer_
+remarks that "wild beasts and gladiators did most possess it"; and
+such must have been the chief use of the building down to 1642, when
+animal-baiting was prohibited by Parliament.[559]
+
+[Footnote 559: Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_
+(1879), III, 102; Ordish, _Early London Theatres_, p. 237.]
+
+On January 14, 1647, at the disposition of the Church lands, the Hope
+was sold for £1783 15_s._[560]
+
+[Footnote 560: Arthur Tiler, _St. Saviour's_, p. 51; Reed's Dodsley,
+IX, 175.]
+
+In certain manuscript notes entered in the Phillipps copy of Stow's
+_Annals_ (1631), we read:
+
+ The Hope, on the Bankside, in Southwarke, commonly called
+ the Bear Garden, a playhouse for stage-plays on Mondays,
+ Wednesdays, Fridays, and Saturdays, and for the baiting of
+ Bears on Tuesdays and Thursdays, the stage being made to
+ take up and down when they please. It was built in the year
+ 1610, and now pulled down to make tenements, by Thomas
+ Walker, a petticoat-maker in Cannon Street, on Tuesday, the
+ 25 day of March, 1656. Seven of Mr. Godfrey's bears, by the
+ command of Thomas Pride, then high sheriff of Surrey, were
+ then shot to death on Saturday the 9 day of February, 1655
+ [i.e. 1656], by a company of soldiers.[561]
+
+[Footnote 561: Printed in _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314. As
+to "Mr. Godfrey" see Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_
+(1879), III, 102.]
+
+The mistakes in the earlier part of this note are obvious, yet the
+latter part is so circumstantial that we cannot well doubt its general
+accuracy. The building, however, was not pulled down "to the ground,"
+though its interior may have been converted into tenements.
+
+At the Restoration, when the royal sport of bear-baiting was revived,
+the Hope was again fitted up as an amphitheatre and opened to the
+public. The Earl of Manchester, on September 29, 1664, wrote to the
+city authorities, requesting that the butchers be required, as of old,
+to provide food for the dogs and bears:
+
+ He had been informed by the Master of His Majesty's Game of
+ Bears and Bulls, and others, that the Butchers' Company had
+ formerly caused all their offal in Eastcheap and Newgate
+ Market to be conveyed by the beadle of that Company unto
+ two barrow houses, conveniently placed on the river side,
+ for the provision and feeding of the King's Game of Bears,
+ which custom had been interrupted in the late troubles when
+ the bears were killed. His Majesty's game being now removed
+ to the usual place on the Bankside, by Order of the Council,
+ he recommended the Court of Aldermen to direct the Master
+ and Wardens of the Butchers' Company to have their offal
+ conveyed as formerly for the feeding of the bears, &c.[562]
+
+[Footnote 562: _The Remembrancia_, p. 478. Quoted by Ordish, _Early
+London Theatres_, p. 241.]
+
+For some years the Bear Garden flourished as it had in the days of
+Elizabeth and James. It was frequently visited by Samuel Pepys, who
+has left vivid accounts of several performances there. In his _Diary_,
+August 14, 1666, he writes:
+
+ After dinner with my wife and Mercer to the Bear-garden;
+ where I have not been, I think, of many years, and saw some
+ good sport of the bull's tossing of the dogs: one into the
+ very boxes. But it is a very rude and nasty pleasure. We had
+ a great many hectors in the same box with us (and one, very
+ fine, went into the pit, and played his dog for a wager,
+ which was a strange sport for a gentleman), where they drank
+ wine, and drank Mercer's health first; which I pledged with
+ my hat off.
+
+John Evelyn, likewise, in his _Diary_, June 16, 1670, records a visit
+to the Bear Garden:
+
+ I went with some friends to the Bear Garden, where was
+ cock-fighting, dog-fighting, bear- and bull-baiting, it
+ being a famous day for all these butcherly sports, or rather
+ barbarous cruelties. The bulls did exceeding well; but the
+ Irish wolf-dog exceeded, which was a tall greyhound, a
+ stately creature indeed, who beat a cruel mastiff. One of
+ the bulls tossed a dog full into a lady's lap as she sat in
+ one of the boxes at a considerable height from the arena.
+ Two poor dogs were killed; and so all ended with the ape on
+ horseback, and I most heartily weary of the rude and dirty
+ pastime, which I had not seen, I think, in twenty years
+ before.
+
+On January 7, 1676, the Spanish Ambassador was entertained at the Bear
+Garden, as we learn from a warrant, dated March 28, 1676, for the
+payment of £10 "to James Davies, Esq., Master of His Majesty's Bears,
+Bulls, and Dogs, for making ready the rooms at the Bear Garden, and
+baiting of the bears before the Spanish Ambassador, the 7 January
+last, 1675 {6}."[563]
+
+[Footnote 563: British Museum Additional MSS. 5750; quoted by
+Cunningham, _Handbook of London_ (1849), I, 67.]
+
+Rendle[564] quotes from _The Loyal Protestant_ an advertisement of an
+entertainment to be given so late as 1682 "at the Hope on the
+Bankside, being His Majesty's Bear Garden." And Malcolm writes the
+following account of the baiting of a horse there in April of the same
+year:
+
+ Notice was given in the papers that on the twelfth of April
+ a horse, of uncommon strength, and between 18 and 19 hands
+ high, would be _baited to death at his Majesty's
+ Bear-Garden_ at the Hope on the Bankside, for the amusement
+ of the Morocco ambassador, many of the nobility who knew the
+ horse, and any others who would pay the price of admission.
+ It seems this animal originally belonged to the Earl of
+ Rochester, and being of a ferocious disposition, had killed
+ several of his brethren; for which misdeed he was sold to
+ the Earl of Dorchester; in whose service, committing several
+ similar offenses, he was transferred to the worse than
+ savages who kept the Bear-Garden. On the day appointed
+ several dogs were set upon the vindictive steed, which he
+ destroyed or drove from the arena; at this instant his
+ owners determined to preserve him for a future day's sport,
+ and directed a person to lead him away; but before the horse
+ had reached London Bridge the spectators demanded the
+ fulfilment of the promise of baiting him to death, and began
+ to destroy the building: to conclude, the poor beast was
+ brought back, and other dogs set upon him, without effect,
+ when he was stabbed to death with a sword.[565]
+
+[Footnote 564: _The Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer_, VIII,
+59.]
+
+[Footnote 565: James Peller Malcolm, _Anecdotes of the Manners and
+Customs of London from the Roman Invasion to the Year 1700_ (London,
+1811), p. 425.]
+
+This is the last reference to the Hope that I have been able to
+discover. Soon after this date the "royal sport of bulls, bears, and
+dogs" was moved to Hockley-in-the-hole, Clerkenwell, where, as the
+advertisements inform us, at "His Majesty's Bear Garden" the baiting
+of animals was to be frequently seen.[566] Strype, in his _Survey of
+London_, thus describes Bear Garden Alley on the Bankside:
+
+ Bear Alley runs into Maiden Lane. Here is a Glass House; and
+ about the middle is a new-built Court, well inhabited,
+ called Bear Garden Square, so called as built in the place
+ where the _Bear Garden_ formerly stood, until removed to the
+ other side of the water: which is more convenient for the
+ butchers, and such like who are taken with such rustic
+ sports as the baiting of bears and bulls.[567]
+
+[Footnote 566: The earliest advertisement of the Bear Garden at
+Hockley-in-the-hole that I have come upon is dated 1700. For a
+discussion of the sports there see J.P. Malcolm, _Anecdotes of the
+Manners and Customs of London during the Eighteenth Century_ (1808),
+p. 321; Cunningham, _Handbook of London_, under "Hockley"; W.B.
+Boulton, _Amusements of Old London_, vol. I, chap. I.]
+
+[Footnote 567: Ordish (_Early London Theatres_, p. 242) is mistaken in
+thinking that the old building was converted into a glass house. He
+says: "The last reference to the Hope shows that it had declined to
+the point of extinction," and he quotes an advertisement from the
+_Gazette_, June 18, 1681, as follows: "There is now made at the Bear
+Garden glass-house, on the Bankside, crown window-glass, much
+exceeding French glass in all its qualifications, which may be squared
+into all sizes of sashes for windows, and other uses, and may be had
+at most glaziers in London." From Strype's _Survey_ it is evident that
+the glass house was in Bear Garden Alley, but not on the site of the
+old Bear Garden.]
+
+In the map which he gives of this region (reproduced on page 245) the
+position of the Hope is clearly marked by the square near the middle
+of Bear Alley.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+ROSSETER'S BLACKFRIARS, OR PORTER'S HALL
+
+
+Philip Rosseter, the poet and musician, first appears as a theatrical
+manager in 1610, when he secured a royal patent for the Children of
+the Queen's Revels to act at Whitefriars. This company performed there
+successfully under his management until March, 1613, when, for some
+unknown reason, he formed a partnership with Philip Henslowe, who was
+managing the Lady Elizabeth's Men at the Swan. The two companies were
+combined, and the new organization, under the name of "The Lady
+Elizabeth's Men," made use of both playhouses, the Swan as a summer
+and the Whitefriars as a winter home.
+
+As already explained in the preceding chapters, Rosseter's lease on
+the Whitefriars Playhouse was to expire in 1614, and apparently he was
+unable to renew the lease.[568] Naturally he and his partner Henslowe
+were anxious to secure a private playhouse in the city to serve as a
+winter home for their troupe, especially since the Swan was poorly
+situated for winter patronage. This may explain the following entry in
+Sir George Buc's Office-Book: "July 13, 1613, for a license to erect a
+new playhouse in Whitefriars &c. £20."[569] The new playhouse,
+however, was not built. Probably the opposition of the inhabitants of
+the district led to its prohibition.
+
+[Footnote 568: Nathaniel Field, the leading actor at Whitefriars,
+published _A Woman is a Weathercock_ in 1612, with the statement to
+the reader: "If thou hast anything to say to me, thou know'st where to
+hear of me for a year or two, and no more, I assure thee." Possibly
+this reflects the failure of the managers to renew the lease; after
+1614 Field did not know where he would be acting. But editors have
+generally regarded it as meaning that Field intended to withdraw from
+acting.]
+
+[Footnote 569: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 52.]
+
+At the expiration of one year, in March, 1614, Rosseter withdrew from
+his partnership with Henslowe, and on the old patent of the Children
+of the Queen's Revels (which he had retained) organized a new company
+to travel in the country.
+
+In the following year, 1615, he and certain others, Philip Kingman,
+Robert Jones, and Ralph Reeve, secured a lease of "diverse buildings,
+cellars, sollars, chambers, and yards for the building of a playhouse
+thereupon for the better practising and exercise of the said Children
+of the Revels; all which premises are situate and being within the
+precinct of the Blackfriars, near Puddlewharf, in the suburbs of
+London, called by the name of the Lady Saunders's House, or otherwise
+Porter's Hall."[570] It was their purpose to convert this hall into a
+playhouse to rival the near-by Blackfriars; and in accordance with
+this purpose, on June 3, 1615, Rosseter secured a royal license under
+the Great Seal of England "to erect, build, and set up in and upon the
+said premises before mentioned one convenient playhouse for the said
+Children of the Revels, the same playhouse to be used by the Children
+of the Revels for the time being of the Queene's Majesty, and for the
+Prince's Players, and for the Lady Elizabeth's Players."[571]
+
+[Footnote 570: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 277. For the
+location of Puddlewharf see the map of the Blackfriars precinct on
+page 94.]
+
+[Footnote 571: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 277.]
+
+The work of converting Porter's Hall into a playhouse seems to have
+begun at once. On September 26, 1615, the Privy Council records "that
+one Rosseter, and others, having obtained license under the Great Seal
+of England for the building of a playhouse, have pulled down [i.e.,
+stripped the interior of] a great messuage in Puddlewharf, which was
+sometimes the house of the Lady Saunders, within the precinct of the
+Blackfriars, and are now erecting a new playhouse in that place."[572]
+
+[Footnote 572: _Ibid._, p. 373.]
+
+The city authorities, always hostile to the actors and jealous of any
+new theatres, made so vigorous a complaint to the Privy Council that
+the Lords of the Council "thought fit to send for Rosseter." He came,
+bringing his royal license. This document was carefully "perused by
+the Lord Chief Justice of England," who succeeded in discovering in
+the wording of one of its clauses a trivial flaw that would enable the
+Privy Council, on a technicality, to prohibit the building: "The Lord
+Chief Justice did deliver to their Lordships that the license granted
+to the said Rosseter did extend to the building of a playhouse without
+the liberties of London, and not within the city."[573] Now, in 1608
+the liberty of Blackfriars had by a special royal grant been placed
+within the jurisdiction of the city. Rosseter's license unluckily had
+described the Lady Saunders's house as being "in the suburbs," though,
+of course, the description was otherwise specific enough: "all which
+premises are situate and being within the precinct of the Blackfriars,
+near Puddlewharf, in the suburbs of London, called by the name of the
+Lady Saunders's House, or otherwise Porter's Hall."
+
+[Footnote 573: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 373.]
+
+Since "the inconveniences urged by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were
+many," the Lords of the Privy Council decided to take advantage of the
+flaw discovered by the Lord Chief Justice, and prohibit the erection
+of the playhouse. Their order, issued September 26, 1615, reads as
+follows:
+
+ It was this day ordered by their Lordships that there shall
+ be no playhouse erected in that place, and that the Lord
+ Mayor of London shall straightly prohibit the said Rosseter
+ and the rest of the patentees, and their workmen to proceed
+ in the making and converting the said building into a
+ playhouse. And if any of the patentees or their workmen
+ shall proceed in their intended building contrary to this
+ their Lordships' inhibition, that then the Lord Mayor shall
+ commit him or them so offending unto prison and certify
+ their Lordships of their contempt in that behalf.[574]
+
+[Footnote 574: _Ibid._]
+
+This order, for the time being, halted work on the new playhouse. The
+Children of the Revels were forced to spend the next year traveling in
+the provinces; and the Lady Elizabeth's Men and Prince Charles's Men
+had to remain on the Bankside and endure the oppressions of Henslowe
+and later of Meade. Possibly their sufferings at the hands of Meade
+led them to urge Rosseter to complete at once the much desired house
+in the city. At any rate, in the winter of 1616, Rosseter, believing
+himself strongly enough entrenched behind his royal patent, resumed
+work on converting Porter's Hall into a theatre. The city authorities
+issued "diverse commandments and prohibitions," but he paid no
+attention to these, and pushed the work to completion. The building
+seems to have been ready for the actors about the first of January,
+1617. Thereupon the company which had been occupying the Hope deserted
+that playhouse and "came over" to Rosseter's Blackfriars.[575] In the
+new playhouse they presented Nathaniel Field's comedy, _Amends for
+Ladies_, which was printed the following year "as it was acted at the
+Blackfriars both by the Prince's Servants and the Lady Elizabeth's."
+
+[Footnote 575: See the chapter on "The Hope."]
+
+The actors, however, were not allowed to enjoy their new home very
+long. On January 27, 1617, the Privy Council dispatched the following
+letter to the Lord Mayor:
+
+ Whereas His Majesty is informed that notwithstanding diverse
+ commandments and prohibitions to the contrary, there be
+ certain persons that go about to set up a playhouse in the
+ Blackfriars near unto His Majesty's Wardrobe, and for that
+ purpose have lately erected and made fit a building, which
+ is almost if not fully finished. You shall understand that
+ His Majesty hath this day expressly signified his pleasure
+ that the same shall be pulled down, so as it be made unfit
+ for any such use; whereof we require your Lordship to take
+ notice and to cause it to be performed accordingly, with all
+ speed, and thereupon to certify us of your proceeding.
+
+There can be no doubt that an order so peremptory, carrying the
+authority both of the Privy Council and of the King, and requiring an
+immediate report, was performed "with all speed." After this we hear
+nothing more of the playhouse in Puddlewharf.[576]
+
+[Footnote 576: I can find no further reference to the Puddlewharf
+Theatre either in the _Records_ of the Privy Council or in the
+_Remembrancia_ of the City. Collier, however, in his _History of
+English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 384, says: "The city authorities
+proceeded immediately to the work, and before three days had elapsed,
+the Privy Council was duly and formally made acquainted with the fact
+that Rosseter's theatre had been 'made unfit for any such use' as that
+for which it had been constructed." Collier fails to cite his
+authority for the statement; the passage he quotes may be found in the
+order of the Privy Council printed above.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+THE PHOENIX, OR COCKPIT IN DRURY LANE
+
+
+The private playhouse opened in Drury Lane[577] in 1617 seems to have
+been officially named "The Phoenix"; but to the players and the
+public alike it was more commonly known as "The Cockpit." This implies
+some earlier connection of the site or of the building with
+cock-fighting, from time out of mind a favorite sport in England.
+Stowe writes in his _Survey_: "Cocks of the game are yet cherished by
+diverse men for their pleasures, much money being laid on their heads,
+when they fight in pits, whereof some be costly made for that
+purpose." These pits, it seems, were circular in shape, and if large
+enough might well be used for dramatic purposes. Shakespeare, in
+_Henry V_ (1599), likens his playhouse to a cockpit:
+
+ Can this cockpit hold
+ The vasty fields of France? or may we cram
+ Within this wooden O the very casques
+ That did affright the air at Agincourt?
+
+[Footnote 577: Its exact position in Drury Lane is indicated by an
+order of the Privy Council, June 8, 1623, concerning the paving of a
+street at the rear of the theatre: "Whereas the highway leading along
+the backside of the Cockpit Playhouse near Lincolns Inn Fields, and
+the street called Queens Street adjoining to the same, are become very
+foul," etc. (See The Malone Society _Collections_, I, 383. Queens
+Street may be readily found in Faithorne's _Map of London_.) Malone
+(_Variorum_, III, 53) states that "it was situated opposite the Castle
+Tavern." The site is said to be marked by Pit Court.]
+
+It is possible, then, that the building was an old cockpit made into a
+playhouse. Howes,[578] in enumerating the London theatres, says: "Five
+inns or common hostelries turned into playhouses, one cockpit, St.
+Paul's singing-school," etc. And Thomas Randolph, in verses prefixed
+to James Shirley's _Grateful Servant_ (printed in 1630 as it was acted
+"in the private house in Drury Lane"), suggests the same
+metamorphosis:
+
+ When thy intelligence on the Cockpit stage
+ Gives it a soul from her immortal rage,
+ I hear the Muse's birds with full delight
+ Sing where the birds of Mars were wont to fight.
+
+[Footnote 578: Stow's _Annals_ (1631), p. 1004.]
+
+But in this fantastic conceit Randolph may have been thinking simply
+of the name of the theatre; possibly he knew nothing of its early
+history. On the whole it seems more likely that the playhouse was
+newly erected in 1617 upon the site of an old cockpit. The name
+"Phoenix" suggests that possibly the old cockpit had been destroyed
+by fire, and that from its ashes had arisen a new building.[579]
+Howes describes the Phoenix as being in 1617 "a new playhouse,"[580]
+and Camden, who is usually accurate in such matters, refers to it in
+the same year as "nuper erectum."[581]
+
+[Footnote 579: Some scholars have supposed that the playhouse, when
+attacked by the apprentices in 1617, was burned, and that the name
+"Phoenix" was given to the building after its reconstruction. But
+the building was not burned; it was merely wrecked on the inside by
+apprentices.]
+
+[Footnote 580: Continuation of Stow's _Annals_ (1631), p. 1026.]
+
+[Footnote 581: William Camden, _Annals_, under the date of March 4,
+1617. Yet Sir Sidney Lee (_A Life of William Shakespeare_, p. 60)
+says, "built about 1610."]
+
+Of its size and shape all our information comes from James Wright, who
+in his _Historia Histrionica_[582] tells us that the Cockpit differed
+in no essential feature from Blackfriars and Salisbury Court, "for
+they were all three built almost exactly alike for form and bigness."
+Since we know that Blackfriars and Salisbury Court were small
+rectangular theatres, the former constructed in a hall forty-six feet
+broad and sixty-six feet long, the latter erected on a plot of ground
+forty-two feet broad and one hundred and forty feet long, we are not
+left entirely ignorant of the shape and the approximate size of the
+Cockpit.[583] And from Middleton's _Inner Temple Masque_ (1618) we
+learn that it was constructed of brick. Its sign, presumably, was that
+of a phoenix rising out of flames.
+
+[Footnote 582: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 408.]
+
+[Footnote 583: Fleay and Lawrence are wrong in supposing that the
+Cockpit was circular.]
+
+[Illustration: THE SITE OF THE COCKPIT IN DRURY LANE
+
+The site is marked by Cockpit Court. (From Rocque's _Map of London_,
+1746.)]
+
+The playhouse was erected and managed by Christopher Beeston,[584] one
+of the most important actors and theatrical managers of the
+Elizabethan period. We first hear of him as a member of Shakespeare's
+troupe. In 1602 he joined Worcester's Company. In 1612 he became the
+manager of Queen Anne's Company at the Red Bull. He is described at
+that time as "a thriving man, and one that was of ability and
+means."[585] He continued as manager of the Queen Anne's Men at the
+Red Bull until 1617, when he transferred them to his new playhouse in
+Drury Lane.
+
+[Footnote 584: _Alias_ Christopher Hutchinson. Several actors of the
+day employed _aliases_: Nicholas Wilkinson, _alias_ Tooley; Theophilus
+Bourne, _alias_ Bird; James Dunstan, _alias_ Tunstall, etc. Whether
+Beeston admitted other persons to a share in the building I cannot
+learn. In a passage quoted by Malone (_Variorum_, III, 121) from the
+Herbert Manuscript, dated February 20, 1635, there is a reference to
+"housekeepers," indicating that Beeston had then admitted "sharers" in
+the proprietorship of the building. And in an order of the Privy
+Council, May 12, 1637 (The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 392), we
+read: "Command the keepers of the playhouse called the Cockpit in
+Drury Lane, who either live in it or have relation to it, not to
+permit plays to be acted there till further order."]
+
+[Footnote 585: Wallace, _Three London Theatres_, p. 35.]
+
+The playhouse seems to have been ready to receive the players about
+the end of February, 1617. We know that they were still performing at
+the Red Bull as late as February 23;[586] but by March 4 they had
+certainly moved to the Cockpit.
+
+[Footnote 586: Wallace, _ibid._, pp. 32, 46. John Smith was delivering
+silk and other clothes to the Queen Anne's Men at the Red Bull from
+1612 until February 23, 1617.]
+
+On the latter date, during the performance of a play, the Cockpit was
+entered by a mob of disorderly persons, who proceeded to demolish the
+interior. The occasion for the wrecking of the new playhouse was the
+Shrove Tuesday saturnalia of the London apprentices, who from time
+immemorial had employed this holiday to pull down houses of ill-fame
+in the suburbs. That the Cockpit was situated in the neighborhood of
+such houses cannot be doubted. We may suppose that the mob, fresh from
+sacking buildings, had crowded into the playhouse in the afternoon,
+and before the play was over had wrecked that building too.
+
+The event created a great stir at the time. William Camden, in his
+_Annals_, wrote under the date of March 4, 1617:
+
+ Theatrum ludiorum, nuper erectum in Drury Lane, a furente
+ multitudine diruitur, et apparatus dilaceratur.
+
+Howes, in his continuation of Stow's _Annals_, writes:
+
+ Shrove-Tuesday, the fourth of March, many disordered persons
+ of sundry kinds, amongst whom were very many young boys and
+ lads, that assembled themselves in Lincolnes Inn Field,
+ Finsbury Field, in Ratcliffe, and Stepney Field, where in
+ riotous manner they did beat down the walls and windows of
+ many victualing houses and of all other houses which they
+ suspected to be bawdy houses. And that afternoon they
+ spoiled a new playhouse, and did likewise more hurt in
+ diverse other places.[587]
+
+[Footnote 587: _Annals_ (1631), p. 1026.]
+
+That several persons were killed, and many injured, is disclosed by a
+letter from the Privy Council to the Lord Mayor, dated March 5, 1617:
+
+ It is not unknown unto you what tumultuous outrages were
+ yesterday committed near unto the city of London in diverse
+ places by a rowt of lewd and loose persons, apprentices and
+ others, especially in Lincolns Inn Fields and Drury Lane,
+ where in attempting to pull down a playhouse belonging to
+ the Queen's Majesty's Servants, there were diverse persons
+ slain, and others hurt and wounded, the multitude there
+ assembled being to the number of many thousands, as we are
+ credibly informed.[588]
+
+[Footnote 588: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 374. Collier, in
+_The History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 386, prints a long
+ballad on the event; but he does not give its source, and its
+genuineness has been questioned. The following year threats to pull
+down the Fortune, the Red Bull, and the Cockpit led to the setting of
+special watches. See The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 377.]
+
+The Queen's Men returned to the Red Bull and acted there until their
+ruined playhouse could be repaired. Three months later, on June 3,
+they again occupied the Cockpit,[589] and continued there until the
+death of Queen Anne on March 2, 1619.[590]
+
+[Footnote 589: Greenstreet, Documents, _The New Shakspere Society's
+Transactions_ (1880-86), p. 504.]
+
+[Footnote 590: Mr. Wallace (_Three London Theatres_, p. 29) says that
+the documents he prints make it "as certain as circumstances
+unsupported by contemporary declaration can make it, that Queen Anne's
+company occupied the Red Bull continuously from the time of its
+erection ... till their dissolution, 1619." His documents make it
+certain only that Queen Anne's Men occupied the Red Bull until
+February 23, 1617. Other documents prove that they occupied the
+Cockpit from 1617 until 1619. (Note the letter of the Privy Council
+quoted above.) The documents printed by Greenstreet show that Queen
+Anne's Men moved to the Cockpit on June 3, 1617, and continued there.]
+
+This event led to the dissolution of the company. For a year or more
+its members had been "falling at variance and strife amongst
+themselves," and when the death of the Queen deprived them of a
+"service," they "separated and divided themselves into other
+companies."[591] As a result of the quarrels certain members of the
+company made charges against their former manager, Beeston: "The said
+Beeston having from the beginning a greater care for his own private
+gain, and not respecting the good of these defendants and the rest of
+his fellows and companions, hath in the place and trust aforesaid much
+enriched himself, and hath of late given over his coat and
+condition,[592] and separated and divided himself from these
+defendants, carrying away not only all the furniture and apparel,"
+etc.[593] The charges against Beeston's honesty may be dismissed; but
+it seems clear that he had withdrawn from his former companions, and
+was preparing to entertain a new troupe of actors at his playhouse.
+And Beeston himself tells us, on November 23, 1619, that "after Her
+Majesty's decease, he entered into the service of the most noble
+Prince Charles."[594] Thus Prince Charles's Men, after their
+unfortunate experiences at the Hope and at Rosseter's Blackfriars,
+came to Beeston's playhouse, where they remained until 1622. In the
+spring of that year, however, they moved to the Curtain, and the
+Princess Elizabeth's Men occupied the Cockpit.[595] Under their
+tenancy, the playhouse seems to have attained an enviable reputation.
+Heminges and Condell, in the epistle to the readers, prefixed to the
+Folio of Shakespeare (1623), bear testimony to this in the following
+terms: "And though you be a Magistrate of Wit, and sit on the stage at
+Blackfriars, or the Cockpit, to arraign plays daily." A further
+indication of their prosperity is to be found in the records of St.
+Giles's Church; for when in 1623 the parish undertook the erection of
+a new church building, "the players of the Cockpit," we are informed,
+contributed the large sum of £20, and the proprietors, represented by
+Christopher Beeston, gave £19 1_s._ 5_d._[596]
+
+[Footnote 591: Wallace, _Three London Theatres_, p. 33.]
+
+[Footnote 592: He had joined Prince Charles's Men.]
+
+[Footnote 593: Wallace, _Three London Theatres_, p. 38.]
+
+[Footnote 594: _Ibid._, p. 40. Fleay, Murray, and others have
+contended that the Princess Elizabeth's Men came to the Cockpit in
+1619, and have denied the accuracy of the title-page of _The Witch of
+Edmonton_ (1658), which declares that play to have been "acted by the
+Prince's Servants at the Cockpit often." (See Fleay, _A Chronicle
+History of the London Stage_, p. 299.)]
+
+[Footnote 595: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 59.]
+
+[Footnote 596: John Parton, _Some Account of the Hospital and Parish
+of St. Giles in the Fields_, p. 235. From a parish entry in 1660 we
+learn that the players had to contribute 2_d._ to the parish poor for
+each day that there was acting at the Cockpit. (See _ibid._, p. 236.)]
+
+The Princess Elizabeth's Men continued to act at the Cockpit until
+May, 1625, when all theatres were closed on account of the plague.
+Beeston made this the occasion to organize a new company called "Queen
+Henrietta's Men"; and when the theatres were allowed to reopen, about
+December, 1625,[597] this new company was in possession of the
+Cockpit. But the reputation of the playhouse seems not to have been
+enhanced by the performances of this troupe. In 1629, Lenton, in _The
+Young Gallant's Whirligig_, writes sneeringly:
+
+ The Cockpit heretofore would serve his wit,
+ But now upon the Friars' Stage he'll sit.
+
+[Footnote 597: In the _Middlesex County Records_, III, 6, we find that
+on December 6, 1625, because "the drawing of people together to places
+was a great means of spreading and continuing the infection ... this
+Court doth prohibit the players of the house at the Cockpit, being
+next to His Majesty's Court at Whitehall, commanding them to surcease
+all such their proceedings until His Majesty's pleasure be further
+signified." Apparently the playhouses in general had been allowed to
+resume performances; and since by December 24 there had been no deaths
+from the plague for a week, the special inhibition of the Cockpit
+Playhouse was soon lifted.]
+
+And in the following year, 1630, Thomas Carew in verses prefixed to
+Davenport's _Just Italian_, attacks the Red Bull and the Cockpit as
+"adulterate" stages where "noise prevails," and "not a tongue of th'
+untun'd kennel can a line repeat of serious sense." Queen Henrietta's
+Men probably continued to occupy the building until May 12, 1636, when
+the theatres were again closed on account of a serious outbreak of the
+plague. The plague continued for nearly a year and a half, and during
+this time the company was dissolved.[598]
+
+[Footnote 598: "When Her Majesty's Servants were at the Cockpit, being
+all at liberty, they dispersed themselves to several companies."
+(Heton's Patent, 1639, _The Shakespeare Society Papers_, IV, 96.)]
+
+Before the plague had ceased, early in 1637, "Mr. Beeston was
+commanded to make a company of boys."[599] In the Office-Book of the
+Lord Chamberlain we find, under the date of February 21, 1637:
+"Warrant to swear Mr. Christopher Beeston His Majesty's Servant in the
+place of Governor of the new company of The King's and Queen's
+Boys."[600] The first recorded performance by this new company was at
+Court on February 7, 1637.[601] On February 23, the number of deaths
+from the plague having diminished, acting was again permitted; but at
+the expiration of one week, on March 2, the number of deaths having
+increased, all playhouses were again closed. During this single week
+the King's and Queen's Boys, we may suppose, acted at the
+Cockpit.[602]
+
+[Footnote 599: Herbert Manuscript, Malone, _Variorum_, III, 240.]
+
+[Footnote 600: Stopes, "Shakespeare's Fellows and Followers,"
+Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 99. In 1639 Heton applied for a patent
+as "Governor" of the company at Salisbury Court.]
+
+[Footnote 601: On May 10 Beeston was paid for "two plays acted by the
+New Company." See Stopes, "Shakespeare's Fellows and Followers," in
+the Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 99.]
+
+[Footnote 602: Herbert Manuscript, Malone, _Variorum_, III, 240.]
+
+On May 12, Beeston was arrested and brought before the Privy Council
+for having allowed his Boys to act a play at the Cockpit during the
+inhibition.[603] In his apology he explains this as follows:
+"Petitioner being commanded to erect and prepare a company of young
+actors for Their Majesties's service, and being desirous to know how
+they profited by his instructions, invited some noblemen and
+gentlemen to see them act at his house, the Cockpit. For which, since
+he perceives it is imputed as a fault, he is very sorry, and craves
+pardon."[604]
+
+[Footnote 603: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 392.]
+
+[Footnote 604: _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1636-1637_, p.
+254.]
+
+On September 17, 1637, "Christopher Beeston, His Majesty's servant, by
+petition to the Board, showed that he hath many young actors lying
+unpractised by reason of the restraint occasioned by infection of the
+plague, whereby they are much disabled to perform their service, and
+besought that they might have leave to practise. It was ordered that
+Beeston should be at liberty to practise his actors at Michaelmas next
+[September 29], if there be no considerable increase of the sickness,
+nor that there die more than died last week."[605]
+
+[Footnote 605: _Ibid._, _1637_, p. 420.]
+
+On October 2, 1637, the plague having abated, all playhouses were
+opened, and the King's and Queen's Boys, Herbert tells us, began to
+play at the Cockpit "the same day."[606] Here, under the popular name
+of "Beeston's Boys," they enjoyed a long and successful career, which
+ended only with the prohibition of acting in 1642.
+
+[Footnote 606: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 240.]
+
+In 1639 Christopher Beeston died, and the position of Governor of the
+Boys was conferred upon his son, William Beeston, who had long been
+associated in the management of the company,[607] and who, if we may
+believe Francis Kirkman, was admirably qualified for the position. In
+dedicating to him _The Loves and Adventures of Clerico and Lozia_,
+Kirkman says:
+
+ Divers times in my hearing, to the admiration of the whole
+ company, you have most judiciously discoursed of Poesie:
+ which is the cause I presume to choose you for my patron and
+ protector, who are the happiest interpreter and judge of our
+ English stage-plays this nation ever produced; which the
+ poets and actors of these times cannot (without ingratitude)
+ deny; for I have heard the chief and most ingenious
+ acknowledge their fames and profits essentially sprung from
+ your instruction, judgment, and fancy.
+
+[Footnote 607: He is referred to as their Governor on August 10, 1639;
+see Malone, _Variorum_, III, 159.]
+
+But in spite of all this, William Beeston's career as Governor was of
+short duration. About the first of May, 1640, he allowed the Boys to
+act without license a play that gave great offense to the King.
+Herbert, the Master of the Revels, writes of this play that it "had
+relation to the passages of the King's journey into the north, and was
+complained of by His Majesty to me, with command to punish the
+offenders."[608] In the Office-Book of the Lord Chamberlain, under the
+date of May 3, 1640, we read:
+
+ Whereas William Beeston and the company of the players of
+ the Cockpit, in Drury Lane, have lately acted a new play
+ without any license from the Master of His Majesty's Revels,
+ and being commanded to forbear playing or acting of the same
+ play by the said Master of the Revels, and commanded
+ likewise to forbear all manner of playing, have
+ notwithstanding, in contempt of the authority of the said
+ Master of the Revels, and the power granted unto him under
+ the Great Seal of England, acted the said play, and others,
+ to the prejudice of His Majesty's service, and in contempt
+ of the Office of the Revels, [whereby] he and they and all
+ other companies ever have been and ought to be governed and
+ regulated: These are therefore in His Majesty's name, and
+ signification of his royal pleasure, to command the said
+ William Beeston and the rest of that company of the Cockpit
+ players from henceforth and upon sight hereof, to forbear to
+ act any plays whatsoever until they shall be restored by the
+ said Master of the Revels unto their former liberty. Whereof
+ all parties concernable are to take notice, and conform
+ accordingly, as they and every one of them will answer it at
+ their peril.[609]
+
+[Footnote 608: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 241.]
+
+[Footnote 609: Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_
+(1879), II, 32; Stopes, _op. cit._, p. 102.]
+
+Herbert records in his Office-Book:
+
+ On Monday the 4 May, 1640, William Beeston was taken by a
+ messenger and committed to the Marshalsea by my Lord
+ Chamberlain's warrant, for playing a play without license.
+ The same day the company at the Cockpit was commanded by my
+ Lord Chamberlain's warrant to forbear playing, for playing
+ when they were forbidden by me, and for other disobedience,
+ and lay still Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. On Thursday,
+ at my Lord Chamberlain's entreaty, I gave them their
+ liberty, and upon their petition of submission subscribed by
+ the players, I restored them to their liberty on
+ Thursday.[610]
+
+[Footnote 610: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 241. Herbert did not forget
+Beeston's insubordination, and in 1660, in issuing to Beeston a
+license to use the Salisbury Court Playhouse, he inserted clauses to
+prevent further difficulty of this kind (see _Variorum_, III, 243).]
+
+To this period of Beeston's imprisonment I should refer the puzzling
+Epilogue of Brome's _The Court Beggar_:
+
+ There's wit in that now. But this small Poet vents none but
+ his own, and his by whose care and directions this Stage is
+ govern'd, who has for many years, both in his father's days,
+ and since, directed Poets to write and Players to speak,
+ till he trained up these youths here to what they are now.
+ Aye, some of 'em from before they were able to say a grace
+ of two lines long to have more parts in their pates than
+ would fill so many Dry-vats. And to be serious with you, if
+ after all this, by the venomous practice of some, who study
+ nothing more than his destruction, he should fail us, both
+ Poets and Players would be at loss in reputation.
+
+His "destruction" was wrought, nevertheless, for as a result of his
+indiscretion he was deposed from his position as Governor of the
+King's and Queen's Company, and William Davenant was appointed in his
+place. In the Office-Book of the Lord Chamberlain under the date of
+June 27, 1640,[611] appears the following entry with the heading, "Mr.
+Davenant Governor of the Cockpit Players":
+
+ Whereas in the playhouse or theatre commonly called the
+ Cockpit, in Drury Lane, there are a company of players
+ authorized by me (as Lord Chamberlain to His Majesty) to
+ play or act under the title of The King's and Queen's
+ Servants, and that by reason of some disorders lately
+ amongst them committed they are disabled in their service
+ and quality: These are therefore to signify that by the same
+ authority I do authorize and appoint William Davenant,
+ Gent., one of Her Majesty's servants, for me and in my name
+ to take into his government and care the said company of
+ players, to govern, order, and dispose of them for action
+ and presentments, and all their affairs in the said house,
+ as in his discretion shall seem best to conduce to His
+ Majesty's service in that quality. And I do hereby enjoin
+ and command them, all and every of them, that are so
+ authorized to play in the said house under the privilege of
+ His or Her Majesty's Servants, and every one belonging as
+ prentices or servants to those actors to play under the same
+ privilege, that they obey the said Mr. Davenant and follow
+ his orders and directions, as they will answer the contrary;
+ which power and privilege he is to continue and enjoy during
+ that lease which Mrs. Elizabeth Beeston, _alias_ Hucheson,
+ hath or doth hold in the said playhouse, provided he be
+ still accountable to me for his care and well ordering the
+ said company.[612]
+
+[Footnote 611: Stopes (_op. cit._) dates this June 5, but Collier,
+Malone, and Chalmers all give June 27, and Mrs. Stopes is not always
+quite accurate in such matters.]
+
+[Footnote 612: Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_
+(1879), II, 32, note 1.]
+
+Under the direction of Davenant the company acted at the Cockpit until
+the closing of the theatres two years later.
+
+The history of the playhouse during the troubled years that followed
+is varied. In the churchwarden's account of St. Giles's Parish is
+found the entry: "1646. Paid and given to the teacher at the Cockpit
+of the children, 6_d._"[613] Apparently the old playhouse was then
+being temporarily used as a school.
+
+[Footnote 613: John Parton, _Some Account of the Hospital and Parish
+of St. Giles in the Fields_, p. 235.]
+
+Wright, in his _Historia Histrionica_, tells us that at the outbreak
+of the civil war most of the actors had joined the royal army and
+served His Majesty, "though in a different, yet more honorable
+capacity." Some were killed, many won distinction; and "when the wars
+were over, and the royalists totally subdued, most of 'em who were
+left alive gathered to London, and for a subsistence endeavored to
+revive their old trade privately. They made up one company out of all
+the scattered members of several, and in the winter before the King's
+murder, 1648, they ventured to act some plays, with as much caution
+and privacy as could be, at the Cockpit." John Evelyn records in his
+_Diary_, under the date of February 5, 1648: "Saw a tragicomedy acted
+in the Cockpit after there had been none of these diversions for many
+years during the war." Trouble, however, was brewing for these daring
+actors. As Wright records: "They continued undisturbed for three or
+four days, but at last, as they were presenting the tragedy of _The
+Bloody Brother_ (in which Lowin acted Aubery; Taylor, Rollo; Pollard,
+the Cook; Burt, Latorch; and, I think, Hart, Otto), a party of
+foot-soldiers beset the house, surprised 'em about the middle of the
+play, and carried 'em away in their habits, not admitting them to
+shift, to Hatton House, then a prison, where, having detained them
+some time, they plundered them of their clothes, and let 'em loose
+again."[614]
+
+[Footnote 614: Hazlitt's Dodsley, XV, 409.]
+
+In 1649 the interior of the building was sacked, if we may trust the
+manuscript note entered in the Phillipps copy of Stow's _Annals_
+(1631): "The playhouse in Salisbury Court, in Fleet Street, was pulled
+down by a company of soldiers set on by the sectaries of these sad
+times, on Saturday the 24 day of March, 1649. The Phoenix, in Drury
+Lane, was pulled down also this day, being Saturday the 24 day of
+March, 1649, by the same soldiers."[615] In the passage quoted,
+"pulled-down" merely means that the stage and its equipment, and
+possibly a part of the galleries and the seats, were wrecked, not that
+the walls of the building itself were thrown down.
+
+[Footnote 615: See _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314. The
+soldiers here mentioned also "pulled down on the inside" the Fortune
+playhouse.]
+
+In 1656 Sir William Davenant undertook to create a form of dramatic
+entertainment which would be tolerated by the authorities. The Lord
+Protector was known to be a lover of music. Sir William, therefore,
+applied for permission to give operatic entertainments, "after the
+manner of the antients," the "story sung in recitative music," and the
+representation made "by the art of perspective in scenes." To such
+entertainments, he thought, no one could object. He was wise enough to
+give his first performances at Rutland House; but in 1658 he moved to
+the Cockpit, where, says Aubrey, "were acted very well, _stylo
+recitativo_, _Sir Francis Drake_ and _The Siege of Rhodes_ (1st and 2d
+parts). It did affect the eye and ear extremely. This first brought
+scenes in fashion in England; before at plays was only a hanging."
+Thus the Cockpit had the distinction of being the first English
+playhouse in which scenery was employed, and, one should add, the
+first English home of the opera.[616]
+
+[Footnote 616: For a discussion of Davenant's attempts to introduce
+the opera into England, see W.J. Lawrence, _The Elizabethan Playhouse_
+(Second Series), pp. 129 ff.]
+
+Later in the same year, 1658, Davenant exhibited at the Cockpit _The
+Cruelty of the Spaniards in Peru_; but this performance excited the
+suspicion of the authorities, who on December 23 sent for "the poet
+and the actors" to explain "by what authority the same is exposed to
+public view."[617]
+
+[Footnote 617: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 93; Collier, _The History of
+English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), II, 48.]
+
+"In the year 1659," writes John Downes in his _Roscius Anglicanus_,
+"General Monk marching then his army out of Scotland to London, Mr.
+Rhodes, a bookseller, being wardrobe-keeper formerly (as I am
+informed) to King Charles the First's company of commedians in
+Blackfriars, getting a license from the then governing state,[618]
+fitted up a house then for acting, called the _Cockpit_, in Drury
+Lane, and in a short time completed his company." If this statement is
+correct, the time must have been early in the year 1659-60, and the
+company must have attempted at first to play without a proper license.
+From the _Middlesex County Records_ (III, 282), we learn that one of
+their important actors, Thomas Lilleston, was held under bond for
+having performed "a public stage-play this present 4th of February
+[1659-60] in the Cockpit in Drury Lane in the parish of St.
+Giles-in-the-Fields, contrary to the law in that case made"; and in
+the Parish Book[619] of St. Giles we find the entry: "1659. Received
+of Isack Smith, which he received at the Cockpit playhouse of several
+offenders, by order of the justices, £3 8_s._ 6_d._" Shortly after
+this, it is to be presumed, the company under Rhodes's management
+secured the "license of the then governing state" mentioned by Downes,
+and continued thereafter without interruption. The star of this
+company was Betterton, whose splendid acting at once captivated
+London. Pepys went often to the theatre, and has left us some
+interesting notes of his experiences there. On August 18, 1660, he
+writes:
+
+ Captain Ferrers, my Lord's Cornet, comes to us, who after
+ dinner took me and Creed to the Cockpit play, the first that
+ I have had time to see since my coming from sea, _The Loyall
+ Subject_, where one Kinaston, a boy, acted the Duke's
+ sister, but made the loveliest lady that ever I saw in my
+ life, only her voice not very good.
+
+[Footnote 618: For his troubles with the Master of the Revels see
+Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient Documents_, p. 26.]
+
+[Footnote 619: Parton, _op. cit._, p. 236.]
+
+Again on October 11, 1660, he writes:
+
+ Here in the Park we met with Mr. Salisbury, who took Mr.
+ Creed and me to the Cockpit to see _The Moor of Venice_,
+ which was well done. Burt acted the Moor, by the same token
+ a very pretty lady that sat by me called out to see
+ Desdemona smothered.
+
+The subsequent history of the Cockpit falls outside the scope of the
+present treatise. The reader who desires to trace the part the
+building played in the Restoration would do well to consult the
+numerous documents printed by Malone from the Herbert Manuscript.[620]
+
+[Footnote 620: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 244 ff.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+SALISBURY COURT
+
+
+The Salisbury Court Playhouse[621] was projected and built by two men
+whose very names are unfamiliar to most students of the drama--Richard
+Gunnell and William Blagrove. Yet Gunnell was a distinguished actor,
+and was associated with the ownership and management of at least two
+theatres. Even so early as 1613 his reputation as a player was
+sufficient to warrant his inclusion as a full sharer in the
+Palsgrave's Company, then acting at the Fortune. When the Fortune was
+rebuilt after its destruction by fire in 1621, he purchased one of the
+twelve shares in the new building, and rose to be manager of the
+company.[622] In addition to managing the company he also, as we learn
+from the Herbert Manuscript, supplied the actors with plays. In 1623
+he composed _The Hungarian Lion_, obviously a comedy, and in the
+following year _The Way to Content all Women, or How a Man May Please
+his Wife_.[623] Of William Blagrove I can learn little more than that
+he was Deputy to the Master of the Revels. In this capacity he signed
+the license for Glapthorne's _Lady Mother_, October 15, 1635; and his
+name appears several times in the Herbert Manuscript in connection
+with the payments of various companies.[624] Possibly he was related
+to Thomas Blagrove who during the reign of Elizabeth was an important
+member of the Revels Office, and who for a time served as Master of
+the Revels.
+
+[Footnote 621: The playhouse discussed in this chapter was officially
+known as "The Salisbury Court Playhouse," and it should always be
+referred to by that name. Unfortunately, owing to its situation near
+the district of Whitefriars, it was sometimes loosely, though
+incorrectly, called "Whitefriars." Since it had no relation whatever
+to the theatre formerly in the Manor-House of Whitefriars, a
+perpetuation of this false nomenclature is highly undesirable.]
+
+[Footnote 622: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 66.]
+
+[Footnote 623: Chalmers's _Supplemental Apology_, pp. 216-17. He may
+also have been the author of a play called _The Masque_, which Herbert
+in 1624 licensed: "For the Palsgrave's Company, a new play called _The
+Masque_." In the list of manuscript plays collected by Warburton we
+find the title _A Mask_, and the authorship ascribed to R. Govell.
+Since "R. Govell" is not otherwise heard of, we may reasonably suppose
+that this was Warburton's reading of "R. Gunell." Gunnell also
+prefixed a poem to the Works of Captain John Smith, 1626.]
+
+[Footnote 624: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 66, 122, 176, 177.]
+
+What threw these two men together in a theatrical partnership we do
+not know. But in the summer of 1629 they decided to build a private
+playhouse to compete with the successful Blackfriars and Cockpit; and
+for this purpose they leased from the Earl of Dorset a plot of ground
+situated to the east of the precinct of Whitefriars. The ground thus
+leased opened on Salisbury Court; hence the name, "The Salisbury Court
+Playhouse." In the words of the legal document, the Earl of Dorset "in
+consideration that Richard Gunnell and William Blagrove should at
+their costs and charges erect a playhouse and other buildings at the
+lower end of Salisbury Court, in the parish of St. Bridges, in the
+ward of Farringdon Without, did demise to the said Gunnell and
+Blagrove a piece of ground at the same lower end of Salisbury Court,
+containing one hundred and forty foot in length and forty-two in
+breadth ... for forty-one years and a half." The lease was signed on
+July 6, 1629. Nine days later, on July 15, the Earl of Dorset, "in
+consideration of nine hundred and fifty pounds paid to the said late
+Earl by John Herne, of Lincoln's Inn, Esquire, did demise to hire the
+said piece of ground and [the] building [i.e., the playhouse]
+thereupon to be erected, and the rent reserved upon the said lease
+made to Gunnell and Blagrove." Herne's lease was for a term of
+sixty-one years. The effect of this second lease was merely to make
+Herne, instead of the Earl of Dorset, the landlord of the players.
+
+[Illustration: A PLAN OF THE SALISBURY COURT PROPERTY
+
+To illustrate the lease. (Drawn by the author.)]
+
+The plot of ground selected for the playhouse is described with
+exactness in the lease printed below. The letters inserted in brackets
+refer to the accompanying diagram (see page 371):
+
+ All that soil and ground whereupon the Barn {A}, at the
+ lower end of the great back court, or yard of Salisbury
+ Court, now stands; and so much of the soil whereupon the
+ whole south end of the great stable in the said court or
+ yard stands, or contains, from that end of that stable
+ towards the north end thereof sixteen foot of assize, and
+ the whole breadth of the said stable {B}; and all the ground
+ and soil on the east and west side of that stable lying
+ directly against the said sixteen foot of ground at the
+ south end thereof between the wall of the great garden
+ belonging to the mansion called Dorset House and the wall
+ that severs the said Court from the lane called Water Lane
+ {C and D}; and all the ground and soil being between the
+ said walls on the east and west part thereof, and the said
+ barn, stable, and ground on both side the same on the south
+ and north parts thereof {E}. Which said several parcells of
+ soil and ground ... contain, in the whole length ... one
+ hundred and forty foot of assize, and in breadth ... forty
+ and two foot of assize, and lies together at the lower end
+ of the said Court.
+
+This plot, one hundred and forty feet in length by forty-two in
+breadth, was small for its purpose, and the playhouse must have
+covered all the breadth and most of the length of the leased
+ground;[625] there was no actual need of leaving any part of the plot
+vacant, for the theatre adjoined the Court, and "free ingress, egress,
+and regress" to the building were stipulated in the lease "by,
+through, and on any part of the Court called Salisbury Court."
+
+[Footnote 625: The Blackfriars auditorium was sixty-six feet in length
+and forty-six feet in breadth.]
+
+At once Gunnell and Blagrove set about the erection of their
+playhouse. They may have utilized in some way the "great barn" which
+occupied most of their property; one of the legal documents printed by
+Cunningham contains the phrase: "and the great barn, which was
+afterwards the playhouse."[626] If this be true--I think it very
+doubtful--the reconstruction must have been thorough, for Howes, in
+his continuation of Stow's _Annals_ (1631), speaks of Salisbury Court
+as "a new, fair playhouse";[627] and in all respects it seems to have
+ranked with the best.
+
+[Footnote 626: Cunningham, _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV,
+104. In his _Handbook for London_ Cunningham says that the Salisbury
+Court Playhouse "was originally the 'barn.'"]
+
+[Footnote 627: _Annals_ (1631), p. 1004. In 1633 Prynne
+(_Histriomastix_) refers to it as a "new theatre erected."]
+
+We know very little of the building. But Wright, in his _Historia
+Histrionica_, informs us that it was "almost exactly like" the two
+other private houses, the Blackfriars and the Cockpit:
+
+ _True._ The Blackfriars, Cockpit, and Salisbury Court were
+ called private houses, and were very small to what we see
+ now. The Cockpit was standing since the Restoration, and
+ Rhodes' company acted there for some time.
+
+ _Love._ I have seen that.
+
+ _True._ Then you have seen the other two in effect, for they
+ were all three built almost exactly alike for form and
+ bigness.[628]
+
+[Footnote 628: Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Literature_
+(1879), III, 106, thought that Salisbury Court was a round playhouse,
+basing his opinion on a line in Sharpe's _Noble Stranger_ acted at
+"the private house in Salisbury Court": "Thy Stranger to the
+Globe-like theatre."]
+
+In spite of what Wright says, however, there is some reason for
+believing that Salisbury Court was smaller than the other two private
+houses. The Epilogue to _Totenham Court_ refers to it as "my little
+house"; and the Epistle affixed to the second edition of _Sir Giles
+Goosecappe_ is said to convey the same impression of smallness.[629]
+
+[Footnote 629: I have not been able to examine this. In the only copy
+of the second edition accessible to me the Epistle is missing.]
+
+According to Malone, Sir Henry Herbert, the Master of the Revels, was
+"one of the proprietors" of the house, and held a "ninth share" in the
+profits.[630] This, however, is not strictly accurate. Sir Henry, by
+virtue of his power to license playhouses, demanded from each
+organization of players an annual fee. The King's Men gave him two
+benefit performances a year; Christopher Beeston, on behalf of the
+Cockpit in Drury Lane, paid him £60 a year; as for the rest, Herbert
+tells us that he had "a share paid by the Fortune Players, and a share
+by the Bull Players, and a share by the Salisbury Court Players."[631]
+It seems, therefore, that the Salisbury Court organization was divided
+into eight shares, and that of the profits an extra, or ninth, share
+was set aside as a fee for the Master of the Revels.
+
+[Footnote 630: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 178.]
+
+[Footnote 631: Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient
+Documents_, p. 27.]
+
+The playhouse was ready for use in all probability in the autumn of
+1629; and to occupy it a new company of actors was organized, known as
+"The King's Revels." The chief members of this company were George
+Stutville, John Young, William Cartwright, William Wilbraham, and
+Christopher Goad; Gunnell and Blagrove probably acted as managers. In
+the books of the Lord Chamberlain we find a warrant for the payment of
+£30 to William Blagrove "and the rest of his company" for three plays
+acted by the Children of the Revels, at Whitehall, 1631.[632] The
+Children continued at Salisbury Court until about December, 1631, when
+they abandoned the playhouse in favor of the much larger Fortune,
+surrendered by the Palsgrave's Men.
+
+[Footnote 632: See Mrs. Stopes's extracts from the Lord Chamberlain's
+books, in the Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_ (1910), XLVI, 97. This entry
+probably led Cunningham to say (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_,
+IV, 92) that Blagrove was "Master of the Children of the Revels in the
+reign of Charles I."]
+
+The Palsgrave's Men, who for many years had occupied the Fortune, seem
+to have fallen on bad times and to have disbanded. They were
+reorganized, however, possibly by their old manager, Richard Gunnell,
+and established in Salisbury Court. The Earl of Dorset, who took a
+special interest in Salisbury Court, obtained for the troupe a patent
+to play under the name of the infant Prince Charles, then little more
+than a year old.[633] The patent bears the date of December 7, 1631;
+and "The Servants of the High and Mighty Prince Charles" opened at
+Salisbury Court very soon after[634] with a play by Marmion entitled
+_Holland's Leaguer_. The Prologue refers to the going of the King's
+Revels to the Fortune, and the coming of the new troupe to Salisbury
+Court:
+
+ Gentle spectators, that with graceful eye
+ Come to behold the Muses' colony
+ New planted in this soil, forsook of late
+ By the inhabitants, since made _Fortunate_.
+
+[Footnote 633: For Dorset's interest in the matter see Cunningham,
+_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV, 96.]
+
+[Footnote 634: In December, 1631; see Malone, _Variorum_, III, 178.]
+
+The Prologue closes thus:
+
+ That on our branches now new poets sing;
+ And when with joy he shall see this resort
+ Phoebus shall not disdain to styl't his _Court_.
+
+But the audiences at Salisbury Court were not large. For six
+performances of the play, says Malone, Sir Henry Herbert received
+"but one pound nineteen shillings, in virtue of the ninth share which
+he possessed as one of the proprietors of the house."[635]
+
+[Footnote 635: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 178.]
+
+Of the "new poets" referred to by the Prologue, one, of course, was
+Marmion himself. Another, I venture to say, was James Shirley, who, as
+I think, had been engaged to write the company's second play. This was
+_The Changes_, brought out at Salisbury Court on January 10. The
+Prologue is full of allusions to the company, its recent misfortunes,
+and its present attempt to establish itself in its new quarters:
+
+ That Muse, whose song within another sphere[636]
+ Hath pleased some, and of the best, whose ear
+ Is able to distinguish strains that are
+ Clear and Phoebean from the popular
+ And sinful dregs of the adulterate brain,
+ By me salutes your candour once again;
+ And begs this noble favour, that this place,
+ And weak performances, may not disgrace
+ His fresh Thalia.[637] 'Las, our poet knows
+ We have no name; a torrent overflows
+ Our little island;[638] miserable we
+ Do every day play our own Tragedy.
+ But 't is more noble to create than kill,
+ He says; and if but with his flame, your will
+ Would join, we may obtain some warmth, and prove
+ Next them that now do surfeit with your love.
+ Encourage our beginning. Nothing grew
+ Famous at first. And, gentlemen, if you
+ Smile on this barren mountain, soon it will
+ Become both fruitful and the Muses hill.
+
+[Footnote 636: The Cockpit, for which Shirley had been writing.]
+
+[Footnote 637: Cf. "new poets" of Marmion's Prologue.]
+
+[Footnote 638: An allusion to the smallness of the Salisbury Court
+Playhouse?]
+
+The similarity of this to the Prologue of _Holland's Leaguer_ is
+striking; and the Epilogue is written in the same vein:
+
+ Opinion
+ Comes hither but on crutches yet; the sun
+ Hath lent no beam to warm us. If this play
+ Proceed more fortunate, we shall bless the day
+ And love that brought you hither. 'T is in you
+ To make a little sprig of laurel grow,
+ And spread into a grove.
+
+All scholars who have written on the subject--Collier, Fleay, Greg,
+Murray, etc.--have contended that the King's Revels Company did not
+leave Salisbury Court until after January 10, 1632, because Herbert
+licensed Shirley's _The Changes_ on that date,[639] and the title-page
+of the only edition of _The Changes_ states that it was acted at
+Salisbury Court by His Majesty's Revels. But Herbert records payments
+for six representations of Marmion's _Leaguer_ by Prince Charles's Men
+at Salisbury Court "in December, 1631."[640] This latter date must be
+correct, for on January 26 _Holland's Leaguer_ was entered on the
+Stationers' Register "as it hath been lately and often acted with
+great applause ... at the private house in Salisbury Court."
+According to the generally accepted theory, however, the King's Men
+were still at Salisbury Court, and actually bringing out a new play
+there so late as January 10. This error has led to much confusion, and
+to no little difficulty for historians of the stage; for example, Mr.
+Murray is forced to suppose that two royal patents were granted to
+Prince Charles's Company.[641] It seems to me likely that the
+title-page of _The Changes_ is incorrect in stating that the play was
+acted by the King's Revels. The play must have been acted by the new
+and as yet unpopular Prince Charles's Men, who had occupied Salisbury
+Court as early as December, and, as Herbert tells us, with poor
+success. The various dates cited clearly indicate this; and the
+Prologue and the Epilogue are both wholly unsuited for utterance by
+the successful Revels Company which had just been "made Fortunate,"
+but are quite in keeping with the condition of the newly organized and
+struggling Prince Charles's Men, who might naturally ask the public to
+"encourage our beginning."
+
+[Footnote 639: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 232. But Malone was a careless
+transcriber, and Herbert himself sometimes made errors. Possibly the
+correct date is January 10, 1631.]
+
+[Footnote 640: _Ibid._, III, 178.]
+
+[Footnote 641: _English Dramatic Companies_, I, 221.]
+
+Whether Prince Charles's Men ultimately succeeded in winning the favor
+of the public we do not know. Presumably they did, for at some date
+before 1635 they moved to the large Red Bull Playhouse. Richard Heton
+wrote: "And whereas my Lord of Dorset had gotten for a former company
+at Salisbury Court the Prince's service, they, being left at liberty,
+took their opportunity of another house, and left the house in
+Salisbury Court destitute both of a service and company."[642]
+
+[Footnote 642: Richard Heton, "Instructions for my Pattent," _The
+Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV, 96.]
+
+This person, Richard Heton, who describes himself as "one of the
+Sewers of Her Majesty's Chamber Extraordinary," had now obtained
+control of Salisbury Court, and had become manager of its
+affairs.[643] He apparently induced the Company of His Majesty's
+Revels to leave the Fortune and return to Salisbury Court, for in 1635
+they acted there Richard Brome's _The Sparagus Garden_. But their
+career at Salisbury Court was short; on May 12 of the following year
+all playhouses were closed by the plague, and acting was not allowed
+again for nearly a year and a half. During this long period of
+inactivity, the Company of His Majesty's Revels was largely dispersed.
+
+[Footnote 643: We find a payment to Richard Heton, "for himself and
+the rest of the company of the players at Salisbury Court," for
+performing a play before his Majesty at Court, October, 1635.
+(Chalmers's _Apology_, p. 509.) Exactly when he took charge of
+Salisbury Court I am unable to learn.]
+
+When at last, on October 2, 1637, the playhouses were allowed to open,
+Heton found himself with a crippled troupe of actors. Again the Earl
+of Dorset interested himself in the theatre. Queen Henrietta's
+Company, which had been at the Cockpit since 1625, having "disperst
+themselves," Dorset took "care to make up a new company for the
+Queen";[644] and he placed this new company under Heton at Salisbury
+Court. Heton writes: "How much I have done for the upbuilding of this
+Company, I gave you some particulars of in a petition to my Lord of
+Dorset." This reorganization of the Queen's Men explains, perhaps, the
+puzzling entry in Herbert's Office-Book, October 2, 1637: "I disposed
+of Perkins, Sumner, Sherlock, and Turner, to Salisbury Court, and
+joyned them with the best of that company."[645] Doubtless Herbert,
+like Dorset, was anxious for the Queen to have a good troupe of
+players. This new organization of the Queen's Men continued at
+Salisbury Court without interruption, it seems, until the closing of
+the playhouses in 1642.[646]
+
+[Footnote 644: Cunningham, _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV,
+96.]
+
+[Footnote 645: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 240.]
+
+[Footnote 646: For certain troubles at Salisbury Court in 1644 and
+1648, see Collier, _The History of English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879),
+II, 37, 40, 47.]
+
+In 1649 John Herne, son of the John Herne who in 1629 had secured a
+lease on the property for sixty-one years, made out a deed of sale of
+the playhouse to William Beeston,[647] for the sum of £600. But the
+document was not signed. The reason for this is probably revealed in
+the following passage: "The playhouse in Salisbury Court, in Fleet
+Street, was pulled down[648] by a company of soldiers set on by the
+sectaries of these sad times, on Saturday, the 24 day of March,
+1649."[649]
+
+[Footnote 647: William Beeston was the son of the famous actor
+Christopher Beeston, who was once a member of the Lord Chamberlain's
+Men, later manager of the Fortune, and finally proprietor of the
+Cockpit. In 1639 William had been appointed manager of the Cockpit
+Company. (See pages 358 ff.)]
+
+[Footnote 648: That is, stripped of its benches, stage-hangings, and
+other appliances for dramatic performances.]
+
+[Footnote 649: The manuscript entry in Stow's _Annals_. See _The
+Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314. On the same date the soldiers
+"pulled down on the inside" also the Phoenix and the Fortune.]
+
+Three years later, however, Beeston, through his agent Theophilus
+Bird, secured the property from Herne at the reduced price of £408:
+"John Herne, by indenture dated the five and twentieth day of May,
+1652, for £408, to him paid by Theophilus Bird, did assign the
+premises and all his estate therein in trust for the said William
+Beeston."[650]
+
+[Footnote 650: Cunningham, _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV,
+103.]
+
+Early in 1660 Beeston, anticipating the return of King Charles, and
+the reëstablishment of the drama, decided to put his building back
+into condition to serve as a playhouse; and he secured from Herbert,
+the Master of the Revels, a license to do so.[651] On April 5, 1660,
+he contracted with two carpenters, Fisher and Silver, "for the
+rebuilding the premises"; and to secure them he mortgaged the
+property. The carpenters later swore that they "expended in the same
+work £329 9_s._ 4_d._"[652]
+
+[Footnote 651: Printed in Malone, _Variorum_, III, 243, and
+Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient Documents_, p. 85. The
+language clearly indicates that Beeston was to _reconvert_ the
+building into a theatre.]
+
+[Footnote 652: Cunningham, _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV,
+103.]
+
+The reconstructed playhouse was opened in 1660, probably as early as
+June, with a performance of _The Rump_, by Tatham. It was engaged by
+Sir William Davenant for his company of actors until his "new theatre
+with scenes" could be erected in Lincoln's Inn Fields.[653] The
+ubiquitous Pepys often went thither, and in his _Diary_ gives us some
+interesting accounts of the performances he saw there. On March 2,
+1661, he witnessed a revival of Thomas Heywood's _Love's Mistress, or
+The Queen's Masque_ before a large audience:
+
+ After dinner I went to the Theatre [i.e., Killigrew's
+ playhouse] where I found so few people (which is strange,
+ and the reason I did not know) that I went out again; and so
+ to Salisbury Court, where the house as full as could be; and
+ it seems it was a new play, _The Queen's Masque_, wherein
+ are some good humours: among others a good jeer to the old
+ story of the Siege of Troy, making it to be a common country
+ tale. But above all it was strange to see so little a boy as
+ that was to act Cupid, which is one of the greatest parts in
+ it.
+
+[Footnote 653: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 257; Halliwell-Phillipps, _A
+Collection of Ancient Documents_, p. 27.]
+
+Again, on March 26, he found Salisbury Court crowded:
+
+ After dinner Mrs. Pierce and her husband, and I and my wife,
+ to Salisbury Court, where coming late, he and she light of
+ Col. Boone, that made room for them; and I and my wife sat
+ in the pit, and there met with Mr. Lewes and Tom Whitton,
+ and saw _The_ _Bondman_[654] done to admiration.
+
+[Footnote 654: By Philip Massinger.]
+
+The history of the playhouse during these years falls outside the
+scope of this volume. Suffice it to say that before Beeston finished
+paying the carpenters for their work of reconstruction, the great fire
+of 1666 swept the building out of existence; as Fisher and Silver
+declared: "The mortgaged premises by the late dreadful fire in London
+were totally burned down and consumed."[655]
+
+[Footnote 655: The subsequent history of Salisbury Court is traced in
+the legal documents printed by Cunningham. Beeston lost the property,
+and Fisher and Silver erected nearer the river a handsome new
+playhouse, known as "The Duke's Theatre," at an estimated cost of
+£1000.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT, OR THEATRE ROYAL AT WHITEHALL
+
+
+On birthdays, holidays, and festive occasions in general the
+sovereigns of England and the members of the royal family were wont to
+summon the professional actors to present plays at Court. For the
+accommodation of the players and of the audience, the larger halls at
+Hampton, Windsor, Greenwich, St. James, Whitehall, or wherever the
+sovereign happened to be at the time, were specially fitted up, often
+at great expense. At one end of the hall was erected a temporary stage
+equipped with a "music-room," "players' houses of canvas," painted
+properties, and such other things as were necessary to the actors. In
+the centre of the hall, on an elevated dais, were provided seats for
+the royal family, and around and behind the dais, stools for the more
+distinguished guests; a large part of the audience was allowed to
+stand on platforms raised in tiers at the rear of the room. Since the
+plays were almost invariably given at night, the stage was illuminated
+by special "branches" hung on wires overhead, and carrying many
+lights. In the accounts of the Office of the Revels one may find
+interesting records of plays presented in this manner, with the
+miscellaneous items of expense for making the halls ready.
+
+Usually the Court performances, like the masques, were important,
+almost official occasions, and many guests, including the members of
+the diplomatic corps, were invited. To provide accommodation for so
+numerous an audience, a large room was needed. Hampton Court possessed
+a splendid room for the purpose in the Great Banqueting Hall, one
+hundred and six feet in length and forty feet in breadth. But the
+palace at Whitehall for many years had no room of a similar character.
+For the performance of a masque there in 1559 the Queen erected a
+temporary "Banqueting House." Again, in 1572, to entertain the Duke of
+Montmorency, Ambassador from France, she had a large "Banketting House
+made at Whitehall," covered with canvas and decorated with ivy and
+flowers gathered fresh from the fields. An account of the structure
+may be found in the records of the Office of the Revels. Perhaps,
+however, the most elaborate and substantial of these "banqueting
+houses" was that erected in 1581, to entertain the ambassadors from
+France who came to treat of a marriage between Elizabeth and the Duc
+d'Anjou. The structure is thus described by Holinshed in his
+_Chronicle_:[656]
+
+ This year (against the coming of certain commissioners out
+ of France into England), by Her Majesty's appointment, on
+ the sixth and twentieth day of March, in the morning (being
+ Easter Day), a Banqueting House was begun at Westminster, on
+ the south-west side of Her Majesty's palace of Whitehall,
+ made in manner and form of a long square, three hundred
+ thirty and two foot in measure about; thirty principals made
+ of great masts, being forty foot in length apiece, standing
+ upright; between every one of these masts ten foot asunder
+ and more. The walls of this house were closed with canvas,
+ and painted all the outsides of the same most artificially,
+ with a work called rustic, much like stone. This house had
+ two hundred ninety and two lights of glass. The sides within
+ the same house was made with ten heights of degrees for
+ people to stand upon; and in the top of this house was
+ wrought most cunningly upon canvas works of ivy and holly,
+ with pendants made of wicker rods, garnished with bay, rue,
+ and all manner of strange flowers garnished with spangles of
+ gold; as also beautified with hanging toseans made of holly
+ and ivy, with all manner of strange fruits, as pomegranates,
+ oranges, pompions, cucumbers, grapes, carrots, with such
+ other like, spangled with gold, and most richly hanged.
+ Betwixt these works of bays and ivy were great spaces of
+ canvas, which was most cunningly painted, the clouds with
+ stars, the sun and sun-beams, with diverse other coats of
+ sundry sorts belonging to the Queen's Majesty, most richly
+ garnished with gold. There were of all manner of persons
+ working on this house to the number of three hundred seventy
+ and five: two men had mischances, the one broke his leg, and
+ so did the other. This house was made in three weeks and
+ three days, and was ended the eighteenth day of April, and
+ cost one thousand seven hundred forty and four pounds,
+ nineteen shillings, and od mony, as I was credibly informed
+ by the worshipful master Thomas Grave, surveyor unto Her
+ Majesty's works, who served and gave order for the same.
+
+[Footnote 656: Edition of 1808, IV, 434. See also Stow's _Chronicle_,
+under the year 1581.]
+
+Although built in such a short time, and of such flimsy material, this
+expensive Banqueting House seems to have been allowed to stand, and to
+have been used thereafter for masques and plays. Thus, when King James
+came to the throne, he ordered plays to be given there in November,
+1604. We find the following entry in the Treasurer's accounts:
+
+ For making ready the Banqueting House at Whitehall for the
+ King's Majesty against the plays, by the space of four days
+ ... 78_s._ 7_d._
+
+And the accounts of the Revels' Office inform us:
+
+ Hallomas Day, being the first of November, a play in the
+ Banqueting House at Whitehall, called _The Moor of Venice_.
+
+Apparently, however, the King was not pleased with the Banqueting
+House as a place for dramatic performances, for he promptly ordered
+the Great Hall of the palace--a room approximately ninety feet in
+length and forty feet in breadth[657]--to be made ready for the next
+play:
+
+ For making ready the Great Chamber at Whitehall for the
+ King's Majesty to see the play, by the space of two days ...
+ 39_s._ 4_d._
+
+[Footnote 657: This had once already, on Shrove Tuesday, 1604, been
+used for a play. The situation and ground-plan of the "Great Hall" are
+clearly shown in Fisher's _Survey_ of the palace, made about 1670, and
+engraved by Vertue, 1747.]
+
+The work was completed with dispatch, for on the Sunday following the
+performance of _Othello_ in the Banqueting House, _The Merry Wives of
+Windsor_ was acted in the Great Hall. The next play to be given at
+Court was also presented in the same room:
+
+ On St. Stephen's Night, in the Hall, a play called _Measure
+ for Measure_.
+
+And from this time on the Great Hall was the usual place for Court
+performances. The abandonment of the Banqueting House was probably due
+to the facts that the Hall was smaller in size, could be more easily
+heated in the winter, and was in general better adapted to dramatic
+performances. Possibly the change was due also to the decayed
+condition of the old structure and to preparations for its removal.
+Stow, in his _Annals_ under the date of 1607, writes:
+
+ The last year the King pulled down the old, rotten,
+ slight-builded Banqueting House at Whitehall, and
+ new-builded the same this year very strong and stately,
+ being every way larger than the first.[658]
+
+[Footnote 658: Stow's _Annals_, continued by Edmund Howes (1631), p.
+891.]
+
+This new Banqueting House was completed in the early part of 1608.
+John Chamberlain writes to Sir Dudley Carleton on January 5, 1608:
+"The masque goes forward at Court for Twelfth Day, tho' I doubt the
+New Room will be scant ready."[659] Thereafter the Banqueting House,
+"every way larger than the first," was regularly used for the
+presentation of masques. But it was rarely if ever used for plays.
+Throughout the reign of James, the ordinary place for dramatic
+performances, as has been observed, was the Great Hall.
+
+[Footnote 659: John Nichols, _The Progresses of James_, II, 162.]
+
+On January 12, 1619, as a result of negligence during the preparations
+for a masque, the Banqueting House caught fire and was burned to the
+ground. The Reverend Thomas Lorkin writes to Sir Thomas Puckering on
+January 19, 1619:
+
+ The unhappy accident that chanced at Whitehall last week by
+ fire you cannot but have heard of; but haply not the manner
+ how, which was this. A joiner was appointed to mend some
+ things that were out of order in the device of the masque,
+ which the King meant to have repeated at Shrovetide, who,
+ having kindled a fire upon a false hearth to heat his
+ glue-pot, the force thereof pierced soon, it seems, the
+ single brick, and in a short time that he absented himself
+ upon some occasion, fastened upon the basis, which was of
+ dry deal board, underneath; which suddenly conceiving flame,
+ gave fire to the device of the masque, all of oiled paper,
+ and dry fir, etc. And so, in a moment, disposed itself among
+ the rest of that combustible matter that it was past any
+ man's approach before it was almost discovered. Two hours
+ begun and ended that woful sight.
+
+[Illustration: THE COCKPIT
+
+Probably as built by Henry VIII. (From Faithorne's _Map of London_,
+1658. The Whitehall district is represented as it was many years
+earlier, compare Agas's _Map_, 1560).]
+
+Inigo Jones, who had dreamed of a magnificent palace at Whitehall, and
+who had drawn elaborate plans for a royal residence which should
+surpass anything in Europe, now took charge of building a new
+Banqueting House as a first step in the realization of his scheme.
+The noble structure which he erected is to-day one of his chief
+monuments, and the sole relic of the once famous royal palace. It was
+completed in the spring of 1622; but, as in the case of its
+predecessor, it was not commonly used for dramatic entertainments.
+Though masques might be given there, the regular place for plays
+continued to be the Great Hall.
+
+In the meanwhile, however, there had been developed at Court the
+custom of having small private performances in the Cockpit, in
+addition to the more elaborate performances in the Great Hall. Since
+this ultimately led to the establishment of a theatre royal, known as
+"The Cockpit-in-Court," it will be necessary to trace in some detail
+the history of that structure.
+
+The palace of Whitehall, anciently called York House, and the home of
+thirty successive Archbishops of York, was seized by King Henry VIII
+at the fall of Wolsey and converted into a royal residence.[660] The
+new proprietor at once made improvements after his own taste, among
+which were tennis-courts, bowling-alleys, and an amphitheatre for the
+"royal sport" of cock-fighting. In Stow's description of the palace we
+read:
+
+ On the right hand be diverse fair tennis courts, bowling
+ alleys, and a Cockpit, all built by King Henry the Eight.
+
+[Footnote 660: Shakespeare writes (_Henry VIII_, IV, i, 94-97):
+
+ Sir you
+ Must no more call it York-place, that is past;
+ For since the Cardinal fell, that title's lost:
+ 'Tis now the King's, and called Whitehall.]
+
+Strype, in his edition of Stow's _Survey_ (1720), adds the information
+that the Cockpit was made "out of certain old tenements."[661] It is
+pictured in Agas's _Map of London_ (1570), and more clearly in
+Faithorne's _Map_ (see page 390), printed in 1658, but apparently
+representing the city at an earlier date.
+
+[Footnote 661: Book VI, page 6.]
+
+During the reign of Elizabeth the Cockpit, so far as I can ascertain,
+was never used for plays. In the voluminous documents relating to the
+Office of the Revels there is only one reference to the building: in
+1572 flowers were temporarily stored there that were to be used for
+decking the "Banketting House."
+
+It was during the reign of King James that the Cockpit began to be
+used for dramatic representations. John Chamberlain writes from London
+to Sir Ralph Winwood, December 18, 1604: "Here is great provision for
+Cockpit to entertain him [the King] at home, and of masques and revels
+against the marriage of Sir Herbert and Lady Susan Vere."[662] Since,
+however, King James was very fond of cock-fighting, it may be that
+Chamberlain was referring to that royal entertainment rather than to
+plays. The small Cockpit was certainly a very unusual place for the
+formal presentation of plays before His Majesty and the Court.
+
+[Footnote 662: _Winwood State Papers_ (1725), II, 41.]
+
+But the young Prince Henry, whose official residence was in St.
+James's Palace, often had private or semi-private performances of
+plays in the Cockpit. In the rolls of the expenses of the Prince we
+find the following records:[663]
+
+ For making ready the Cockpit four several times for plays,
+ by the space of four days, in the month of December, 1610,
+ £2 10_s._ 8_d._
+
+ For making ready the Cockpit for plays two several times, by
+ the space of four days, in the months of January and
+ February, 1611, 70_s._ 8_d._
+
+ For making ready the Cockpit for a play, by the space of two
+ days, in the month of December, 1611, 30_s._ 4_d._
+
+[Footnote 663: See Cunningham, _Extracts from the Accounts of the
+Revels_, pp. xiii-xiv.]
+
+The building obviously, was devoted for the most part to other
+purposes, and had to be "made ready" for plays at a considerable
+expense. Nor was the Prince the only one who took advantage of its
+small amphitheatre. John Chamberlain, in a letter to Sir Dudley
+Carleton on September 22, 1612, describing the reception accorded to
+the Count Palatine by the Lady Elizabeth, writes: "On Tuesday she sent
+to invite him as he sat at supper to a play of her own servants in the
+Cockpit."[664]
+
+[Footnote 664: John Nichols, _The Progresses of James_, II, 466.]
+
+It is clear, then, that at times throughout the reign of James
+dramatic performances were given in the Cockpit; but the auditorium
+was small, and the performances must have been of a semi-private
+nature. The important Court performances, to which many guests were
+invited, were held in the Great Hall.
+
+In the reign of the next sovereign, however, a change came about. In
+the year 1632 or 1633, as well as I am able to judge with the evidence
+at command, King Charles reconstructed the old Cockpit into a "new
+theatre at Whitehall," which from henceforth was almost exclusively
+used for Court performances. The opening of this "new theatre royal"
+is celebrated by a _Speech_ from the pen of Thomas Heywood:
+
+ _A Speech Spoken to Their Two Excellent Majesties at the
+ First Play Play'd by the Queen's Servants in the New Theatre
+ at Whitehall._
+
+ When Greece, the chief priority might claim
+ For arts and arms, and held the eminent name
+ Of Monarchy, they erected divers places,
+ Some to the Muses, others to the Graces,
+ Where actors strove, and poets did devise,
+ With tongue and pen to please the ears and eyes
+ Of Princely auditors. The time was, when
+ To hear the rapture of one poet's pen
+ A Theatre hath been built.
+
+ By the Fates' doom,
+ When th' Empire was removed from thence to Rome,
+ The Potent Cæsars had their _circi_, and
+ Large amphitheatres, in which might stand
+ And sit full fourscore thousand, all in view
+ And touch of voice. This great Augustus knew,
+ Nay Rome its wealth and potency enjoyed,
+ Till by the barbarous Goths these were destroy'd.
+
+ But may this structure last, and you be seen
+ Here a spectator, with your princely Queen,
+ In your old age, as in your flourishing prime,
+ To outstrip Augustus both in fame and time.
+
+The exact date of this _Speech_ is not given, but it was printed[665]
+in 1637 along with "The Prologue to the Famous Tragedy of _The Rich
+Jew of Malta_, as it Was Played Before the King and Queen in His
+Majesty's Theatre at Whitehall"; and this Prologue Heywood had already
+published with the play itself in 1633. He dedicated the play to Mr.
+Thomas Hammon, saying, "I had no better a New-Year's gift to present
+you with." Apparently, then, the play had been acted at Court shortly
+before New Year's, 1633; and this sets a forward date to Heywood's
+_Speech_. Other evidence combines with this to show that "His
+Majesty's Theatre at Whitehall" was "new" at the Christmas season of
+1632-33.
+
+[Footnote 665: See _The Dramatic Works of Thomas Heywood_ (1874), VI,
+339.]
+
+In erecting this, the first "theatre royal," King Charles would
+naturally call for the aid of the great Court architect Inigo
+Jones,[666] and by good luck we have preserved for us Jones's original
+sketches for the little playhouse (see page 396). These were
+discovered a few years ago by Mr. Hamilton Bell in the Library of
+Worcester College (where many valuable relics of the great architect
+are stored), and printed in _The Architectural Record_ of New York,
+March, 1913. Mr. Bell accompanied the plans with a valuable
+discussion, but he was unable to discover their purpose. He writes:
+
+ We have still no clue as to what purpose this curiously
+ anomalous and most interesting structure was to
+ serve--whether the plan was ever carried out, or whether it
+ remained part of a lordly pleasure-house which its prolific
+ designer planned for the delectation of his own soul.
+
+[Footnote 666: Whether he merely made over the old Cockpit which Henry
+VIII had constructed "out of certain old tenements," or erected an
+entirely new building, I have not been able to ascertain. Heywood's
+_Speech_ indicates a "new" and "lasting" structure.]
+
+That the plan actually was carried out, at least in part, is shown by
+a sketch of the Whitehall buildings made by John Fisher at some date
+before 1670, and engraved by Vertue in 1747, (see page 398).[667]
+Here, in the northeast corner of the palace, we find a little theatre,
+labeled "The Cockpit." Its identity with the building sketched by
+Inigo Jones is obvious at a glance; even the exterior measurements,
+which are ascertainable from the scales of feet given on the two
+plans, are the same.
+
+[Footnote 667: Vertue conservatively dates the survey "about 1680";
+but the names of the occupants of the various parts of the palace show
+that it was drawn before 1670, and nearer 1660 than 1680.]
+
+[Illustration: INIGO JONES'S PLANS FOR THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT
+
+Now preserved in the Worcester College Library at Oxford; discovered
+by Mr. Hamilton Bell, and reproduced in _The Architectural Record_, of
+New York, 1913.]
+
+[Illustration: FISHER'S SURVEY OF WHITEHALL SHOWING THE
+COCKPIT-IN-COURT
+
+A section from Vertue's engraving, 1747, of a survey of Whitehall made
+by John Fisher, 1660-1670. Compare "The Cockpit" with Inigo Jones's
+plans.]
+
+[Illustration: THE THEATRO OLYMPICO AT VICENZA
+
+Which probably inspired Inigo Jones's plans for the Cockpit-in-Court.]
+
+Mr. Bell describes the plan he discovered as follows:[668]
+
+ It represents within a square building, windowed on three
+ sides and on one seemingly attached to another building, an
+ auditorium occupying five sides of an octagon, on the floor
+ of which are shown the benches of a pit, or the steps, five
+ in number, on which they could be set. These are curiously
+ arranged at an angle of forty-five degrees on either side of
+ a central aisle, so that the spectators occupying them
+ could never have directly faced the stage. Surrounding this
+ pit on five sides is a balcony ten feet deep, with, it would
+ seem, two rows of benches on four of its sides; the fifth
+ side in the centre, directly opposite the stage, being
+ partitioned off into a room or box, in the middle of which
+ is indicated a platform about five feet by seven, presumably
+ for the Royal State. Three steps descend from this box to
+ the centre aisle of the pit. To the left of and behind this
+ royal box appears another enclosure or box, partitioned off
+ from the rest of the balcony.
+
+ The staircases of access to this auditorium are clearly
+ indicated; one small door at the rear of the _salle_ with
+ its own private stairway, communicating with the adjoining
+ building, opens directly into the royal box; as in the Royal
+ Opera House in Berlin to-day.
+
+ There is another door, with a triangular lobby, into the
+ rear of the left-hand balcony. Two windows are shown on each
+ side of the house, opening directly into the theatre from
+ the outer air.
+
+ The stage runs clear across the width of the pit, about
+ thirty-five feet, projecting in an "apron" or _avant scène_
+ five feet beyond the proscenium wall, and is surrounded on
+ the three outward sides by a low railing of classic design
+ about eighteen inches in height, just as in many Elizabethan
+ playhouses.
+
+ If one may trust an elevation of the stage, drawn on the
+ same sheet to twice the scale of the general plan, the stage
+ was four feet six inches above the floor of the pit. This
+ elevation exhibits the surprising feature of a classic
+ façade, Palladian in treatment, on the stage of what so far
+ we have regarded as a late modification of a playhouse of
+ Shakespeare's day. Evidently Inigo Jones contemplated the
+ erection of a permanent architectural _proscenium_, as the
+ ancients called it, of the type, though far more modest,
+ both in scale and ornamentation, of Palladio's Theatro
+ Olimpico at Vicenza, which we know he visited in about 1600,
+ some twenty years after its erection. This _proscenium_,
+ given in plan and elevation, shows a semi-circular structure
+ with a radius of fifteen feet, two stories in height, of the
+ Corinthian or Composite order. In the lower story are five
+ doorways, the centre of which is a large archway flanked by
+ pedestals, on which are inscribed in Greek characters,
+ Melpomene--Thalia; over these and over the smaller doors are
+ tablets.
+
+ The second story contains between its lighter engaged
+ columns, over the four side doors, niches with corbels
+ below, destined to carry statues as their inscribed bases
+ indicate. So far as these inscriptions are legible,--the
+ clearest reading "phocles," probably Sophocles,--these were
+ to represent Greek dramatists, most likely Æschylus,
+ Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes.
+
+ The curved pediment of the central archway runs up into this
+ story and is broken in the middle by a tablet bearing the
+ inscription "Prodesse et Delectare," which is flanked by two
+ reclining genii holding garlands.
+
+ Above these are two busts on brackets, Thespis and Epicurus,
+ or possibly Epicharmus. The space directly above this
+ pediment is occupied by a window-like opening five by four
+ feet, the traditional Elizabethan music-room, in all
+ probability, which, Mr. W.J. Lawrence has shown us, occupied
+ this position both in Shakespeare's day and for some time
+ after the Restoration; an arrangement which was revived by
+ Mr. Steele Mackaye in the Madison Square Theatre, and
+ originally in the first little Lyceum, New York, both now
+ pulled down. The pyramidal pediment above this opening
+ projects above the upper cornice into a coved ceiling, which
+ would appear from the rendering of the drawing to form an
+ apse above the semi-circular stage. Behind the _proscenium_
+ is a large space with staircases of approach, two windows at
+ the rear, and apparently a fireplace for the comfort of the
+ waiting players. Communication with the front of the house
+ is provided by a door in the proscenium wall opening into
+ the stage door lobby, whence the outside of the building may
+ be reached.
+
+ There is no indication of galleries, unless some marks on
+ the angles of the front wall of the balcony may be
+ interpreted without too much license into the footings of
+ piers or posts to carry one; the total interior height shown
+ in the elevation from what I have assumed to be the floor of
+ the pit to the ceiling being only twenty-eight feet, there
+ would hardly have been room for more than one. The only
+ staircases which could have served it are at the rear of the
+ building in the corners behind the stage wall....
+
+ The general dimensions would appear to be:
+
+ Total width of the auditorium 58 ft.
+ Total width of the pit 36 ft.
+ Total width of the front stage or "apron" 35 ft.
+ Total depth of the stage from the railing to
+ the centre of the _proscenium_ 16 ft.
+ The entire building is 58 feet square inside, cut to
+ an octagon of 28 feet each side.
+ Height from floor to ceiling 28 ft.
+ Height from stage to ceiling about 23 ft. 6 in.
+ The lower order of the _proscenium_ 10 ft. 6 in.
+ The upper order of the _proscenium_ 9 ft. 6 in.
+
+ The scale on the drawing may not be absolutely correct, as
+ measured by it the side doors of the _proscenium_ are only
+ five feet high and two feet nine inches wide: this, however,
+ may be an error in the drawing, since we have it on very
+ good authority that Inigo Jones designed without the use of
+ a scale, proportioning his various members by his
+ exquisitely critical eye alone, subsequently adding the
+ dimensions in writing.
+
+[Footnote 668: Reprinted here by the kind permission of Mr. Bell and
+the editors of _The Architectural Record_.]
+
+I record below some of the references to the Cockpit which I have
+gathered from the Herbert Manuscript and the Office-Books of the Lord
+Chamberlain. The earliest payment for plays there, it will be
+observed, is dated March 16, 1633. Abundant evidence shows that the
+actors gave their performance in the Cockpit at night without
+interfering with their regular afternoon performance at their
+playhouses, and for their pains received the sum of £10. If, however,
+for any reason they "lost their day" at their house they were paid
+£20.
+
+ 1633. March 16. Warrant to pay £270 to John Lowen, Joseph
+ Taylor, and Eilliard Swanston, His Majesty's Comedians, for
+ plays by them acted before His Majesty, viz.--£20 for the
+ rehearsal of one at the Cockpit, by which means they lost
+ their afternoon at their house....[669]
+
+ 1634. _Bussy d'Amboise_ was played by the King's Players on
+ Easter-Monday night, at the Cockpit-in-Court.[670]
+
+ 1634. The _Pastorall_ was played by the King's Players on
+ Easter-Tuesday night, at the Cockpit-in-Court.[671]
+
+ 1635. 10 May. A warrant for £30 unto Mons. Josias Floridor,
+ for himself and the rest of the French players for three
+ plays acted by them at the Cockpit.[672]
+
+ 1635. 10 Decemr.--A warrant for £100 to the Prince's
+ Comedians,--viz. £60 for three plays acted at Hampton Court,
+ at £20 for each play, in September and October, 1634. And
+ £40 for four plays at Whitehall and [_query_ "at"] the
+ Cockpit in January, February, and May following, at £10 for
+ each play.[673]
+
+ 1636. The first and second part of _Arviragus and Philicia_
+ were acted at the Cockpit before the King and Queen, the
+ Prince, and Prince Elector, the 18 and 19 April, 1636, being
+ Monday and Tuesday in Easter week.[674]
+
+[Footnote 669: Lord Chamberlain's Office-Book, C.C. Stopes,
+"Shakespeare's Fellows and Followers," Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI,
+96.]
+
+[Footnote 670: Herbert MS., Malone, _Variorum_, III, 237.]
+
+[Footnote 671: Herbert MS., Malone, _Variorum_, III, 237.]
+
+[Footnote 672: Lord Chamberlain's Office-Book, Chalmers's _Apology_,
+p. 508.]
+
+[Footnote 673: _Ibid._, p. 509.]
+
+[Footnote 674: The Herbert MS., Malone, _Variorum_, III, 238.]
+
+Other similar allusions to performance in the Cockpit might be cited
+from the Court records. One more will suffice--the most interesting of
+all, since it shows how frequently the little theatre was employed for
+the entertainment of the royal family. It is a bill presented by the
+Blackfriars Company, the King's Men, for Court performances during the
+year 1637. This bill was discovered and reproduced in facsimile by
+George R. Wright, F.S.A., in _The Journal of the British
+Archæological Association_ for 1860; but it was wholly misunderstood
+by its discoverer, who regarded it as drawn up by the company of
+players that "performed at the Cockpit in Drury Lane." He was indeed
+somewhat puzzled by the reference to the Blackfriars Playhouse, but
+met the difficulty by saying: "There can be little doubt that the
+last-named theatre was lent for the occasion to the Cockpit Company,"
+although he suggests no reason for this strange borrowing of a theatre
+by a troupe that possessed a house of its own, and much nearer the
+Court, too. It did not even occur to him, it seems, to inquire how the
+Cockpit Company secured the plays which we know belonged to
+Shakespeare's old company. Because of these obvious difficulties
+scholars have looked upon the document with suspicion, and apparently
+have treated it as a forgery.[675] But that it is genuine is indicated
+by the history of "The Cockpit-in-Court" as sketched above, and is
+proved beyond any question by the fact that the Office-Book of the
+Lord Chamberlain shows that the bill was paid:
+
+ 12th March 1638 {9}.--Forasmuch as His Majesty's Servants,
+ the company at the Blackfriars, have by special command, at
+ divers times within the space of this present year 1638,
+ acted 24 plays before His Majesty, six whereof have been
+ performed at Hampton-court and Richmond, by means whereof
+ they were not only at the loss of their day at home, but at
+ extraordinary charges by traveling and carriage of their
+ goods, in consideration whereof they are to have £20 apiece
+ for those plays, and £10 apiece for the other 18 acted at
+ Whitehall, which in the whole amounted to the sum of
+ £300.--These are therefore to pray and require you out of
+ His Majesty's treasure in your charge to pay....[676]
+
+[Footnote 675: Fleay in his elaborate studies of performances at Court
+ignores it entirely, as do subsequent scholars.]
+
+[Footnote 676: Chalmers, _Apology_, p. 510.]
+
+A photographic facsimile of this interesting document may be seen in
+_The Journal of the British Archæological Association_, already
+referred to; but for the convenience of those who do not read
+Elizabethan script with ease, I have reproduced it in type facsimile
+on page 404.
+
+[Illustration: [Transcriber's Note: The dashes below represent
+handwritten check-marks in the facsimile.]
+
+before the king & queene this
+yeare of our lord 1638
+
+At the Cocpit the 26th of march The lost ladie
+
+At the Cocpit the 27th of march Damboyes
+
+At the Cocpit the 3d of Aprill Aglaura
+
+At the blackfryers the 23 of Aprill
+for the queene the vnfortunate lou[ers]
+
+At the Cocpit the 29th of may
+the princes berthnight ould Castel
+
+At the Cocpit the last of may agayne the vnfortunate louers
+
+At Sumerset-house the 10th of July & our day
+
+-- lost at our house mr Carlels play the first part of the pasionate louers
+
+-- At Hamton Court the 30th of September The vnfortunate louer[s]
+
+-- At Richmount the 6th of november for the ladie } The mery divell
+ maries berthnight & the day lost at our house } of Edmonto[n]
+
+At the Cocpit the 8th of november The fox
+
+At the Cocpit the 13th of november Ceaser
+
+At the Cocpit the 15th of november The mery wifes of winser
+
+At the Cocpit the 20th of november The fayre favorett
+
+At the Cocpit the 22th of november Chances
+
+At the Cocpit the 27th of november The Costome of the C[ountry]
+
+At the Cocpit the 29th of november The northen las
+
+At the Cocpit the 6th of desember The spanish Curatt
+
+At the Cocpit the 11th of desember agayne The fayre favorett
+
+At the Cocpit the 18th of desember m Carlels
+play agayne the first part of The pasionate louers
+
+At the Cocpit the 20th of desember
+the 2d part of The pasionate louers
+
+At the Cocpit the 27 of desember the 2d part agayne of the pasionate louers
+
+-- At Richmount the 28 of desember the ladie }
+ Elsabeths berthnight & our day lost at our house } The northen las
+
+-- At Richmount on newyeares day }
+ and our day lost at our house } beggers bush
+
+-- At Richmount the 7th of Janeuarye }
+ and our day lost at our house } The spanish Cura[tt]]
+
+The check-marks at the left were probably made by the clerk in the
+Chamberlain's office to ascertain how many times the players "lost
+their day" at their house, and hence were entitled to £20 in payment.
+For the play given "at the blackfriars the 23 of Aprill for the
+queene" (presumably the general public was excluded) only the usual
+£10 was allowed.
+
+With the approach of the civil war, the Cockpit, like the public
+theatres, suffered an eclipse. Sir Henry Herbert writes: "On Twelfth
+Night, 1642, the Prince had a play called _The Scornful Lady_ at the
+Cockpit; but the King and Queen were not there, and it was the only
+play acted at court in the whole Christmas."[677] During the dark days
+that followed we hear nothing of plays in the Cockpit. Later
+Cromwell himself occupied this section of the palace, and naturally
+saw to it that no dramatic exhibitions were held there. But at the
+Restoration "the Prince," now become the King, could have his plays
+again; and he did not wait long. On November 20, 1660, Edward Gower
+wrote to Sir Richard Leveson: "Yesternight the King, Queen, Princess,
+etc., supped at the Duke d'Albemarle's, where they had _The Silent
+Woman_ acted in the Cockpit."[678] From this time on the theatre royal
+was in constant use for the entertainment of the Court.
+
+[Footnote 677: Herbert MS., Malone, _Variorum_, III, 241.]
+
+[Footnote 678: Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fifth Report, p.
+200. Pepys, under the date November 20, 1660, gives an anecdote about
+the King's behavior on this occasion.]
+
+Samuel Pepys, as he rose in the world, became a frequent visitor
+there.[679] In the absence of other descriptions of the building, I
+subjoin a few of the entries from his _Diary_. Under the date of
+October 2, 1662, he writes:
+
+ At night by coach towards Whitehall, took up Mr. Moore and
+ set him at my Lord's, and myself, hearing that there was a
+ play at the Cockpit (and my Lord Sandwich, who came to town
+ last night, at it), I do go thither, and by very great
+ fortune did follow four or five gentlemen who were carried
+ to a little private door in a wall, and so crept through a
+ narrow place and come into one of the boxes next the King's,
+ but so as I could not see the King or Queen, but many of the
+ fine ladies, who yet are really not so handsome generally
+ as I used to take them to be, but that they are finely
+ dressed. Here we saw _The Cardinal_,[680] a tragedy I had
+ never seen before, nor is there any great matter in it. The
+ company that came in with me into the box were all Frenchmen
+ that could speak no English, but Lord! what sport they made
+ to ask a pretty lady that they got among them that
+ understood both French and English to make her tell them
+ what the actors said.
+
+[Footnote 679: He first "got in" on April 20, 1661, "by the favour of
+one Mr. Bowman." John Evelyn also visited the Cockpit; see his
+_Diary_, January 16 and February 11, 1662.]
+
+[Footnote 680: By James Shirley, licensed 1641.]
+
+The next time he went to the Cockpit, on November 17, 1662, he did not
+have to creep in by stealth. He writes:
+
+ At Whitehall by appointment, Mr. Crew carried my wife and I
+ to the Cockpit, and we had excellent places, and saw the
+ King, Queen, Duke of Monmouth, his son, and my Lady
+ Castlemaine, and all the fine ladies; and _The Scornful
+ Lady_, well performed. They had done by eleven o'clock.
+
+The fine ladies, as usual, made a deep impression on him, as did the
+"greatness and gallantry" of the audience. On December 1, 1662, he
+writes:
+
+ This done we broke up, and I to the Cockpit, with much
+ crowding and waiting, where I saw _The Valiant Cid_[681]
+ acted, a play I have read with great delight, but is a most
+ dull thing acted, which I never understood before, there
+ being no pleasure in it, though done by Betterton and by
+ Ianthe,[682] and another fine wench that is come in the room
+ of Roxalana; nor did the King or Queen once smile all the
+ whole play, nor any of the company seem to take any pleasure
+ but what was in the greatness and gallantry of the company.
+ Thence ... home, and got thither by 12 o'clock, knocked up
+ my boy, and put myself to bed.
+
+[Footnote 681: By Corneille.]
+
+[Footnote 682: Mrs. Betterton.]
+
+[Illustration: THE COCKPIT-IN-COURT
+
+From an engraving by Mazell in Pennant's _London_. Mr. W.L. Spiers,
+who reproduces this engraving in the _London Topographical Record_
+(1903), says that it is "undated, but probably copied from a
+contemporary drawing of the seventeenth century."]
+
+Two entries, from an entirely different source, must suffice for this
+history of the Cockpit. In the Paper-Office Chalmers discovered a
+record of the following payments, made in 1667:
+
+ To the Keeper of the theatre at Whitehall, £30. To the same
+ for Keeping clean that place, _p. ann._ £6.[683]
+
+[Footnote 683: Chalmers, _Apology_, p. 530. Cunningham says, in his
+_Handbook of London_: "I find in the records of the Audit Office a
+payment of £30 per annum 'to the Keeper of our Playhouse called the
+Cockpit in St. James Park'"; but he does not state the year in which
+the payment was made.]
+
+And in the Lord Chamberlain's Accounts is preserved the following
+warrant:
+
+ 1674, March 27. Warrant to deliver to Monsieur Grabu, or to
+ such as he shall appoint, such of the scenes remaining in
+ the theatre at Whitehall as shall be useful for the French
+ Opera at the theatre in Bridges Street, and the said
+ Monsieur to return them again safely after 14 days' time to
+ the theatre at Whitehall.[684]
+
+[Footnote 684: I quote from W.J. Lawrence, _The Elizabethan Playhouse_
+(First Series), p. 144.]
+
+What became of the theatre at Whitehall I have not been able to
+ascertain.[685] Presumably, after the fire of January, 1698, which
+destroyed the greater part of the palace and drove the royal family to
+seek quarters elsewhere, the building along with the rest of the
+Cockpit section was made over into the Privy Council offices.
+
+[Footnote 685: The reasons why the Cockpit at Whitehall has remained
+so long in obscurity (its history is here attempted for the first
+time) are obvious. Some scholars have confused it with the public
+playhouse of the same name, a confusion which persons in the days of
+Charles avoided by invariably saying "The Cockpit in Drury Lane."
+Other scholars have confused it with the residential section of
+Whitehall which bore the same name. During the reign of James several
+large buildings which had been erected either on the site of the old
+cockpit of Henry VIII, or around it, were converted into lodgings for
+members of the royal family or favorites of the King, and were
+commonly referred to as "the Cockpit." Other scholars have assumed
+that all plays during the reigns of Elizabeth, James, and Charles were
+given either in the Banqueting House or in the Great Hall. Finally,
+still other scholars (e.g., Sir Sidney Lee, in _Shakespeare's
+England_, 1916) have confused the Cockpit at Whitehall with the Royal
+Cockpit in St. James's Park. Exactly when the latter was built I have
+not been able to discover, but it was probably erected near the close
+of the seventeenth century. It stood at the end of Dartmouth Street,
+adjacent to Birdcage Walk, but not in the Park itself. John Strype, in
+his edition of Stow's _Survey_ (1720), bk. VI, p. 64, says of
+Dartmouth Street: "And here is a very fine Cockpit, called the King's
+Cockpit, well resorted unto." A picture of the building is given by
+Strype on page 62, and a still better picture may be found in J.T.
+Smith's _The Antiquities of Westminster_. The Royal Cockpit in
+Dartmouth Street survived until 1816, when it was torn down. Hogarth,
+in his famous representation of a cock-fight, shows its interior as
+circular, and as embellished with the royal coat of arms. Another
+interesting picture of the interior will be found in Ackermann's _The
+Microcosm of London_ (1808). It is needless to add that this building
+had nothing whatever to do with the theatre royal of the days of King
+Charles.]
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XXI
+
+MISCELLANEOUS
+
+
+I
+
+WOLF'S THEATRE IN NIGHTINGALE LANE, NEAR EAST SMITHFIELD
+
+In Jeaffreson's _Middlesex County Records_ (I, 260), we find the
+following entry, dated April 1, 1600:
+
+ 1 April, 42 Elizabeth.--Recognizance, taken before Sir John
+ Peyton knt., Lieutenant of the Tower of London, and Thomas
+ Fowler, Tobias Woode, Edward Vaghan and Henry Thoresby
+ esqs., Justices of the Peace, of John Wolf, of
+ Eastsmithfield, co. Midd., stationer, in the sum of forty
+ pounds; The condition of the recognizance being "that,
+ whereas the above-bounden John Wolf hath begun to erect and
+ build a playhouse in Nightingale Lane near East Smithfield
+ aforesaid, contrary to Her Majesty's proclamation and orders
+ set down in Her Highness's Court of Starchamber. If
+ therefore the said John Wolf do not proceed any further in
+ building or erecting of the same playhouse, unless he shall
+ procure sufficient warrant from the Rt. Honourable the Lords
+ of Her Majesty's most honourable Privy Council for further
+ ... then this recognizance to be void, or else to remain in
+ full force."
+
+The only stationer in London named John Wolf was the printer and
+publisher who at this time had his shop in Pope's Head Alley, Lombard
+Street. For several reasons he is well known to bibliographers; and
+his strong personality and tireless energy might easily have led him
+into the field of the theatre. For many years he was a member of the
+Fishmongers' Company, to which also, in all probability, his father
+had belonged. After a ten years' apprenticeship with the eminent
+printer, John Day, he spent several years abroad "gadding from country
+to country," but learning the printing trade from the best
+establishments on the Continent. His longest stay was in Italy, where
+he was connected with the printing-office of the Giunti, and also, it
+seems, of Gabriel Giolito. In 1576 he printed two _Rappresentazioni_,
+"ad instanzia di Giovanni Vuolfio, Inglese." About the year 1579 he
+established himself in London (where he was dubbed by his fellows
+"Machiavel"), and began an energetic warfare on the monopolies secured
+by certain favored printers. The fact that he was for a time
+"committed to the Clink" failed to deter him. We are told that he
+"affirmed openly in the Stationers' Hall that it was lawful for all
+men to print all lawful books, what commandment soever Her Majesty
+gave to the contrary." And being "admonished that he, being but one,
+so mean a man, should not presume to contrary Her Highness'
+government: 'Tush,' said he, 'Luther was but one man, and reformed all
+the world for religion, and I am _that one man_ that must and will
+reform the government in this trade.'" The courage and energy here
+revealed characterized his entire life. In 1583 he was admitted a
+freeman of the Company of Stationers. In 1593 he was elected Printer
+to the City. In the spring of 1600 he was in serious difficulties with
+the authorities over the printing of John Hayward's _Life and Raigne
+of King Henrie IV_, and was forced to spend two weeks in jail. He died
+in 1601.[686]
+
+[Footnote 686: For the life of John Wolf see the following: Edward
+Arber, _A Transcript of the Stationers' Registers_, especially II,
+779-93; _The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1598-1601_, pp. 405,
+449, 450; A. Gerber, _All of the Five Fictitious Italian Editions_,
+etc. (in _Modern Language Notes_, XXII (1907), 2, 129, 201); H.R.
+Plomer, _An Examination of Some Existing Copies of Hayward's "Life and
+Raigne of King Henrie IV_" (in _The Library_, N.S., III (1902), 13);
+R.B. McKerrow, _A Dictionary of Printers and Booksellers ...
+1557-1640_; S. Bongi, _Annali di Gabriel Giolito de' Ferrari_.]
+
+If this "John Wolf, stationer," be the man who started to erect a
+playhouse in East Smithfield, it is to be regretted that we do not
+know more about the causes which led him into the undertaking.
+
+
+II
+
+THE PROJECTED "AMPHITHEATRE"
+
+In 1620 John Cotton, John Williams, and Thomas Dixon[687] secured from
+King James a license to build an amphitheatre[688] "intended
+principally for martiall exercises, and extraordinary shows and
+solemnities for ambassadors, and persons of honor and quality," with
+the power granted to the owners to order "a cessation from other shows
+and sports, for one day in a month only, upon fourteen days' warning."
+
+[Footnote 687: Of these men nothing is known; something, however, may
+be inferred from the following entries in Sir Henry Herbert's
+Office-Book: "On the 20th August, 1623, a license _gratis_, to John
+Williams and four others, to make _show_ of _an Elephant_, for a year;
+on the 5th of September to make show of a _live Beaver_; on the 9th of
+June, 1638, to make show of an outlandish creature, called a
+_Possum_." (George Chalmers, _Supplemental Apology_, p. 208.)]
+
+[Footnote 688: The place is not indicated, but it was probably outside
+the city.]
+
+But for some reason the King suddenly changed his mind, and on
+September 29, 1620, he addressed a letter to the Privy Council
+directing them to cancel the license:[689]
+
+ Right trusty and right well-beloved Cousins and Councellors,
+ and right trusty and well-beloved Councellors, we greet you
+ well. Whereas at the humble suit of our servants John
+ Cotton, John Williams, and Thomas Dixon, and in recompence
+ of their services, we have been pleased to license them to
+ build an Amphitheatre, which hath passed our Signet and is
+ stayed at our Privy Seal; and finding therein contained some
+ such words and clauses, as may, in some constructions, seem
+ to give them greater liberty both in point of building and
+ using of exercises than is any way to be permitted, or was
+ ever by us intended, we have thought fit to command and give
+ authority unto you, or any four of you, to cause that
+ already passed to be cancelled, and to give order unto our
+ Solicitor General for the drawing up of a new warrant for
+ our signature to the same parties, according to such
+ directions and reservations as herewith we send you. Wherein
+ we are more particular, both in the affirmative and the
+ negative, to the end that, as on one side we would have
+ nothing pass us to remain upon record which either for the
+ form might not become us or for the substance might cross
+ our many proclamations (pursued with good success) for
+ buildings, or, on the other side, might give them cause to
+ importune us after they had been at charges; to which end we
+ wish that you call them before you and let them know our
+ pleasure and resolution therein.
+
+[Footnote 689: See _State Papers, Domestic, 1619-1623_, p. 181. I have
+quoted the letter from Collier, _The History of English Dramatic
+Poetry_ (1879), I, 408.]
+
+Accordingly the license was canceled, and no new license was issued.
+
+In 1626, however, John Williams and Thomas Dixon (what had become of
+John Cotton we do not know) made an attempt to secure a license from
+King Charles, then newly come to the throne, to erect an amphitheatre
+in Lincoln's Inn Fields. Apparently they so worded the proposed grant
+as to authorize them to present in their amphitheatre not only
+spectacles, but dramatic performances and animal-baitings as well,
+with the power to restrain all other places of amusement for one day
+in each week, on giving two days' warning.
+
+A "bill" to this effect was drawn up and submitted to Thomas Coventry,
+the Lord Keeper, who examined it hastily, and dispatched it to Lord
+Conway with the following letter:[690]
+
+ _My very good Lord_,--I have perused this Bill, and do call
+ to mind that about three or four years past when I was
+ Attorney General, a patent for an Amphitheatre was in hand
+ to have passed; but upon this sudden, without search of my
+ papers, I cannot give your lordship any account of the true
+ cause wherefore it did not pass, nor whether that and this
+ do vary in substance: neither am I apt upon a sudden to take
+ impertinent exceptions to anything that is to pass, much
+ less to a thing that is recommended by so good a friend. But
+ if upon perusal of my papers which I had while I was
+ Attorney, or upon more serious thoughts, I shall observe
+ anything worthy to be represented to His Majesty, or to the
+ Council, I shall then acquaint your lordship; and in the
+ meantime I would be loath to be the author of a motion to
+ His Majesty to stay it: but if you find His Majesty at
+ fitting leisure, to move him that he will give leave to
+ think of it in this sort as I have written, it may do well;
+ and I assure your lordship, unless I find matter of more
+ consequence than I observe on this sudden, it is not like to
+ be stayed. And so I rest your lordship's very assured to do
+ you service,
+
+ THO. COVENTRYE, CH.
+
+ CANBURY, 12 _August_, 1626.
+
+[Footnote 690: Collier, _op. cit._, I, 443.]
+
+Apparently some very influential person was urging the passage of the
+bill. But the scheme soon evoked the bitter opposition of the various
+troupes of players, and of the owners of the various theatres and
+other places of amusement. An echo of the quarrel is found in
+Marmion's _Holland's Leaguer_, II, iii:
+
+ Twill dead all my device in making matches,
+ My plots of architecture, and erecting
+ New amphitheatres to draw custom
+ From playhouses once a week, and so pull
+ A curse upon my head from the poor scoundrels.[691]
+
+[Footnote 691: _The Dramatic Works of Shackerley Marmion_, in
+_Dramatists of the Restoration_, p. 37. Fleay (_A Biographical
+Chronicle of the English Drama_, II, 66) suggests that the impostors
+Agurtes and Autolichus are meant to satirize Williams and Dixon
+respectively.]
+
+The "poor scoundrels"--i.e., the players--seem to have caused the
+authorities to examine the bill more closely; and on September 28,
+1626, the Lord Keeper sent to Lord Conway a second letter in which he
+condemned the measure in strong terms:[692]
+
+ _My Lord_,--According to His Majesty's good pleasure, which
+ I received from your lordship, I have considered of the
+ grant desired by John Williams and Thomas Dixon for building
+ an Amphitheatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields; and comparing it
+ with that which was propounded in King James his time, do
+ find much difference between them: for that former was
+ intended principally for martiall exercises, and
+ extraordinary shows, and solemnities for ambassadors and
+ persons of honor and quality, with a cessation from other
+ shows and sports for one day in a month only, upon 14 days'
+ warning: whereas by this new grant I see little probability
+ of anything to be used but common plays, or ordinary sports
+ now used or showed at the Bear Garden or the common
+ playhouses about London, for all sorts of beholders, with a
+ restraint to all other plays and shows for one day in the
+ week upon two days' warning: with liberty to erect their
+ buildings in Lincoln's Inn Fields, where there are too many
+ buildings already; and which place in the late King's time
+ upon a petition exhibited by the Prince's comedians for
+ setting up a playhouse there, was certified by eleven
+ Justices of Peace under their hands to be very inconvenient.
+ And therefore, not holding this new grant fit to pass, as
+ being no other in effect but to translate the playhouses and
+ Bear Garden from the Bankside to a place much more unfit, I
+ thought fit to give your lordship these reasons for it;
+ wherewithal you may please to acquaint His Majesty, if there
+ shall be cause. And so remain your lordship's very assured
+ friend to do you service,
+
+ THO. COVENTRYE.
+
+ CANBURY, 28 _Sept._, 1626.
+ LO. CONWAY.
+
+[Footnote 692: I quote the letter from Collier, _The History of
+English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 444.]
+
+On the letter Lord Conway has written the indorsement: "That it is
+unfit the grant for the Amphitheatre should passe." And such, no
+doubt, was the ultimate decision of the Privy Council, for we hear
+nothing more of the project.
+
+
+III
+
+OGILBY'S DUBLIN THEATRE
+
+In 1635 a playhouse was opened in Dublin by John
+Ogilby,--dancing-master, theatrical manager, playwright, scholar,
+translator, poet,--now best known, perhaps, for the ridicule he
+inspired in Dryden's _MacFlecknoe_ and Pope's _Dunciad_. At the
+beginning of his versatile career he was a successful London
+dancing-master, popular with "the nobility and gentry." When Thomas
+Earl of Strafford was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, he took
+Ogilby with him to Dublin, to teach his wife and children the art of
+dancing, and also to help with the secretarial duties. Under
+Strafford's patronage, Ogilby was appointed to the post of Master of
+the Revels for Ireland; and in this capacity he built a small
+playhouse in Dublin and began to cultivate dramatic representations
+after the manner of London. Anthony à Wood in _Athenæ Oxonienses_,
+says:
+
+ He built a little theatre to act plays in, in St. Warburg's
+ street in Dublin, and was then and there valued by all
+ ingenious men for his great industry in promoting morality
+ and ingenuity.[693]
+
+[Footnote 693: Bliss's edition, III, 741.]
+
+Aubrey writes:
+
+ He had a warrant from the Lord Lieutenant to be Master of
+ the Ceremonies for that kingdom; and built a pretty[694]
+ little theatre in St. Warburgh Street in Dublin.
+
+[Footnote 694: "Pretty little theatre" is the reading of _MS. Aubr.
+7_, folio 20; _MS. Aubr. 8_ omits the adjective "pretty." For Aubrey's
+full account of Ogilby see Andrew Clark's _Brief Lives_ (1898), 2
+vols.]
+
+The history of this "little theatre" is not known in detail. For its
+actors Ogilby himself wrote at least one play, entitled _The Merchant
+of Dublin_,[695] and Henry Burnell a tragi-comedy entitled
+_Landgartha_, printed in 1641 "as it was presented in the new theatre
+in Dublin with good applause." But its chief playwright was James
+Shirley, who came to Dublin in 1636 under the patronage of the Earl of
+Kildare. For the Irish stage he wrote _The Royal Master_, published in
+1638 as "acted in the new theatre in Dublin"; _Rosania, or Love's
+Victory_, now known as _The Doubtful Heir_, under which title it was
+later printed; _St. Patrick for Ireland_;[696] and in all probability
+_The Constant Maid_.[697] The actors, however, had little need to buy
+original plays, for they were free, no doubt, to take any of the
+numerous London successes. From Shirley's _Poems_ we learn that they
+were presenting Jonson's _Alchemist_, Middleton's _No Wit_, two of
+Fletcher's plays, unnamed, and two anonymous plays entitled _The Toy_
+and _The General_; and we may fairly assume that they honored several
+of Shirley's early plays in the same way.
+
+[Footnote 695: Aubrey mentions this as having been "written in Dublin,
+and never printed."]
+
+[Footnote 696: Published in 1640 as "the first part," and both the
+Prologue and the Epilogue speak of a second part; but no second part
+was printed, and in all probability it never was written.]
+
+[Footnote 697: Never licensed for England; reprinted in 1657 with _St.
+Patrick for Ireland_.]
+
+The theatre came to a sudden end with the outbreak of the rebellion in
+1641. In October the Lords Justices prohibited playing there; and
+shortly after, we are told, the building was "ruined and spoiled, and
+a cow-house made of the stage."[698]
+
+[Footnote 698: _MS. Aubr. 7_, folio 20 v. Ogilby's second theatre in
+Dublin, built after the Restoration, does not fall within the scope of
+the present work.]
+
+
+IV
+
+THE FRENCH PLAYERS' TEMPORARY THEATRE IN DRURY LANE
+
+In February, 1635, a company of French players, under the leadership
+of the eminent actor, Josias de Soulas, better known by his stage-name
+of Floridor,[699] appeared in London, and won such favor at Court that
+they were ultimately allowed to fit up a house in Drury Lane for a
+temporary theatre. The history of these players is mainly found in the
+records of the Master of the Revels and of the Lord Chamberlain. From
+the former, Malone has preserved the following entries by Herbert:
+
+ On Tuesday night the 17 of February, 1634 [i.e., 1635], a
+ French company of players, being approved of by the Queen at
+ her house two nights before, and commended by Her Majesty to
+ the King, were admitted to the Cockpitt in Whitehall, and
+ there presented the King and Queen with a French comedy
+ called _Melise_,[700] with good approbation: for which play
+ the King gave them ten pounds.
+
+ This day being Friday, and the 20 of the same month, the
+ King told me his pleasure, and commanded me to give order
+ that this French company should play the two sermon days in
+ the week during their time of playing in Lent [i.e.,
+ Wednesdays and Fridays, on which days during Lent the
+ English companies were not allowed to play], and in the
+ house of Drury Lane [i.e., the Cockpit Playhouse], where the
+ Queen's Players usually play. The King's pleasure I
+ signified to Mr. Beeston [the manager of the Cockpit] the
+ same day, who obeyed readily. The housekeepers are to give
+ them by promise the benefit of their interest[701] for the
+ two days of the first week. They had the benefit of playing
+ on the sermon days, and got two hundred pounds at least;
+ besides many rich clothes were given them. They had freely
+ to themselves the whole week before the week before
+ Easter,[702] which I obtained of the King for them.
+
+[Footnote 699: See Frederick Hawkins, _Annals of the French Stage_
+(1884), I, 148 ff., for the career of this player on the French stage.
+"Every gift required by the actor," says Hawkins, "was possessed by
+Floridor."]
+
+[Footnote 700: _La Melise, ou Les Princes Reconnus_, by Du Rocher,
+first acted in Paris in 1633; see _The Athenæum_, July 11, 1891, p.
+73; and cf. _ibid._, p. 139.]
+
+[Footnote 701: "Housekeepers" were owners, who always demanded of the
+players as rental for the building a certain part of each day's
+takings. The passage quoted means that the housekeepers allowed the
+French players to receive _all_ money taken on the two sermon days of
+the _first_ week, and after that exacted their usual share as rental
+for the building.]
+
+[Footnote 702: That is, Passion Week, during which time the English
+companies were never allowed to give performances.]
+
+The use of the Cockpit in Drury Lane came to an end at Easter, for the
+Queen's own troupe, under Beeston's management, regularly occupied
+that building. But the King summoned the French players to act at
+Court on several occasions. Thus Herbert records:
+
+ The 4 April, on Easter Monday,[703] they played the
+ _Trompeur Puny_[704] with better approbation than the
+ other.
+
+ On Wednesday night, the 16 April,[705] 1635, the French
+ played _Alcimedor_[706] with good approbation.[707]
+
+[Footnote 703: This must be an error, for Easter Monday fell on March
+30.]
+
+[Footnote 704: _Le Trompeur Puni, ou Histoire Septentrionale_, by
+Scuderi.]
+
+[Footnote 705: Wednesday was the 15th.]
+
+[Footnote 706: _Alcimedon_, by Duryer.]
+
+[Footnote 707: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 121, note.]
+
+Clearly these actors were in high favor at Court. Sir Henry, who did
+not as a rule show any hesitancy in accepting fees, notes in the
+margin of his book: "The French offered me a present of £10; but I
+refused it, and did them many other courtesies gratis to render the
+Queen my mistress an acceptable service." In view of this royal favor,
+it is not surprising to find that, after they were driven from the
+Cockpit, they received permission to fit up a temporary playhouse in
+the manage, or riding-school, of one M. Le Febure, in Drury Lane. The
+Lord Chamberlain's Office-Book contains the following entry on the
+subject:
+
+ 18 April, 1635: His Majesty hath commanded me to signify his
+ royal pleasure that the French comedians (having agreed with
+ Mons. le Febure) may erect a stage, scaffolds, and seats,
+ and all other accommodations which shall be convenient, and
+ act and present interludes and stage plays at his house [and
+ manage[708]] in Drury Lane, during His Majesty's pleasure,
+ without any disturbance, hindrance, or interruption. And
+ this shall be to them, and Mr. le Febure, and to all others,
+ a sufficient discharge, &c.[709]
+
+[Footnote 708: This clause I insert from Mrs. Stopes's notes on the
+Lord Chamberlain's records, in the Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 97.]
+
+[Footnote 709: I have chosen to reproduce the record from Chalmers's
+_Apology_, p. 506, note _s_, rather than from Mrs. Stopes's apparently
+less accurate notes in the Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 97.]
+
+Apparently the players lost little time in fitting up the building,
+for we read in Herbert's Office-Book:
+
+ A warrant granted to Josias D'Aunay,[710] Hurfries de Lau,
+ and others, for to act plays at a new house in Drury Lane,
+ during pleasure, the 5 May, 1635.
+
+ The King was pleased to command my Lord Chamberlain to
+ direct his warrant to Monsieur Le Fevure, to give him a
+ power to contract with the Frenchmen for to build a
+ playhouse in the manage-house, which was done accordingly by
+ my advice and allowance.[711]
+
+[Footnote 710: Should we place a comma after "Josias"? That "Josias
+Floridor" was the leader of the troupe we know from two separate
+entries; cf. Chalmers, _Apology_, pp. 508, 509.]
+
+[Footnote 711: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 122, note.]
+
+In Glapthorne's _The Ladies' Priviledge_ is a good-natured allusion to
+the French Company and their vivacious style of acting:[712]
+
+ _La._ But, Adorni,
+ What think you of the French?
+
+ _Ador._ Very airy people, who participate
+ More fire than earth; yet generally good,
+ And nobly disposition'd, something inclining
+ To over-weening fancy. This lady
+ Tells my remembrance of a comic scene
+ I once saw in their Theatre.
+
+ _Bon._ Add it to
+ Your former courtesies, and express it.
+
+[Footnote 712: Act II, Scene i. This passage is pointed out by
+Lawrence, _The Elizabethan Playhouse_, p. 137.]
+
+Whereupon, according to the stage direction, Adorni "acts furiously."
+
+In the margin of his Office-Book Sir Henry Herbert writes
+complacently: "These Frenchmen were commended unto me by the Queen,
+and have passed through my hands gratis." This was indeed a rare favor
+from Herbert; but they did not so easily escape his deputy, William
+Blagrove, who accepted from them the sum of "three pounds for his
+pains."
+
+How long the French actors occupied their temporary playhouse in Drury
+Lane is not clear. In the Lord Chamberlain's book we find an entry
+showing that they presented a play at Court in December, 1635:
+"Warrant to pay £10 to Josias Floridor for himself and the rest of the
+French players for a tragedy by them played before His Majesty Dec.
+last."[713] The entry is dated January 8, 1636, and, so far as I can
+discover, this is the last reference to the French players in London.
+We may suppose that shortly after this they returned to Paris.
+
+[Footnote 713: Stopes, _op. cit._, p. 98, Chalmers, _Apology_, p.
+509.]
+
+
+V
+
+DAVENANT'S PROJECTED THEATRE IN FLEET STREET
+
+On March 26, 1639, William Davenant, who had succeeded Ben Jonson as
+Poet Laureate, secured from King Charles a royal patent under the
+Great Seal of England to erect a playhouse in Fleet Street, to be used
+not only for regular plays, but also for "musical entertainments" and
+"scenic representations." Davenant, as we know, was especially
+interested in "the art of perspective in scenes," and also in the
+Italian _opera musicale_. The royal patent--unusually verbose even for
+a patent--is printed in full in Rymer's _Foedera_, XX, 377; I cite
+below all the essential passages:
+
+ [_The Building._] Know ye, that we, of our especial grace,
+ certain knowledge, and meere motion, and upon the humble
+ petition of our servant William Davenant, gentleman, have
+ given and granted, and by these presents, for us, our heirs,
+ and successors, do give and grant unto the said William
+ Davenant, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns,
+ full power, license, and authority ... to frame, new-build,
+ and set up ... a Theatre or Playhouse, with necessary tiring
+ and retiring rooms, and other places convenient, containing
+ in the whole forty yards square at the most,[714] wherein
+ plays, musical entertainments, scenes, or other like
+ presentments may be presented ... so as the outwalls of the
+ said Theatre or Playhouse, tiring or retiring rooms, be made
+ or built of brick or stone, according to the tenor of our
+ proclamations in that behalf.
+
+ [_Its Location._] Upon a parcel of ground lying near unto or
+ behind the Three Kings Ordinary in Fleet Street, in the
+ parishes of Saint Dunstan's in the West, London, or in Saint
+ Bride's, London, or in either of them; or in any other
+ ground in or about that place, or in the whole street
+ aforesaid, already allotted to him for that use, or in any
+ other place that is or hereafter shall be assigned or
+ allotted out to the said William Davenant by our right
+ trusty and right well-beloved cousin and counsellor Thomas,
+ Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Earl Marshall of England, or any
+ other of our commissioners for building for that time being
+ in that behalf.
+
+ [_Its Uses._] And we do hereby, for us, our heirs, and
+ successors, grant to the said William Davenant, his heirs,
+ executors, administrators, and assigns, that it shall and
+ may be lawful to and for him, the said William Davenant, his
+ heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, from time to
+ time to gather together, entertain, govern, privilege, and
+ keep, such and so many players and persons, to exercise
+ action, musical presentments, scenes, dancing, and the like,
+ as he, the said William Davenant, his heirs, executors,
+ administrators, and assigns shall think fit and approve for
+ the said house; and such persons to permit and continue at
+ and during the pleasure of the said William Davenant, his
+ heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, from time to
+ time to act plays in such house so to be by him or them
+ erected; and exercise music, musical presentments, scenes,
+ dancing, or other the like, at the same, or other, hours, or
+ times, or after plays are ended,[715] peaceably and quietly,
+ without the impeachment or impediment of any person or
+ persons whatsoever, for the honest recreation of such as
+ shall desire to see the same. And that it shall and may be
+ lawful to and for the said William Davenant, his heirs,
+ executors, administrators, and assigns, to take and receive
+ of such our subjects as shall resort to see or hear any such
+ plays, scenes, and entertainments whatsoever, such sum or
+ sums of money as is, are, or hereafter from time to time
+ shall be accustomed to be given or taken in other playhouses
+ and places for the like plays, scenes, presentments, and
+ entertainments.
+
+[Footnote 714: The Fortune was only eighty feet square, but the stage
+projected to the middle of the yard. Davenant probably wished to
+provide for an alcove stage of sufficient depth to accommodate his
+"scenes."]
+
+[Footnote 715: That is, he may give his "musical presentments," etc.,
+either at the hours when he was accustomed to give plays, or after his
+plays are ended. This does not necessarily imply evening
+entertainments.]
+
+The novelty of the scheme and the great size of the proposed building
+must have alarmed the owners of playhouses. That the established
+theatrical proprietors were hostile is clearly indicated by the
+attitude of Richard Heton, one of the Sewers of the Chamber to Queen
+Henrietta, and at the time manager of the Salisbury Court Playhouse.
+In September, 1639, he wrote out a document entitled "Instructions for
+my Patent," in which he advanced reasons why he should receive the
+sole power to elect the members of the Queen's Company of Players. He
+observes that under the existing arrangement the company was free to
+leave the Salisbury Court Playhouse at their pleasure, "as in one year
+and a half of their being here they have many times threatened"; and
+he concludes by adding: "and one now of the chief fellows [i.e.,
+sharers of the company], an agent for one [William Davenant] that hath
+got a grant from the King for the building of a new playhouse which
+was intended to be in Fleet Street, which no man can judge that a
+fellow of our Company, and a well-wisher to those that own the house,
+would ever be an actor in."[716] Doubtless the owners of other houses
+had the same sentiments, and exercised what influence they possessed
+against the scheme. But the most serious opposition in all probability
+came from the citizens and merchants living in the neighborhood. We
+know how bitterly they complained about the coaches that brought
+playgoers to the small Blackfriars Theatre, and how strenuously from
+year to year they sought the expulsion of the King's Men from the
+precinct.[717] They certainly would not have regarded with complacency
+the erection in their midst of a still larger theatre.
+
+[Footnote 716: Cunningham, _The Whitefriars Theatre_, in _The
+Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV, 96.]
+
+[Footnote 717: See the chapter on the Second Blackfriars.]
+
+Whatever the opposition, it was so powerful that on October 2 Davenant
+was compelled to make an indenture by which he virtually
+renounced[718] for himself and his heirs for ever the right to build a
+theatre in Fleet Street, or in any other place "in or near the cities,
+or suburbs of the cities, of London or Westminster," without further
+and special permission granted. This document, first printed by
+Chalmers in his _Supplemental Apology_, is as follows:
+
+ This indenture made the second day of October, in the
+ fifteenth year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord Charles,
+ by the grace of God, of England, Scotland, France, and
+ Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, &c. _Anno Domini_ 1639.
+ Between the said King's most excellent Majesty of the first
+ part, and William Davenant of London, Gent., of the other
+ part. Whereas the said King's most excellent Majesty, by His
+ Highness's letters patents under the Great Seal of England
+ bearing date the six and twentieth day of March last past
+ before the date of these presents, did give and grant unto
+ the said William Davenant, his heirs, executors,
+ administrators, and assigns full power, license, and
+ authority that he, they, and every of them, by him and
+ themselves and by all and every such person or persons as he
+ or they shall depute or appoint, and his and their laborers,
+ servants, and workmen, shall and may lawfully, quietly, and
+ peaceably frame, erect, new build, and set up upon a parcel
+ of ground lying near unto or behind the Three Kings Ordinary
+ in Fleet Street in the Parish of St. Dunstan's in the West,
+ London, or in St. Bride's London, or in either of them, or
+ in any other ground in or about that place, or in the whole
+ street aforesaid, already allotted to him for that use, or
+ in any other place that is or hereafter shall be assigned
+ and allotted out to the said William Davenant by the Right
+ Honorable Thomas, Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Earl Marshall
+ of England, or any other His Majesty's Commissioners for
+ Building, for the time being in that behalf, a theatre or
+ playhouse with necessary tiring and retiring rooms and other
+ places convenient, containing in the whole forty yards
+ square at the most, wherein plays, musical entertainments,
+ scenes, or other the like presentments may be presented by
+ and under certain provisors or conditions in the same
+ contained, as in and by the said letters patents, whereunto
+ relation being had more fully and at large, it doth and may
+ appear.
+
+ Now this indenture witnesseth, and the said William Davenant
+ doth by these presents declare, His Majesty's intent,
+ meaning at and upon the granting of the said license was and
+ is that he, the said William Davenant, his heirs,
+ executors, administrators nor assigns should not frame,
+ build, or set up the said theatre or playhouse in any place
+ inconvenient, and that the said parcel of ground lying near
+ unto or behind the Three Kings Ordinary in Fleet Street in
+ the said Parish of St. Dunstan's in the West, London, or in
+ St. Bride's, London, or in either of them, or in any other
+ ground in or about that place, or in the whole street
+ aforesaid, and is sithence found inconvenient and unfit for
+ that purpose, therefore the said William Davenant doth for
+ himself his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns,
+ and every of them, covenant, promise, and agree to and with
+ our said Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs and successors,
+ that he, the said William Davenant, his heirs, executors,
+ administrators, nor assigns shall not, nor will not, by
+ virtue of the said license and authority to him granted as
+ aforesaid, frame, erect, new build, or set up upon the said
+ parcel of ground in Fleet Street aforesaid, or in any other
+ part of Fleet Street, a theatre or playhouse, nor will not
+ frame, erect, new build, or set up upon any other parcel of
+ ground lying in or near the cities, or suburbs of the
+ cities, of London or Westminster any theatre or playhouse,
+ unless the said place shall be first approved and allowed by
+ warrant under His Majesty's sign manual, or by writing under
+ the hand and seal of the said Right Honorable Thomas, Earl
+ of Arundel and Surrey. In witness whereof to the one part of
+ this indenture the said William Davenant hath set his hand
+ and seal the day and year first above written.
+
+ WILLIAM DAVENANT. L.S.
+
+ Signed sealed and delivered
+ in the presence of
+ Edw. Penruddoks.
+ Michael Baker.
+
+[Footnote 718: That he did not actually surrender the patent is shown
+by the fact that he claimed privileges by virtue of it after the
+Restoration; see Halliwell-Phillipps, _A Collection of Ancient
+Documents_, p. 48.]
+
+Possibly as a recompense for this surrender of his rights, Davenant
+was made Governor of the King's and Queen's Servants at the Cockpit in
+June of the following year; and from this time until the suppression
+of acting in 1642, he expended his energies in managing the affairs of
+this important playhouse.
+
+
+
+
+BIBLIOGRAPHY
+
+
+[In the following list are included the books and articles
+constituting the main authorities upon which the present study is
+based. The list is not intended to be an exhaustive bibliography,
+though from the nature of the case it is fairly complete. For the
+guidance of scholars the more important titles are marked with
+asterisks. It will be seen that not all the works are included which
+are cited in the text, or referred to in footnotes; the list, in fact,
+is strictly confined to works bearing upon the history of the
+pre-Restoration playhouses. Considerations of space have led to the
+omission of a large number of books dealing with the topography of
+London, and of the counties of Middlesex and Surrey, although a
+knowledge of these is essential to any thorough study of the
+playhouses. Furthermore, titles of contemporary plays, pamphlets, and
+treatises are excluded, except a few of unusual and general value.
+Finally, discussions of the structure of the early stage, of the
+manner of dramatic performances in the time of Shakespeare, and of the
+travels of English actors on the Continent are omitted, except when
+these contain also material important for the study of the theatres.
+At the close is appended a select list of early maps and views of
+London.]
+
+[Transcriber's Note: In the original book, the numbers of the entries
+below are at the end of the entry at the right margin, preceded by a
+single square bracket. For the sake of clarity, in this e-book the
+entries below are numbered at the left margin without the bracket.]
+
+
+*1. _Actors Remonstrance, or Complaint for the Silencing of their
+Profession._ London, 1643. (Reprinted in W.C. Hazlitt's _The English
+Drama and Stage_, and in E.W. Ashbee's _Facsimile Reprints_.)
+
+*2. ADAMS, J.Q. The Conventual Buildings of Blackfriars, London, and
+the Playhouses Constructed Therein. (The University of North Carolina
+_Studies in Philology_, XIV, 64.)
+
+3. ---- The Four Pictorial Representations of the Elizabethan Stage.
+_(The Journal of English and Germanic Philology_, X, 329.)
+
+*4. ---- _The Dramatic Records of Sir Henry Herbert, Master of the
+Revels 1623-1673._ New Haven, 1917.
+
+5. ---- Lordinge (_alias_ "Lodowick") Barry. (_Modern Philology_, IX,
+567. See No. 189.)
+
+6. ALBRECHT, H.A. _Das englische Kindertheater._ Halle, 1883.
+
+7. ARCHER, T. _The Highway of Letters._ London, 1893. (Chap. XV,
+"Whitefriars and the Playhouses.")
+
+8. ARCHER, W. The Fortune Theatre. (The London _Tribune_, October 12,
+1907; reprinted in _New Shakespeariana_, October, 1908, and in the
+Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLIV, 159. See also Nos. 8, 38, 61, 129.)
+
+9. ---- A Sixteenth Century Playhouse. (_The Universal Review_, June,
+1888, p. 281. Deals with the De Witt drawing of the Swan.)
+
+10. ARONSTEIN, P. Die Organisation des englischen Schauspiels im
+Zeitalter Shakespeares. (_Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift_, II,
+165, 216.)
+
+11. AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM. Cunningham's Extracts from the Revels' Books.
+(_The Athenæum_, 1911, II, 101, 130, 421; 1912, I, 469, 654; II, 143.
+See Nos. 80, 179, 180, 183.)
+
+12. BAKER, G.P. The Children of Powles. (_The Harvard Monthly_, May,
+1891.)
+
+13. ---- _The Development of Shakespeare as a Dramatist._ New York,
+1907.
+
+14. BAKER, H.B. _History of the London Stage and its Famous Players._
+London and New York, 1904. (A new and rewritten edition of _The London
+Stage_. 2 vols. London, 1889.)
+
+15. ---- _Our Old Actors._ 2 vols. London, 1881. (There was an earlier
+edition, London, 1878, printed in New York, 1879, with the title,
+_English Actors from Shakespeare to Macready_.)
+
+16. BAPST, C.G. _Essai sur l'Histoire du Théâtre._ Paris, 1893.
+
+17. BARRETT, C.R.B. _The History of the Society of Apothecaries of
+London._ London, 1905.
+
+BEAR GARDEN AND HOPE. See Nos. 27, 72, 99, 119, 143, 144, 147, 152,
+157, 198, 221, 222, 223, 228, 236, 238, 239, 240, 241, 274, 281, 303,
+304, 316.
+
+*18. BELL, H. Contributions to the History of the English Playhouse.
+(_The Architectural Record_, March and April, 1913.)
+
+19. BELL, W.G. _Fleet Street in Seven Centuries._ London, 1912. (Chap.
+XIV, "The Whitefriars Playhouses.")
+
+20. BESANT, SIR W. _Mediæval London._ _London in the Time of the
+Tudors._ _London in the Time of the Stuarts._ 4 vols. London, 1903-06.
+
+21. BINZ, G. Deutsche Besucher im Shakespeare'schen London. (_Beilage
+zur Allgemeinen Zeitung._ München, August, 1902.)
+
+22. ---- Londoner Theater und Schauspiele im Jahre 1599. (_Anglia_,
+XXII, 456.)
+
+*23. BIRCH, T. AND R.F. WILLIAMS. _The Court and Times of James the
+First._ 2 vols. London, 1849.
+
+BLACKFRIARS, FIRST AND SECOND. See Nos. 2, 6, 17, 20, 26, 34, 41, 42,
+43, 59, 61, 72, 90, 97, 100, 101, 105, 106, 108, 119, 136, 137, 146,
+150, 163, 178, 179, 191, 196, 201, 214, 218, 223, 244, 248, 287, 288,
+289, 293, 296, 297, 298.
+
+24. BLANCH, W.H. _Dulwich College and Edward Alleyn._ London, 1877.
+
+25. BOLINGBROKE, L.G. Pre-Elizabethan Plays and Players in Norfolk.
+(_Norfolk Archæology_, XI, 336.)
+
+26. BOND, R.W. _The Complete Works of John Lyly._ 3 vols. Oxford,
+1902.
+
+27. BOULTON, W.B. _The Amusements of Old London._ 2 vols. London,
+1901.
+
+*28. BRAINES, W.W. _Holywell Priory and the Site of the Theatre,
+Shoreditch._ London, 1915. (Part XLIII of _Indications of Houses of
+Historical Interest in London_, issued by the London County Council.)
+
+BRAND, J. See No. 157.
+
+29. BRANDES, G. _William Shakespeare._ Translated by William Archer. 2
+vols. London, 1898.
+
+30. BRAYLEY, E.W. _Historical and Descriptive Accounts of the Theatres
+of London._ London, 1826. (Brief notice of the Cockpit in Drury Lane;
+relates chiefly to Restoration theatres.)
+
+31. BRERETON, J. LE G. De Witt at the Swan. (_A Book of Homage to
+Shakespeare._ Oxford, 1916, p. 204.)
+
+32. BRUCE, J. Who was "Will, my lord of Leycester's jesting player"?
+(_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, I, 88.)
+
+33. BULLEN, G. The Cockpit or Phoenix Theatre in 1660. (_The
+Athenæum_, May 21, 1881, p. 699.)
+
+*34. BÜLOW, G. VON AND W. POWELL. _Diary of the Journey of Philip
+Julius, Duke of Stettin-Pomerania, through England in the year 1602._
+(_Transactions of the Royal Historical Society_, New Series, VI. See
+No. 146.)
+
+*35. _Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, 1547-1660._ London,
+1856-. (See also No. 192.)
+
+36. _Calendar of the Patent Rolls._ London, 1891-1908.
+
+37. CALMOUR, A.C. _Fact and Fiction about Shakespeare, with Some
+Account of the Playhouses, Players, and Playwrights of His Period._
+Stratford-on-Avon, 1894.
+
+38. _A Catalogue of Models and of Stage-Sets in the Dramatic Museum of
+Columbia University._ New York, 1916. (See also Nos. 129, 211.)
+
+*39. CHALMERS, GEORGE. _An Apology for the Believers in the
+Shakspeare-Papers._ London, 1797.
+
+*40. ---- _A Supplemental Apology._ London, 1799.
+
+*41. CHAMBERS, E.K. Commissions for the Chapel. (The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 357.)
+
+*42. ---- Court Performances Before Queen Elizabeth. (_The Modern
+Language Review_, II, 1.)
+
+*43. ---- Court Performances Under James the First. (_Ibid._, IV,
+153.)
+
+*44. ---- Dramatic Records from the Lansdowne Manuscripts. (The Malone
+Society's _Collections_, I, 143.)
+
+45. ---- The Elizabethan Lords Chamberlain. (_Ibid._, I, 31.)
+
+46. ---- [Review of] _Henslowe's Diary_, Edited by Walter W. Greg.
+(_The Modern Language Review_, IV, 407, 511.)
+
+*47. ---- A Jotting by John Aubrey. (The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 341. Concerns Beeston and the Cockpit in Drury
+Lane.)
+
+*48. ---- _The Mediæval Stage._ Oxford, 1903.
+
+49. ---- Nathaniel Field and Joseph Taylor. (_The Modern Language
+Review_, IV, 395.)
+
+50. ---- _Notes on the History of the Revels Office under the Tudors._
+London, 1906.
+
+51. ---- The Stage of the Globe. (_The Works of William Shakespeare._
+Stratford-Town Edition. Stratford-on-Avon, 1904-07, X, 351.)
+
+52. ---- Two Early Player-Lists. (The Malone Society's _Collections_,
+I, 348.)
+
+53. ---- William Kempe. (_The Modern Language Review_, IV, 88.)
+
+*54. CHAMBERS, E.K. AND W.W. GREG. Dramatic Records from the Privy
+Council Register, 1603-1642. (The Malone Society's _Collections_, I,
+370. For the records prior to 1603 see No. 87. Cf. also No. 260.)
+
+*55. ---- Dramatic Records of the City of London. The Remembrancia.
+(The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 43. See also No. 224.)
+
+*56. ---- Royal Patents for Players. (The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, I, 260.)
+
+57. CHARLANNE, L. _L'Influence Française en Angleterre au xviie
+Siecle, Le Théâtre et la Critique._ Paris, 1906.
+
+*58. CHILD, H. The Elizabethan Theatre. (_The Cambridge History of
+English Literature_, vol. VI, chap. X.)
+
+59. CLAPHAM, A.W. On the Topography of the Dominican Priory of London.
+(_Archæologia_, LXIII, 57. See also Nos. 2, 61.)
+
+*60. ---- The Topography of the Carmelite Priory of London. (_The
+Journal of the British Archæological Association_, New Series, XVI,
+15. See also No. 61.)
+
+61. CLAPHAM, A.W. AND W.H. GODFREY. _Some Famous Buildings and their
+Story._ Westminster, [1913]. (Contains Godfrey's study of the Fortune
+contract, and, in abbreviated form, the two articles by Clapham noted
+above, Nos. 59, 60. See also Nos. 8, 38, 116, 129.)
+
+62. CLARK, A. Players or Companies on Tour 1548-1630. (_Notes and
+Queries_, X Series, XII, 41.)
+
+COCKPIT-IN-COURT. See Nos. 18, 80, 81, 82, 83, 89, 99, 180, 181, 182,
+183, 184, 197, 228, 250, 253, 305, 313.
+
+COCKPIT-IN-DRURY LANE. See Nos. 4, 30, 33, 47, 72, 88, 91, 99, 119,
+138, 139, 142, 147, 159, 197, 223, 227, 228, 303.
+
+*63. COLLIER, J.P. _The Alleyn Papers._ London. Printed for The
+Shakespeare Society, 1843. (See No. 161.)
+
+64. ---- _The Diary of Philip Henslowe._ London. Printed for The
+Shakespeare Society, 1845. (See No. 143.)
+
+*65. ---- _The History of English Dramatic Poetry._ 3 vols. 1831.
+Second edition, London, 1879.
+
+66. ---- _Lives of the Original Actors._ (See No. 68.)
+
+*67. ---- _Memoirs of Edward Alleyn._ London. Printed for The
+Shakespeare Society, 1841. (See No. 316.)
+
+68. ---- _Memoirs of the Principal Actors in the Plays of
+Shakespeare._ London. Printed for The Shakespeare Society, 1846.
+(Reprinted with some corrections in No. 65.)
+
+69. ---- On Players and Dramatic Performances in the Reign of Edward
+IV. (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, II, 87.)
+
+*70. ---- Original History of "The Theatre" in Shoreditch, and
+Connexion of the Burbadge Family with it. (_Ibid._, IV, 63.)
+
+71. ---- Richard Field, Nathaniel Field, Anthony Munday, and Henry
+Chettle. (_Ibid._, IV, 36.)
+
+*72. ---- _The Works of Shakespeare_, London, 1844. (Vol. I, p. ccxli,
+reprints a record of the end of certain early playhouses from "some
+manuscript notes to a copy of Stowe's _Annales_, by Howes, folio,
+1631, in the possession of Mr. Pickering." See No. 119.)
+
+73. CONRAD, H. Robert Greene als Dramatiker. (The Shakespeare
+_Jahrbuch_, XXIX-XXX, 210.)
+
+74. CORBIN, J. Shakspere his own Stage-Manager. (_The Century
+Magazine_, LXXXIII, 260.)
+
+75. CREIGHTON, C. _A History of Epidemics in Britain._ 2 vols.
+Cambridge, 1891-94.
+
+76. CREIZENACH, W. _Geschichte des neueren Dramas._ Vol. IV, Part I,
+Book viii. Halle, 1909. (English translation by Cécile Hugon, London,
+1916.)
+
+77. ---- Die Schauspiele der englischen Komödianten. (_Deutsche
+National-Litteratur_, XXIII.)
+
+78. CULLEN, C. Puritanism and the Stage. (_Proceedings of the Royal
+Philosophical Society of Glasgow_, XLIII, 153.)
+
+79. CUNNINGHAM. P. Did General Harrison Kill "Dick Robinson" the
+Player? (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, II, 11.)
+
+*80. ---- _Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels at the Court in
+the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James I._ London. Printed for
+The Shakespeare Society, 1842. (See Nos. 11, 180, 181, 184.)
+
+81. ---- _A Handbook of London._ 2 vols. London, 1849. (A new edition,
+"corrected and enlarged," London, 1850. See also No. 305.)
+
+82. ---- _Inigo Jones. A Life of the Architect._ London. Printed for
+The Shakespeare Society, 1848.
+
+83. ---- Inigo Jones, and his Office under the Crown. (_The
+Shakespeare Society's Papers_, I, 103.)
+
+84. ---- Plays at Court, Anno 1613. (_Ibid._, II, 123.)
+
+85. ---- Sir George Buc and the Office of the Revels. (_Ibid._, IV,
+143.)
+
+*86. ---- The Whitefriars Theatre, the Salisbury Court Theatre, and
+the Duke's Theatre in Dorset Gardens. (_Ibid._, IV, 89.)
+
+CURTAIN. See Nos. 96, 150, 151, 222, 223, 284.
+
+*87. DASENT, J.R. _Acts of the Privy Council of England._ New Series.
+London, 1890-. (This contains the Acts to the end of Elizabeth's
+reign; for those Acts relating to the drama from 1603 to 1642, see No.
+54. Cf. No. 260.)
+
+88. _Description of the Great Machines of the Descent of Orpheus into
+Hell. Presented by the French Comedians at the Cockpit in Drury Lane._
+London, 1661.
+
+89. Diaries and Despatches of the Venetian Embassy at the Court of
+King James I., in the Years 1617, 1618. Translated by Rawdon Brown.
+(_The Quarterly Review_, CII, 398.)
+
+_Diary_, of the Duke of Stettin-Pomerania. (See Nos. 34, 146.)
+
+90. DOBELL, B. Newly Discovered Documents. (_The Athenæum_, March 30,
+1901, p. 403. Of value for Blackfriars.)
+
+*91. DOWNES, J. _Roscius Anglicanus._ London, 1708.
+
+92. DRAMATICUS. On the Profits of Old Actors. (_The Shakespeare
+Society's Papers_, I, 21.)
+
+93. ---- The Players Who Acted in _The Shoemaker's Holiday_, 1600.
+(_Ibid._, IV, 110.)
+
+94. DURAND, W.Y. Notes on Richard Edwards. (_The Journal of Germanic
+Philology_, IV, 348.)
+
+95. ---- _Palæmon and Arcyte_, _Progne_, _Marcus Geminus_, and the
+Theatre in Which They Were Acted, 1566. (_Publications of the Modern
+Language Association of America_, XX, 502.)
+
+96. ELLIS, H. _The History and Antiquities of the Parish of Saint
+Leonard, Shoreditch._ London, 1798.
+
+97. ELTON, C.I. _William Shakespeare, His Family and Friends._ London,
+1904. (Chap. IV deals with Blackfriars and the Globe.)
+
+98. EVANS, M.B. An Early Type of Stage. (_Modern Philology_, IX, 421.)
+
+99. EVELYN, J. _Diary and Correspondence._ Edited by William Bray and
+H.B. Wheatley. 4 vols. London, 1906.
+
+*100. FEUILLERAT, A. Blackfriars Records. (The Malone Society's
+_Collections_, II, 1.)
+
+101. ---- _John Lyly._ Cambridge, 1910.
+
+102. ---- _Le Bureau des Menus-Plaisirs (Office of the Revels) et la
+Mise en Scène a la Cour D'Élizabeth._ Louvain, 1910.
+
+*103. ---- _Documents Relating to the Office of the Revels in the Time
+of Queen Elizabeth._ Louvain, 1908.
+
+104. ---- _Documents Relating to the Revels at Court in the Time of
+King Edward VI and Queen Mary._ (_The Loseley Manuscripts._) Louvain,
+1914.
+
+*105. ---- The Origin of Shakespeare's Blackfriars Theatre. (The
+Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVIII, 81.)
+
+106. ---- Shakespeare's Blackfriars. (The London _Daily Chronicle_,
+December 22, 1911.)
+
+*107. FIRTH, C.H. The Suppression of the Drama during the Protectorate
+and Commonwealth. (_Notes and Queries_, VII Series, VI, 122.)
+
+108. FITZJEFFREY, H. _Notes from Black-fryers._ London, 1620.
+
+*109. FLEAY, F.G. _A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama,
+1559-1642._ 2 vols. London, 1891.
+
+110. ---- _A Chronicle History of the Life and Work of William
+Shakespeare._ London, 1886.
+
+*111. ---- _A Chronicle History of the London Stage, 1559-1642._
+London, 1890.
+
+112. ---- History of the Theatres in London from their First Opening
+in 1576 to their Closing in 1642. (_Transactions of the Royal
+Historical Society_, X, 114. Also privately issued.)
+
+113. ---- On the Actor Lists, 1578-1642. (_Ibid._, IX, 44.)
+
+114. ---- _A Shakespeare Manual._ London, 1878.
+
+115. FLECKNOE, R. A Short Discourse of the English Stage. (Attached to
+_Love's Kingdom_, 1664; reprinted in No. 158.)
+
+116. FORESTIER, A. The Fortune Theatre Reconstructed. (_The
+Illustrated London News_, August 12, 1911, p. 276.)
+
+117. ---- Origins of the English Stage (_Ibid._, CXXXV, 934; CXXXVI,
+57, 169, 225, 344, 423.)
+
+FORTUNE. See Nos. 8, 24, 38, 46, 61, 63, 64, 67, 72, 89, 116, 119,
+120, 126, 129, 143, 144, 161, 190, 211, 223, 231, 234, 235, 239, 303,
+304, 316.
+
+118. FOWELL, F. AND F. PALMER. _Censorship in England._ London,
+[1913].
+
+*119. FURNIVALL, F.J. The End of Shakespeare's Theatres. (_The
+Academy_, XXII, 314. Manuscript notes from the Phillipps copy of
+Stow's _Annals_, 1631. Previously printed by Collier. See No. 72.)
+
+120. ---- The Fortune Theatre in 1649. (_Notes and Queries_, X Series,
+I, 85.)
+
+*121. ---- _Harrison's Description of England._ The New Shakspere
+Society. London, 1877-78. (See No. 154.)
+
+122. G., G.M. _The Stage Censor, an Historical Sketch: 1544-1907._
+London, 1908.
+
+*123. GAEDERTZ, K.T. _Zur Kenntnis der altenglischen Bühne._ Bremen,
+1888. (On the De Witt drawing of the Swan. See Nos. 31, 193, 306.)
+
+124. GAEHDE, C. _Das Theater; Schauspielhaus und Schauspielkunst vom
+griechischen Altertum bis auf die Gegenwart._ Leipzig, 1908.
+
+125. GARDNER, A.E. The Site of the Globe Playhouse of Shakespeare.
+(_The Athenæum_, December 5, 1914.)
+
+126. GAYTON, E. _Pleasant Notes on Don Quixot._ London, 1654. (The
+second edition, 1768, is of no value.)
+
+127. GENEST, J. _Some Account of the English Stage from the
+Restoration in 1660 to 1830._ 10 vols. Bath, 1832.
+
+*128. GILDERSLEEVE, V.C. _Government Regulation of the Elizabethan
+Drama._ New York, 1908.
+
+GLOBE. See Nos. 38, 49, 51, 72, 97, 117, 119, 125, 150, 152, 165, 166,
+167, 171, 176, 191, 205, 206, 207, 208, 211, 212, 213, 223, 233, 236,
+237, 240, 241, 251, 257, 266, 292, 297, 299, 300, 301.
+
+129. GODFREY, W.H. An Elizabethan Playhouse. (_The Architectural
+Review_, London, April, 1908; reprinted in No. 61. See also the
+_Architect and Builder's Journal_, London, August 16, 1911, and _The
+Architectural Review_, London, January, 1912, for descriptions of Mr.
+Godfrey's model of the Fortune. This model is now in the Dramatic
+Museum at Columbia University, and a duplicate is in the Museum of
+European Culture at the University of Illinois. See also Nos. 8, 38,
+61, 116, 211.)
+
+130. GOODWIN, A.T. Court Revels in the Reign of Henry VII. (_The
+Shakespeare Society's Papers_, I, 47.)
+
+131. GRABO, C.H. Theatres of Elizabeth's London. (_Chautauquan_,
+November, 1906.)
+
+*132. GRAVES, T.S. _The Court and the London Theatres During the Reign
+of Elizabeth._ Menasha, Wis., 1913.
+
+*133. ---- A Note on the Swan Theatre. (_Modern Philology_, IX, 431.
+See No. 135.)
+
+134. ---- The Shape of the First London Theatre. (_The South Atlantic
+Quarterly_, July, 1914.)
+
+135. ---- Tricks of Elizabethan Showmen. (_Ibid._, April, 1915. Deals
+with The Swan. See No. 133.)
+
+*136. GREENSTREET, J. The Blackfriars Playhouse: Its Antecedents.
+(_The Athenæum_, July 17, 1886, p. 91, January 7, 1888, p. 25.)
+
+*137. ---- Blackfriars Theatre in the Time of Shakespeare. (_Ibid._,
+April 7, 1888, p. 445; April 21, 1888, p. 509; August 10, 1889, p.
+203. These documents are reprinted by Fleay, No. 111.)
+
+*138. ---- Documents Relating to the Players at the Red Bull,
+Clerkenwell, and the Cockpit in Drury Lane, in the Time of James I.
+(_The New Shakspere Society Transactions_, 1880-86, p. 489. Also in
+_The Athenæum_, February 21, 1885. Reprinted by Fleay, No. 111.)
+
+*139. ---- Drury Lane Theatre in the Reign of James I. (_The
+Athenæum_, 1885, February 21, p. 258; August 29, p. 282. Reprinted by
+Fleay, No. 111.)
+
+*140. ---- The Red Bull Playhouse in the Reign of James I. (_The
+Athenæum_, November 28, 1885, p. 709. Reprinted by Fleay, No. 111; and
+by Wallace, in completer form, No. 303.)
+
+*141. ---- The Whitefriars Theatre in the Time of Shakespeare. (_The
+New Shakspere Society Transactions_, 1887-90, p. 269.)
+
+*142. ---- The Will of Thomas Greene, with Particulars as to the Red
+Bull. (_The Athenæum_, August 29, 1885. Reprinted by Fleay, No. 111.)
+
+*143. GREG, W.W. _Henslowe's Diary._ 2 vols. London, 1904-1908. (See
+No. 46.)
+
+*144. ---- _Henslowe Papers._ London, 1907.
+
+---- See also under CHAMBERS, E.K. AND W.W. GREG.
+
+145. GROTE, W. Das London zur Zeit der Königin Elisabeth in deutscher
+Beleuchtung. (_Neueren Sprachen_, XIV, 633.)
+
+*146. HAGER, H. Diary of the Journey of Philip Julius, Duke of
+Stettin-Pomerania, through England in the Year 1602. (_Englische
+Studien_, XVIII, 315. See No. 34.)
+
+*147. HALLIWELL-PHILLIPPS, J.O. _A Collection of Ancient Documents
+Respecting the Office of the Master of the Revels, and Other Papers
+Relating to the Early Theatre._ London, 1870. (Only eleven copies
+printed. The documents, with others, have been reprinted by Adams in
+No. 4.)
+
+148. ---- Dispute between the Earl of Worcester's Players and the
+Corporation of Leicester in 1586. (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_,
+IV, 145.)
+
+149. ---- _Illustrations of the Life of Shakespeare._ London, 1874.
+(The material of this book has been embodied in No. 150.)
+
+*150. ---- _Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare._ 2 vols. The eleventh
+edition. London, 1907. (The page numbers have not been changed since
+the seventh edition, 1887.)
+
+151. ---- _Tarlton's Jests, and News out of Purgatory._ London.
+Printed for The Shakespeare Society, 1844.
+
+152. ---- _Two Old Theatres. Views of the Globe and Bear Garden._
+Privately printed. Brighton, 1884.
+
+153. ---- _The Visits of Shakespeare's Company of Actors to the
+Provincial Cities and Towns of England, Illustrated by Extracts
+Gathered from Corporate Records._ Privately printed. Brighton, 1887.
+
+*154. HARRISON, WILLIAM. _Harrison's Description of England._ Edited
+by F.J. Furnivall. The New Shakspere Society, London, 1877-78.
+(Additions by Mrs. C.C. Stopes, _The Shakespeare Library_, 1908.
+Edited also by L. Withington, London, 1902.)
+
+155. HASLEWOOD, JOSEPH. _Account of the Old London Theatres._
+(_Roxburghe Revels_, Edinburgh, 1837, p. 85. Fifty copies only
+printed.)
+
+156. HATCHER, O.L. _A Book for Shakespeare Plays and Pageants._ New
+York, 1916. ("Theatres," p. 133.)
+
+157. HAZLITT, W.C. _Brand's Popular Antiquities of Great Britain.
+Faiths and Folklore._ 2 vols. London, 1905.
+
+*158. ---- _The English Drama and Stage under the Tudor and Stuart
+Princes, 1543-1664._ Printed for the Roxburghe Library, 1869.
+
+159. HECKETHORN, C.W. _Lincoln's Inn Fields, and the Localities
+Adjacent._ London, 1896.
+
+160. HENTZNER, P. _Itinerarium Germaniæ; Galliæ; Angliæ; Italiæ._
+Nüremberg, 1612.
+
+161. HERBERT, J.F. Additions to "The Alleyn Papers." (_The Shakespeare
+Society's Papers_, I, 16. See No. 63.)
+
+162. HEYWOOD, T. _An Apology for Actors._ London, 1612. (London:
+Reprinted for The Shakespeare Society, 1841.)
+
+*163. HISTORICAL MANUSCRIPTS COMMISSION. _Calendars_ and _Reports_.
+London, 1870-.
+
+164. HITCHCOCK, R. _An Historical View of the Irish Stage._ 2 vols.
+Dublin, 1788.
+
+HOPE. See Bear Garden and Hope.
+
+*165. HUBBARD, G. On the Exact Site of the Globe Playhouse of
+Shakespeare. (_Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archæological
+Society_, New Series, vol. II, part iii, 1912.)
+
+*166. ---- The Site of the Globe Theatre of Shakespeare on Bankside as
+Shown by Maps of the Period. (_Journal of the Royal Institute of
+British Architects_, London, 1909, Third Series, XVII, 26.)
+
+167. ---- The Site of the Globe. (_Notes and Queries_, XII Series,
+XII, 11, 50, 70, 201, 224.)
+
+168. HUGHSON, D. _An Epitome of the Privileges of London, Including
+Southwark, as Granted by Royal Charters._ London, 1812.
+
+169. ---- _Multum in Parvo. The Privileges of Southwark._ London, [c.
+1818].
+
+170. INGLEBY, C.M. _A Complete View of the Shakespeare Controversy._
+London, 1861. (A discussion of the inaccuracies and forgeries of J.P.
+Collier.)
+
+171. JACKSON, R.C. _The Site of Shakespeare's Globe Playhouse._ (_The
+Athenæum_, October 30, 1909, p. 525.)
+
+*172. JEAFFRESON, J.C. _Middlesex County Records._ 4 vols. London,
+1886-92.
+
+173. JENKINSON, W. The Early Playhouses and the Drama as Referred to
+in Tudor and Stuart Literature. (_The Contemporary Review_, CV, 847.)
+
+174. JUSSERAND, J.J. Les Théâtres de Londres au Temps de Shakespeare.
+(_La Revue de Paris_, VI, 713.)
+
+175. ---- _A Literary History of the English People From the
+Renaissance to the Civil War._ 2 vols. London, 1906-09. (Vol. II, bk.
+V, chap. V.)
+
+176. K., L.L. Site of the Globe Theatre (_Notes and Queries_, XI
+Series, X, 290, 335.)
+
+*177. KELLY, W. _Notices Illustrative of the Drama and Other Popular
+Amusements._ London, 1865.
+
+*178. KEMPE, A.J. _The Loseley Manuscripts._ London, 1836.
+
+*179. LA FÈVRE DE LA BODERIE, ANTOINE. _Ambassades de Monsieur de La
+Boderie en Angleterre ... depuis les années 1606 jusq' en 1611._ 5
+vols. [Paris], 1750.
+
+180. LAW, E. Cunningham's Extracts from the Revels' Books, 1842. (_The
+Athenæum_, 1911, vol. II, pp. 297, 324, 388; 1912, vol. I, pp. 390,
+469. See Nos. 11, 80, 181, 184.)
+
+181. ---- _More About Shakespeare "Forgeries."_ London, 1913. (See
+Nos. 11, 80, 180, 184.)
+
+182. ---- Shakespeare at Whitehall. (The London _Times_, October 31,
+1910, p. 10.)
+
+183. ---- Shakespeare's Christmas, St. Stephen's Day, 1604. (_Ibid._,
+December 26, 1910, p. 10.)
+
+184. ---- _Some Supposed Shakespeare Forgeries._ London, 1911. (See
+Nos. 11, 80, 180, 181.)
+
+*185. LAWRENCE, W.J. _The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies._
+Stratford-upon-Avon, 1912. Second Series, 1913. (I do not record
+separately the numerous articles by Mr. Lawrence which appeared first
+in periodicals, and which are reprinted in these two volumes.)
+
+*186. ---- The Evolution and Influence of the Elizabethan Playhouse.
+(The Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVII, 18.)
+
+*187. ---- A Forgotten Restoration Playhouse. (_Englische Studien_,
+XXXV, 279.)
+
+188. ---- Ireland's First Theatrical Manager. (_The Weekly Freeman_,
+St. Patrick's Day Number, March 11, 1916.)
+
+*189. ---- The Mystery of Lodowick Barry. (The University of North
+Carolina _Studies in Philology_, XIV, 52.)
+
+*190. ---- Restoration Stage Nurseries. (_Archiv für das Studium der
+Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen_, 1914, p. 301.)
+
+191. LEE, SIR S. _A Life of William Shakespeare._ New York, 1916.
+(Chap. VI.)
+
+*192. _Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry
+VIII._ London, 1862-1905. (_Calendar of State Papers_; see No. 35.)
+
+193. LOGEMAN, H. Johannes de Witt's Visit to the Swan Theatre.
+(_Anglia_, XIX, 117. Cf. _The Academy_, December 26, 1896. See No. 31,
+123, 306.)
+
+194. LONDON TOPOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. _London Topographical Record._
+London, 1901-.
+
+195. MAAS, H. _Äussere Geschichte der Englischen Theatertruppen in dem
+Zeitraum von 1559 bis 1642._ Louvain, 1907.
+
+196. ---- _Die Kindertruppen._ Göttingen, 1901.
+
+*197. MCAFEE, H. _Pepys on the Restoration Stage._ New Haven, 1916.
+
+198. MALCOLM, J.P. _Anecdotes of the Manners and Customs of London
+during the Eighteenth Century._ London, 1808.
+
+199. ---- _Anecdotes of the Manners and Customs of London from the
+Roman Invasion to the Year 1700._ London, 1811.
+
+*200. MALONE, E. _The Plays and Poems of William Shakespeare._ 21
+vols. London, 1821. (The Variorum edition, edited by Boswell.)
+
+201. MANLY, J.M. The Children of the Chapel Royal and their Masters.
+(_The Cambridge History of English Literature_, vol. VI, chap. xi.)
+
+202. MANNING, O. AND W. BRAY. _The History and Antiquities of the
+County of Surrey._ 3 vols. London, 1804-14.
+
+203. MANTZIUS, K. _Engelske Theaterforhold i Shakespeare-tiden._
+Khvn., 1901. (See No. 204.)
+
+204. ---- _A History of Theatrical Art in Ancient and Modern Times._
+Authorised Translation by Louise von Cossel. Vol. III, "The
+Shakespearean Period in England." London, 1904.
+
+205. MARTIN, W. _Shakespeare in London._ (The London _Times_, October
+8, 1909, p. 10.)
+
+206. ---- The Site of Shakespeare's Globe Playhouse. (_The Athenæum_,
+October 9, 1909, p. 425.)
+
+207. ---- The Site of the Globe. (_Notes and Queries_, XI Series, X,
+209, XII, 10, 121, 143, 161.)
+
+*208. ---- The Site of the Globe Playhouse of Shakespeare. (_Surrey
+Archæological Collections_, London, 1910, XXIII, 149. Also separately
+printed.)
+
+209. MEMBER FROM THE BEGINNING. Accounts of Performances and Revels at
+Court in the Reign of Henry VIII. (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_,
+III, 87.)
+
+210. MEYMOTT, W.J. _The Manor of Old Paris Garden; an Historical
+Account of Christ Church, Surrey._ London, 1881. (Printed for private
+circulation. Inaccurate. See _Notes and Queries_, VII Series, III,
+241.)
+
+211. MILES, D.H. The Dramatic Museum at Columbia University. (_The
+American Review of Reviews_, XLVI, 67. Illustrations of models of
+early playhouses. See No. 38, 129.)
+
+212. MILLS, C.A. Shakespeare and the Globe Theatre. (The London
+_Times_, April 11, 1914.)
+
+213. Model of the Globe Playhouse. (_The Graphic_, London, LXXXII,
+579; _Illustrated London News_, CXXXVI, 423.)
+
+214. MORGAN, A. The Children's Companies. (_Shakesperiana_, IX, 131.)
+
+215. MURRAY, J.T. English Dramatic Companies in the Towns Outside of
+London, 1550-1600. (_Modern Philology_, II, 539.)
+
+*216. ---- _English Dramatic Companies._ 2 vols. London, 1910.
+
+217. N., T.C. The Old Bridge at Newington. (_Notes and Queries_, II
+Series, XII, 323.)
+
+218. NAIRN, J.A. Boy-Actors under the Tudors and Stuarts.
+(_Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature_, II Series, XXXII,
+11.)
+
+*219. NICHOLS, J. _The Progresses and Public Processions of Queen
+Elizabeth._ 4 vols. London, 1823.
+
+*220. ---- _The Progresses, Processions, and Magnificent Festivities
+of King James the First._ 4 vols. London, 1828.
+
+221. ONIONS, C.T. _Shakespeare's England._ 2 vols. Oxford, 1916.
+(Chap. XXIV, "Actors and Acting," by Percy Simpson; chap. XXV, "The
+Playhouse," by William Archer and W.J. Lawrence; chap. XXVII, section
+7, "Bearbaiting, Bull Baiting, and Cockfighting," by Sir Sidney Lee. A
+popular treatise.)
+
+*222. ORDISH, T.F. _Early London Theatres._ London, 1894. (For an
+important review, see E.K. Chambers in _The Academy_, August 24, 1895,
+p. 139.)
+
+*223. ---- London Theatres. (_The Antiquary_, XI-XVI. "Theatre and
+Curtain," XI, 89; "Rose," XI, 212; "Bear Garden," XI, 243; "Globe,"
+XII, 41; "Elizabethan Stage," XII, 193; "Swan," XII, 245;
+"Blackfriars," XIV, 22, 55, 108; "Fortune," XIV, 205; "Red Bull," XIV,
+236, "Cockpit," XV, 93; "Whitefriars," XV, 262; "Salisbury Court,"
+XVI, 244.)
+
+*224. OVERALL, W.H. AND H.C. _Analytical Index to the Series of
+Records Known as the Remembrancia. Preserved among the Archives of the
+City of London. 1579-1664._ London, 1878. (See No. 55.)
+
+225. OVEREND, G.H. On the Dispute between George Maller, Glazier and
+Trainer of Players to Henry VIII, and Thomas Arthur, his Pupil. (_The
+New Shakspere Society's Transactions_, 1877-79, p. 425.)
+
+226. PAGET, A.H. _The Elizabethan Playhouses._ London, 1891.
+(Privately printed, 8vo, 14 pp.)
+
+*227. PARTON, J. _Some Account of the Hospital and Parish of St. Giles
+in the Fields, Middlesex._ London, 1822. (Contains parish records
+relating to the Cockpit in Drury Lane.)
+
+PAUL'S. See Nos. 6, 12, 26, 101, 196, 201, 214, 218, 297.
+
+*228. PEPYS, S. _The Diary of Samuel Pepys._ Edited by Henry B.
+Wheatley. 9 vols. London, 1893.
+
+PHOENIX. See Cockpit in Drury Lane.
+
+229. PINKS, W.J. _The History of Clerkenwell._ Second edition. London,
+1880. (The Red Bull Playhouse, p. 190.)
+
+230. Pleadings in Rastell _v._ Walton, a Theatrical Lawsuit, temp.
+Henry VIII. (Arber, _An English Garner, Fifteenth Century Prose and
+Verse_, 1903, p. 305.)
+
+231. PLOMER, H.R. Fortune Playhouse (_Notes and Queries_, X Series,
+VI, 107.)
+
+232. POLLOCK, A. The Evolution of the Actor. (_The Drama_, August and
+November, 1915, and November, 1916.)
+
+233. PORTER, C. Playing Hamlet as Shakespeare Staged It in 1601.
+(_Ibid._, August and November, 1915.)
+
+234. PRYNNE, W. _Histriomastix._ London, 1633.
+
+235. RANKIN, G. Early London Theatres. (_Notes and Queries_, IV
+Series, VI, 306; cf. p. 423.)
+
+RED BULL. See Nos. 4, 91, 107, 126, 138, 139, 140, 142, 147, 197, 223,
+228, 229, 234, 303.
+
+_Remembrancia._ See Nos. 55, 224.
+
+*236. RENDLE, W. The Bankside, Southwark, and the Globe Playhouse. (In
+Furnivall's edition of Harrison's _Description of England_, Part II,
+Book iii. See No. 121. Deals with the Swan, Bear Garden, Hope, Rose,
+and Globe.)
+
+*237. ---- The Globe Playhouse. (_Walford's Antiquarian_, VIII, 209.)
+
+238. ---- Paris Garden and Christ Church, Blackfriars. (_Notes and
+Queries_, VII Series, III, 241, 343, 442.)
+
+239. ---- Philip Henslowe. (_The Genealogist_, IV, 149.)
+
+*240. ---- The Playhouses at Bankside in the Time of Shakespeare.
+(_The Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer_, VII, 207, 274; VIII,
+55.)
+
+241. ---- _Old Southwark and its People._ London, 1878.
+
+242. ---- The Swan Playhouse, Bankside, _circa_ 1596. (_Notes and
+Queries_, VII Series, VI, 221.)
+
+*243. RENDLE, W. AND P. NORMAN. _The Inns of Old Southwark and Their
+Associations._ London, 1888.
+
+*244. _Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts._
+London, 1870-. (See No. 163.)
+
+245. RIMBAULT, E.F. _The Old Cheque-Book, or Book of Remembrance, of
+the Chapel Royal from 1561 to 1744._ (_The Camden Society_, 1872.)
+
+246. ---- _Who was "Jack Wilson" the Singer of Shakespeare's Stage?_
+London, 1846. (Cf. _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, II, 33.)
+
+ROSE. See Nos. 24, 46, 63, 64, 67, 143, 144, 161, 222, 223, 236, 239,
+240, 241, 257, 263, 300, 302, 304, 316.
+
+*247. RYE, W.B. _England as Seen by Foreigners in the Days of
+Elizabeth and James I._ London, 1865.
+
+SALISBURY COURT. See Nos. 4, 7, 19, 72, 86, 91, 99, 119, 147, 197,
+223, 228.
+
+248. SCHELLING, F.E. "An Aery of Children, Little Eyases." (_The
+Queen's Progress and Other Elizabethan Sketches_, Boston and New York,
+1904, chap. V.)
+
+249. ---- The Elizabethan Theatre. (_Lippincott's Monthly Magazine_,
+LXIX, 309.)
+
+_Shakespeare's England._ See No. 221.
+
+250. SHEPPARD, E. _The Old Royal Palace of Whitehall._ London and New
+York, 1902.
+
+251. The Site of the Globe Theatre, Bankside. (_The Builder_, March
+26, 1910, p. 353.)
+
+252. SMITH, W.H. _Bacon and Shakespeare. An Inquiry Touching Players,
+Playhouses, and Play-Writers in the Days of Elizabeth._ London, 1857.
+
+253. SPIERS, W.L. An Autograph Plan by Wren. (_The London
+Topographical Record_, 1903. Concerns Whitehall Palace and the
+Cockpit.)
+
+_State Papers._ See Nos. 35, 192.
+
+254. _Statutes of the Realm._ Record Commission. 9 vols. London,
+1810-28.
+
+255. STEPHENSON, H.T. _Shakespeare's London._ New York, 1905. (Chap.
+XIV, "The Theatres.")
+
+256. ---- _The Study of Shakespeare._ New York, 1915. (Chap. III, "The
+Playhouses.")
+
+*257. STOPES, C.C. _Burbage and Shakespeare's Stage._ London, 1913.
+
+258. ---- The Burbages and the Transportation of "The Theatre." (_The
+Athenæum_, October 16, 1909, p. 470.)
+
+259. ---- Burbage's "Theatre." (_The Fortnightly Review_, XCII, 149.)
+
+260. ---- Dramatic Records from the Privy Council Register, James I
+and Charles I. (The Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVIII, 103. See No. 54.)
+
+261. ---- Giles and Christopher Alleyn of Holywell. (_Notes and
+Queries_, X Series, XII, 341.)
+
+262. ---- "The Queen's Players" in 1536. (_The Athenæum_, July 24,
+1914.)
+
+263. ---- The Rose and the Swan, 1597. (_The Stage_, January 6, 1910.
+The documents here summarized are printed in full in No. 257 and again
+in No. 302.)
+
+264. ---- _Shakespeare's Environment._ London, 1914. (Chapters on
+William Hunnis, Burbage's "Theatre," and The Transportation of
+Burbage's "Theatre.")
+
+*265. ---- Shakespeare's Fellows and Followers. (The Shakespeare
+_Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 92.)
+
+266. ---- The Site of the Globe. (_Notes and Queries_, XI Series, XI,
+447.)
+
+267. ---- "The Theatre." (_Archiv für das Studium der Neueren Sprachen
+und Literaturen_, CXXIV, 129.)
+
+268. ---- William Hunnis. (The Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XXVII, 200.)
+
+269. ---- William Hunnis. (_The Athenæum_, March 31, 1900.)
+
+270. ---- _William Hunnis and the Revels of the Chapel Royal._
+Louvain, 1910.
+
+*271. STOW, J. _A Survey of London._ Edited by C.L. Kingsford. 2 vols.
+Oxford, 1908.
+
+*272. ---- _A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster ...
+Corrected, Improved, and Very Much Enlarged ... by John Strype._ 2
+vols. London, 1720.
+
+*273. ---- _Annales, or A Generall Chronicle of England, Continued by
+Edmund Howes._ London, 1631.
+
+274. STRUTT, J. _Sports and Pastimes of the People of England._
+London, 1801.
+
+STRYPE, J. See No. 272.
+
+275. ---- _The Anatomy of Abuses._ Edited by F.J. Furnivall, for The
+New Shakspere Society. London, 1877-79. (There is an earlier edition
+by J.P. Collier, 1870.)
+
+SWAN. See Nos. 9, 31, 46, 123, 133, 135, 144, 193, 210, 214, 222, 223,
+236, 238, 240, 241, 242, 257, 263, 302, 306.
+
+276. SYMONDS, J.A. _Shakespeare's Predecessors._ London, 1883. (Chap.
+VIII, "Theatres, Playwrights, Actors, and Playgoers.")
+
+THEATRE, BURBAGE'S. See Nos. 28, 70, 96, 134, 150, 151, 222, 223, 257,
+258, 259, 261, 264, 267, 277, 290.
+
+277. The Theater; a Middlesex Sessions Record Touching James Burbage's
+"Theater." (_The Athenæum_, February 12, 1887, p. 233.)
+
+*278. THOMPSON, E.N.S. _The Controversy between the Puritans and the
+Stage._ New York, 1903.
+
+279. THORNBURY, G.W. Shakespeare's England. 2 vols. London, 1856.
+(Vol. II, chap. X, "The Theatre.")
+
+*280. THORNDIKE, A.H. _Shakespeare's Theatre._ New York, 1916. (Chap.
+III, "The Playhouses.")
+
+281. TILER, A. _The History and Antiquities of St. Saviours._ London,
+1765.
+
+282. TOMLINS, T.E. A New Document Regarding the Authority of the
+Master of the Revels. (_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, III, 1. The
+document is reprinted in No. 103.)
+
+283. ---- The Original Patent for the Nursery of Actors and Actresses
+in the Reign of Charles II. (_Ibid._, III, 162.)
+
+*284. ---- Origin of the Curtain Theatre, and Mistakes Regarding It.
+(_The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, I, 29.)
+
+285. ---- Three New Privy Seals for Players in the Time of
+Shakespeare. (_Ibid._, IV, 41.)
+
+286. TYSON, W. Heming's Players at Bristol in the Reign of Henry VIII.
+(_Ibid._, III, 13.)
+
+287. _Victoria History of London._ London, 1909.
+
+*288. WALLACE, C.W. _The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars
+1597-1603._ Lincoln [Nebraska], 1908. (Originally printed in
+_University Studies_, University of Nebraska, 1908.)
+
+*289. ---- _The Evolution of the English Drama up to Shakespeare, with
+a History of the First Blackfriars Theatre._ (_Schriften der Deutschen
+Shakespeare-Gesellschaft_, Band IV. Berlin, 1912.)
+
+*290. ---- _The First London Theatre, Materials for a History._
+(_University Studies_, University of Nebraska, vol. XII. Lincoln,
+Nebraska, 1913.)
+
+291. ---- Gervase Markham, Dramatist. (The Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_,
+XLVI, 345. Cf. J.Q. Adams, in _Modern Philology_, X, 426.)
+
+*292. ---- _Globe Theatre Apparel._ [London.] Privately printed,
+August, 1909. (For the nature of the contents see the London _Times_,
+November 30, 1909, p. 12; and the Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 239.)
+
+293. ---- _Keysar_ v. _Burbage and Others._ Privately printed, 1910.
+(These documents are included in the author's _Shakespeare and his
+London Associates_, No. 297.)
+
+294. ---- A London Pageant of Shakespeare's Time. (The London _Times_,
+March 28, 1913.)
+
+295. ---- New Shakespeare Discoveries. (_Harper's Monthly Magazine_,
+CXX, 489. See No. 297.)
+
+296. ---- Old Blackfriars Theatre. (The London _Times_, September 12,
+1906; the New York _Evening Post_, September 24, 1906.)
+
+*297. ---- Shakespeare and His London Associates as Revealed in
+Recently Discovered Documents. (_University Studies_, University of
+Nebraska, X, 261.)
+
+298. ---- Shakespeare and the Blackfriars Theatre. (_The Century
+Magazine_, September, 1910. The documents on which this popular
+article is based may be found in Nos. 289 and 297.)
+
+*299. ---- Shakespeare and the Globe. (The London _Times_, October 2
+and 4, 1909. Deals with the Osteler-Heminges documents, and the site
+of the Globe. These documents Mr. Wallace has privately printed in
+_Advance Sheets from Shakespeare, The Globe, and Blackfriars_, The
+Shakespeare Head Press, 1909, whence they were printed in the
+Shakespeare _Jahrbuch_, XLVI, 235.)
+
+*300. ---- Shakespeare and the Globe. (The London _Times_, April 30
+and May 1, 1914.)
+
+301. ---- Shakspere's Money Interest in the Globe Theatre. (_The
+Century Magazine_, August, 1910. The documents on which this popular
+article is based may be found in No. 297.)
+
+*302. ---- The Swan Theatre and the Earl of Pembroke's Servants.
+(_Englische Studien_, XLIII, 340. See Nos. 257, 263.)
+
+*303. ---- Three London Theatres of Shakespeare's Time. (_University
+Studies_, University of Nebraska, IX, 287.)
+
+*304. WARNER, G.F. _Catalogue of the Manuscripts and Muniments of
+Alleyn's College of God's Gift at Dulwich._ [London], 1881.
+
+305. WHEATLEY, H.B. _London, Past and Present.... Based upon the
+Handbook of London by the late Peter Cunningham._ London and New York,
+1891. (See No. 81.)
+
+*306. ---- On a Contemporary Drawing of the Interior of the Swan
+Theatre, 1596. (_The New Shakspere Society's Transactions_, 1887-90,
+p. 213.)
+
+WHITEFRIARS. See Nos. 5, 6, 7, 19, 43, 60, 61, 86, 141, 144, 189, 196,
+201, 214, 218, 223, 239, 287, 293, 297.
+
+*307. WILKINSON, R. _Londina Illustrata._ 2 vols. London, 1819-25.
+(The second volume is entitled _Theatrum Illustrata_.)
+
+308. WILSON, J.D. _Life in Shakespeare's England._ Cambridge, 1911.
+(Chap. VII, "The Theatre.")
+
+*309. ---- The Puritan Attack upon the Stage. (_The Cambridge History
+of English Literature_, vol. VI.)
+
+*310. WINWOOD, R. _Memorials of Affairs of State._ 3 vols. London,
+1725.
+
+311. WOOLF, A.H. _Shakespeare and the Old Southwark Playhouses: a
+Lecture._ London, 1903. (20 pp., 8vo, privately printed.)
+
+312. WOTTON, SIR H. _Reliquiæ Wottonianæ._ London, 1651.
+
+313. WRIGHT, G.R. The English Stage in the Year 1638. (_The Journal of
+the British Archæological Association_, XVI, 275; reprinted in the
+author's _Archæologic and Historic Fragments_, London, 1887.)
+
+*314. WRIGHT, J. _Historia Histrionica_, London, 1699. (Reprinted in
+Hazlitt's Dodsley, vol. XV.)
+
+315. WRIGHT, T. _Queen Elizabeth and Her Times._ 2 vols. London, 1838.
+
+*316. YOUNG, W. _The History of Dulwich College, with a Life of the
+Founder, Edward Alleyn, and an Accurate Transcript of his Diary,
+1617-1622._ 2 vols. London, 1889. (Edition limited to 250 copies,
+privately printed for the author.)
+
+
+
+
+MAPS AND VIEWS OF LONDON
+
+
+I
+
+CRACE, J.G. _A Catalogue of Maps, Plans, and Views of London,
+Westminster, and Southwark, Collected and Arranged by Frederick
+Crace._ London, 1878. (This collection of maps is now in the British
+Museum. The Catalogue is not always trustworthy.)
+
+GOMME, L. The Story of London Maps. (_The Geographical Journal_,
+London, 1908, XXXI, 489, 616.)
+
+MARTIN, W. A Study of Early Map-Views of London. (_The Antiquary_,
+London, 1909, XLV, 337, 406. See also _Home Counties Magazine_, IX.)
+
+
+II
+
+VAN DEN WYNGAERDE, A. View of London, Westminster, and Southwark. (The
+original drawing, made about 1530, is now preserved in the Sutherland
+Collection in the Bodleian Library. A reproduction in three sections
+will be found in Besant's _London in the Time of the Tudors_.)
+
+BRAUN, G., AND F. HOGENBERGIUS. _Londinum Feracissimi Angliæ Regni
+Metropolis._ (In _Civitates Orbis Terrarum_, Cologne, 1572. The map is
+based on an original, now lost, drawn between 1554 and 1558; see
+Alfred Marks, _The Athenæum_, March 31, 1906.)
+
+AGAS, R. _Civitas Londinum._ (This map, executed about 1570, is based
+on the same original map, 1554-58, made use of by Braun and
+Hogenbergius, although Agas has introduced a few changes. The two
+earliest copies are in Guildhall, London, and in the Pepysian Library
+at Cambridge. The student should be warned against Vertue's
+reproduction, often met with. The best reproduction is that by The
+London Topographical Society, 1905.)
+
+NORDEN, J. _London._ (In _Speculum Britanniæ, an Historical and
+Chorographical Description of Middlesex. By the Travaile and View of
+John Norden_. London, 1593. The map was engraved by Pieter Vanden
+Keere.)
+
+DELARAM, F. View of London. (In the background of an engraving, made
+about 1603, representing King James on horseback.)
+
+HONDIUS, J. _London._ (A small view of the city set in the large map
+of "The Kingdome of Great Britaine and Ireland" printed in John
+Speed's _Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine_, London, 1611. The
+plate is dated 1610, but the inset view of London seems to have been
+based on an earlier view, now lost, representing the city as it was in
+or before 1605. Apparently the views, in the Delaram portrait of King
+James, and on the title-pages of Henry Holland's _Her[Greek:
+ô]ologia_, 1620, and Sir Richard Baker's _Chronicle_, 1643, were based
+also on this lost view.)
+
+VISSCHER, C.J. _London._ (This splendid view was printed in 1616; but
+it was drawn several years earlier, and represents the city as it was
+in or before 1613.)
+
+MERIAN, M. _London._ (In J.L. Gottfried's _Neuwe Archontologia
+Cosmica_, Frankfurt am Mayn, 1638. Based mainly on Visscher's View,
+but with additions from some other earlier view not yet identified.)
+
+[RYTHER, A.] _The Cittie of London._ (This map, erroneously attributed
+to Ryther in the Catalogue of the Crace Collection, is often misdated
+1604. It was made between 1630 and 1640; see _Notes and Queries_, IV
+Series, IX, 95; VI Series, XII, 361, 393; VII Series, III, 110, 297,
+498.)
+
+HOLLAR, W. View of London. (The View is dated 1647; Hollar was in
+banishment from England between the years 1643 and 1652. Excellently
+reproduced by The London Topographical Society, 1907.)
+
+[? HOLLAR, W.] _London._ (In James Howell's _Londinopolis_, London,
+1657. This view is a poor copy of Merian's splendid view, 1638. Though
+generally attributed to Hollar, it is unsigned.)
+
+FAITHORNE, W., AND R. NEWCOURT. _An Exact Delineation of the Cities of
+London and Westminster, and the Suburbs Thereof._ London, 1658.
+(Reproduced by The London Topographical Society, 1905.)
+
+PORTER, T. Map of London and Westminster. (About 1660. Probably based
+on the earlier map, 1630-40, mistakenly ascribed to Ryther. Reproduced
+by The London Topographical Society, 1898.)
+
+MOORE, J. Map of London, Westminster, and Southwark. (Drawn in 1662.
+Reproduced by The London Topographical Society, 1912.)
+
+OGILBY, J., AND W. MORGAN. _A Large and Accurate Map of the City of
+London, 1677._ (Reproduced by The London and Middlesex Archæological
+Society, 1895, with Ogilby's description of the map, entitled _London
+Surveyed_.)
+
+MORDEN, R., AND P. LEA. _London &c. Actually Survey'd, 1682._
+(Reproduced by The London Topographical Society, 1904.)
+
+ROCQUE, J. _An Exact Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster,
+the Borough of Southwark.... Begun in 1741, Finished in 1745, and
+published in 1746._ London, 1746. (An excellent reproduction of this
+large map is now being issued in parts by The London Topographical
+Society, 1913-.)
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+_Abuses_, 116.
+
+Admiral--Prince Henry--1 Palsgrave--3 Prince Charles's Company:
+ Admiral's Company, 14, 16, 61 _n._, 72-73, 153-57, 174-75, 176, 267,
+ 269, 272, 281-82, 289-90.
+ Prince Henry's Company, 88, 282-83, 295.
+ Palsgrave's Company, 283-87, 290, 368, 369 _n._, 375.
+ Prince Charles II's Company, 287, 289-90, 303, 375-79, 401.
+
+Æschylus, 398.
+
+Agas, Ralph, 328, 392.
+
+_Aglaura_, 404.
+
+Albemarle, George Monck, I Duke of, 365, 405.
+
+Albright, V.E., vii.
+
+_Alchemist, The_, 419.
+
+_Alcimedon_, 422.
+
+Aldgate, 7, 10.
+
+_Alexander and Campaspe_, 109, 113.
+
+_Alfonso_, 232.
+
+Allen, William, 305.
+
+Alleyn, Edward, 57, 72, 85, 86, 133, 140, 150-51, 153, 156, 246, 267-74,
+ 281-87, 299, 319, 335-36.
+
+Alleyn, Gyles, 30-38, 43, 47, 52, 53, 58-65, 84, 182, 190, 199, 234.
+
+Alleyn, Joan Woodward, ix, 151.
+
+Alleyn, John, 57-58, 72, 73.
+
+Alleyn, Sara. _See_ Gyles Alleyn.
+
+_All is True_, 251-55. _See Henry VIII._
+
+_All's Lost by Lust_, 309.
+
+Allyn, Sir William, 81.
+
+Alnwick Castle, 173 _n._
+
+_Amends for Ladies_, 346.
+
+Amphitheatre, the projected, 411-17.
+
+_Andronicus_, 140, 152.
+
+Androwes, George, 313, 314, 315.
+
+Anjou, Duke of, 385.
+
+Anne of Denmark, Queen of England, 300, 353.
+ Her players, _see under_ Worcester, Children of the Chapel, and
+ Children of Her Majesty's Royal Chamber.
+
+_Antonio's Revenge_, 112.
+
+Apothecaries, Society of, 191 _n._
+
+_Architectural Record, The_, ix, 395.
+
+Aristophanes, 398.
+
+Armin, Robert, 316.
+
+Arundel and Surrey, Thomas Howard, 2 Earl of, 426, 429, 430.
+
+Arundel's Company, 70, 83.
+
+_Arviragus and Philicia_, 401.
+
+Ashen-tree Court, 313.
+
+Ashley, Sir Anthony, 322.
+
+Aubrey, John, 78, 364.
+
+Aunay, Josias d', 423.
+
+
+Bacon, Anthony, 15.
+
+Bacon, Sir Edmund, 320.
+
+Bacon, Francis, 15, 65.
+
+Baker, Michael, 430.
+
+Baker, Sir Richard, 127, 146.
+
+Banks, Jeremiah, 306.
+
+Banks's horse, 13.
+
+Bankside, 28-29, 63, 64, 119 f., 134 f., 142 f., 161 f., 182-83, 185,
+ 238 f., 267, 326 f.
+
+Banqueting-House at Whitehall, 385-89.
+
+Barclay, Perkins, and Company, 265.
+
+Barry, David Lording, 313, 314-15, 316, 317.
+
+Barry, Lodowick. _See_ David Barry.
+
+_Bartholomew Fair_, 325 _n._, 330, 334.
+
+Bath, 71.
+
+Baxter, Richard, 300-01.
+
+Bear Alley, 340, 341.
+
+Bear Garden (First), 15, 119-33, 145, 146, 146 _n._, 159 _n._, 167, 182,
+ 238, 244, 248, 326, 328, 329, 332 _n._, 336, 416.
+
+Bear Garden (Second). _See_ Hope Playhouse.
+
+Bear Garden Alley, 340, 341.
+
+Bear Garden Glass House, 341 _n._
+
+Bear Garden Square, 341.
+
+Beaumont, Francis, 116, 304, 404.
+
+Beaven, William, 293.
+
+Beddingfield, Anne, 294.
+
+Beddingfield, Christopher, 294.
+
+Beecher, Sir William, 230.
+
+Beeston, Christopher, 158, 299-300, 350-58, 374, 421.
+
+Beeston, Mrs. Elizabeth, 362.
+
+Beeston, William, 358-61, 380-83.
+
+Beeston's Boys. _See_ King's and Queen's Company.
+
+_Beggar's Bush_, 404.
+
+Bell, Hamilton, ix, 395-400.
+
+Bell Inn, 1-17, 67.
+
+Bell Savage Inn, 1-17.
+
+Bermondsey, Monastery of, 161.
+
+Bethelem, 69.
+
+Betterton, Thomas, 366, 406.
+
+Betterton, Mrs. Thomas, 406 _n._
+
+Bevis, 133.
+
+Bird, Theophilus, 350 _n._, 381.
+
+Bird, William, 170, 174.
+
+Bishop, Nicholas, 57.
+
+Bishopsgate Street, 7 f., 67.
+
+_Black Book, The_, 73 _n._
+
+Blackfriars Playhouse (First), 8, 91-110, 113, 183, 194, 201, 202, 204,
+ 208, 311 _n._
+
+Blackfriars Playhouse (Second), 59, 74, 86, 93, 98 _n._, 116, 117, 118,
+ 182-233, 250, 256, 260, 261, 311, 312, 317, 319, 320, 324, 343, 350,
+ 355, 356, 365, 369, 372 _n._, 373, 402, 403, 404, 428.
+
+Blackfriars Playhouse (Rosseter's). _See_ Rosseter's Blackfriars.
+
+Blagrove, Thomas, 369.
+
+Blagrove, William, 368-72, 374, 424.
+
+_Bloody Brother, The_, 363.
+
+Blount, Thomas, 122.
+
+Boar's Head Inn, Eastcheap, 7 _n._
+
+Boar's Head Inn, Whitechapel, 1-17, 87, 157-58, 159.
+
+Boar's Head Yard, 17.
+
+Bodley, Sir John, 256-57, 262.
+
+_Bondman, The_, 382.
+
+Bonetti, Rocho, 194-95.
+
+Boone, Colonel, 382.
+
+Bourne, Theophilus, 350 _n._
+
+Bouverie Street, 313.
+
+Bowes, Sir Jerome, 184.
+
+Bowman (the actor), 405 _n._
+
+Box, Edward, 160.
+
+Bradshaw, Charles, 192.
+
+Braun, G., and F. Hogenbergius, 122.
+
+Brayne, John, 39-58, 72, 78, 83, 144, 234.
+
+Brayne, Mrs. Margaret, 43, 44 _n._, 54-58.
+
+Brend, Elizabeth, 264.
+
+Brend, Matthew, 257, 262-63.
+
+Brend, Sir Nicholas, 238-39, 249, 256.
+
+Brend, Sir Thomas, 240 _n._, 249.
+
+Brend, Thomas (the younger), 264.
+
+Bridges Street, 408.
+
+Bristol, 172.
+
+Brockenbury, Richard, 35.
+
+Brome, Richard, 233, 361, 379.
+
+Bromvill, Peter, 176.
+
+Brooke. _See_ Cobham.
+
+Browker, Hugh, 176-77.
+
+Brown, Sir Matthew, 256.
+
+Brown, Rawdon, 279 _n._
+
+Browne, Robert, 318.
+
+Bruskett, Thomas, 191, 195.
+
+Bryan, Sir Francis, 184.
+
+Bryan, George, 73.
+
+Buc, Sir George, 321, 325, 343.
+
+Buchell, Arend van, 166.
+
+Buckhurst, Robert, Lord, 311-12, 314.
+
+Bull Inn, 1-17, 67, 294 _n._
+
+Burbage, Cuthbert, 39 _n._, 40, 45 _n._, 49, 52, 54-65, 74, 84, 198,
+ 199-200, 223, 224, 234-41, 249, 257, 282.
+
+Burbage, James, 11, 27-59, 65, 66, 67, 70-74, 75, 78, 83, 91, 98 _n._,
+ 144, 161, 182-99, 202, 234.
+
+Burbage, Mrs. James, 56, 57, 63.
+
+Burbage, Richard, 40, 57, 61, 62, 63, 73, 74, 84, 111, 117, 140, 198,
+ 199, 200-01, 204, 208 _n._, 215, 218, 223-25, 234-41, 249, 255, 257,
+ 261, 282, 317, 319, 325.
+
+Burghley, William Cecil, Lord, 14, 20, 69.
+
+Burgram, John, 242-43.
+
+Burnell, Henry, 418.
+
+Burt, Nicholas, 363, 367.
+
+Burt, Thomas, 241-42.
+
+Busino, Orazio, 130, 279.
+
+_Bussy D'Ambois_, 400, 404.
+
+Buttevant, Viscount, 313 _n._
+
+_Byron_, 220, 316.
+
+
+C., W., 302.
+
+Cambridge, 67.
+
+Camden, William, 350, 352.
+
+_Campaspe_, 109, 113.
+
+Campeggio, Cardinal Lorenzo, 186.
+
+Cape, Walter, 55.
+
+_Cardinal, The_, 406.
+
+_Careless Shepherdess, The_, 302.
+
+Carew, Thomas, 302, 356.
+
+Carey. _See_ Hunsdon.
+
+Carlell, Lodowick, 404.
+
+Carleton, Mrs. Alice, 260.
+
+Carleton, Sir Dudley, 212 _n._, 281, 284, 388, 393.
+
+Carter, Lane, 231.
+
+Cartwright, William, 374.
+
+Castle, Tavern, 348 _n._
+
+Castlemaine, Lady, 406.
+
+Catherine of Aragon, Queen, 186.
+
+Cawarden, Sir Thomas, 96, 184, 186-90, 193.
+
+Challes, 69-70, 83.
+
+Chalmers, George, 137-38, 428.
+
+Chamberlain, John, 212 _n._, 252, 260, 281, 284, 388, 392, 393.
+
+Chamberlain's Company. _See_ Strange-Derby, etc., company.
+
+Chambers, E.K., ix, 44 _n._, 230 _n._, 247.
+
+Chambers, George, 206.
+
+Chambers, Richard, 206.
+
+_Chances, The_, 404.
+
+_Changes, The_, 376-78.
+
+Chapel Royal, 91 f. _See also_ Children of the Chapel.
+
+Chapman, George, 116, 206, 217, 220.
+
+Chappell, John, 206.
+
+Charles I, 227, 231, 301-02, 359, 394, 395, 414, 424.
+ His players, _see_ King's and Queen's Company, King's Revels Company,
+ Prince Charles's Company, Strange-Derby, etc., Company.
+
+Charles II, 287, 405.
+ His players, _see under_ Admiral.
+
+Chasserau, Peter, 75 _n._, 79.
+
+Cheeke, Sir John, 96, 184, 190.
+
+Chettle, Henry, 158.
+
+Cheyney, Sir Thomas, the Lord Warden, 184, 188.
+
+Children of Blackfriars. _See_ Children of the Chapel, etc.
+
+Children of Her Majesty's (Queen Anne's) Royal Chamber of Bristol, 215 _n._
+
+Children of His Majesty's (James I's) Revels (at Whitefriars), 224.
+
+Children of St. Paul's, 91, 108-10, 111-18, 217, 311 _n._, 319.
+
+Children of the Chapel--1 Queen's Revels--Revels--Whitefriars--2 Queen's
+ Revels Company:
+ Children of the Chapel (at First Blackfriars), 91-110, 111, 113.
+ Children of the Chapel (at Second Blackfriars), 200-15, 237, 249-50.
+ 1 Children of the Queen's (Anne's) Revels, 215-18, 219, 311.
+ Children of the Revels (or of Blackfriars), 218-24, 314 _n._, 316-17.
+ Children of Whitefriars, 318.
+ 2 Children of the Queen's (Anne's) Revels, 117, 318-21, 324, 342-46.
+
+Children of the Queen's Revels. _See under_ Children of the Chapel, etc.,
+ _and under_ Worcester-Queen, etc.
+
+Children of Whitefriars. _See under_ Children of the Chapel, etc.
+
+Children of Windsor Chapel, 91-108, 111, 201.
+
+Cholmley, John, 143-44, 148, 148 _n._, 234.
+
+Clerkenwell, 78, 88, 301, 294 f.
+
+Clifton, Henry, 205-13.
+
+Clifton, Thomas, 210-13.
+
+Clink, the Liberty of the, 124 f., 135, 142, 145, 161.
+
+Clough, George, 53-54.
+
+Cobham, George Brooke, Lord, 96, 184.
+
+Cobham, Henry Brooke, Lord, 184.
+
+Cobham, William Brooke, Lord, 98, 99, 184, 198, 199, 212 _n._
+
+Cockpit-in-Court, 384-409, 420.
+
+Cockpit in Dartmouth Street, 408 _n._
+
+Cockpit Playhouse in Drury Lane, 291, 297 _n._, 299, 300, 305, 348-67,
+ 369, 373, 376 _n._, 381 _n._, 408 _n._, 421-22, 431.
+
+Cokaine, Sir Aston, 233.
+
+Colefox, Edwin, 34-35.
+
+Collett, John, 256.
+
+Collier, J.P., vii, 76, 138, 230 _n._, 322 _n._, 337, 347 _n._, 353 _n._,
+ 373 _n._
+
+Columbia University, 277.
+
+Condell, Henry, 224, 238, 255, 257, 258, 262, 355.
+
+_Conspiracy and Tragedy of Charles, Duke of Byron, The_, 220, 316.
+
+_Constant Maid, The_, 419.
+
+Conway, Edward, Lord, 414-17.
+
+Cooke, William, 315.
+
+Cooper, Lane, ix.
+
+Corneille, Pierre, 406 _n._
+
+Cornishe, John, 241-42.
+
+Cotton, John, 412-14.
+
+_Court Beggar, The_, 361.
+
+Coventry, Thomas, 414-17.
+
+Cranydge, James, 13.
+
+Creed, John, 366.
+
+Crew, John, 406.
+
+Cromwell, Oliver, 364, 405.
+
+Cross Keys Inn, 1-17, 68.
+
+_Cruelty of the Spaniards in Peru, The_, 365.
+
+Cunningham, Peter, 322, 372, 374 _n._, 407 _n._
+
+_Cupid and Psyche_, 113.
+
+_Cupid's Whirligig_, 316.
+
+Curtain Court, 79, 90.
+
+Curtain Playhouse, 8, 10, 16, 26, 32 _n._, 46, 47, 61, 62, 69, 70, 72,
+ 75-90, 135, 144 _n._, 155, 159, 167, 172 _n._, 174, 182, 200, 295,
+ 296, 297, 298 _n._, 301, 355.
+
+Curtain Road, 34, 90.
+
+_Custom of the Country, The_, 404.
+
+_Cutwell_, 11.
+
+_Cynthia's Revels_, 209 _n._
+
+
+Daborne, Robert, 318, 324 _n._, 325.
+
+Dancaster, Thomas, 35.
+
+Daniel, Samuel, 215 _n._, 216.
+
+Davenant, William, 309, 361-65, 382, 424-31.
+
+Davenant's Projected Theatre, 424-31.
+
+Davenport, Robert, 356.
+
+David, John, 12.
+
+Davies, James, 339.
+
+Day, John (playwright), 158, 220, 315.
+
+Day, John (printer), 411.
+
+Deadman's Place, 264.
+
+Dekker, Thomas, 116, 158, 244, 278, 298, 332 _n._
+
+Delaram, F., 128, 146, 248, 248 _n._
+
+De Lawne, William, 190.
+
+Derby, Ferdinando Stanley, Earl of, 73, 153.
+
+Derby's Company. _See under_ Strange-Derby, etc.
+
+Devonshire, Charles Blount, Earl of, 216 _n._
+
+De Witt, Johannes, 46, 77 _n._, 146 _n._, 165-68, 273.
+
+Ditcher, Thomas, 242.
+
+Dixon, Thomas, 412-17.
+
+_Doctor Faustus_, 73.
+
+Dorchester, Evelyn Pierrepont, Marquis of, 340.
+
+Dorset, Edward Sackville, Earl of, 369-70, 375, 378-80.
+
+Dorset House, 371.
+
+Dotridge, Alice, 35.
+
+_Doubtful Heir, The_, 289, 419.
+
+Downes, John, 307, 365, 366.
+
+Downton, Thomas, 170, 174, 282.
+
+Dragon, John, 34-35.
+
+Drayton, Michael, 311-17.
+
+Droeshout, Martin, 266.
+
+Drury Lane, 309, 348 f., 420 f.
+
+Dryden, John, 417.
+
+Dublin Theatre, 417-19.
+
+Duchy Chamber, 189 f.
+
+Dudley, Robert, _See_ Leicester.
+
+Duke, John, 158.
+
+Duke's Theatre, 383 _n._
+
+Dulwich College, ix, 133, 144 _n._, 274, 283, 285 _n._, 286-93.
+
+_Dumb Knight, The_, 316.
+
+Dun, 178.
+
+Dunstan, James, 350 _n._
+
+Du Rocher, R.M., 420 _n._
+
+Duryer, Pierre, 422 _n._
+
+_Dutch Courtesan, The_, 196 _n._
+
+
+Earthquake, 82-83.
+
+Eastcheap, 7 _n._, 122.
+
+East Smithfield, 410 f.
+
+_Eastward Hoe_, 217.
+
+Eaton, Henry, 308.
+
+Elizabeth, Princess (daughter of James I), 393.
+ Her players, _see_ Princess Elizabeth's Company.
+
+Elizabeth, Queen of England, 91, 108, 113-14, 158 _n._, 171, 212 _n._,
+ 215, 385.
+ Her players, _see_ Queen's Company.
+
+_Endimion_, 114.
+
+_England's Joy_, 177-78.
+
+_English Traveller, The_, 277.
+
+Epicharmus, 398.
+
+_Epicoene_, 319, 405.
+
+Epicurus, 398.
+
+Erasmus, Desiderius, 120.
+
+Essex, 44 _n._
+
+Essex, Robert Devereux, Earl of, 13, 216.
+
+Euripides, 398.
+
+Evans, Henry, 107, 110, 192-225.
+
+Evelyn, John, 338, 363, 405 _n._
+
+_Every Man in His Humour_, 85.
+
+_Every Man out of his Humour_, 246, 247 _n._
+
+
+_Fair Favourite, The_, 404.
+
+Faithorne, W., 348 _n._, 392.
+
+Falcon Stairs, 164.
+
+_Family of Love, The_, 315.
+
+Farrant, Anne, 104-10.
+
+Farrant, Richard, 91-110, 183, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204.
+
+Faunte, William, 133.
+
+Fennor, William, 177 _n._, 332-34.
+
+Ferrers, Captain, 366.
+
+Ferretti, Francesco, 164.
+
+Ferrys, 173.
+
+Feuillerat, A., 101 _n._, 186.
+
+Field, John, 125.
+
+Field, Nathaniel, 206, 237, 319, 324 _n._, 325, 342 _n._, 346.
+
+Finsbury Field, 28-38, 75, 81, 135, 142, 268, 352.
+
+Fisher, Edward, 381, 383.
+
+Fisher, John, 285 _n._, 387 _n._, 396.
+
+Fitz-Stephen, William, 120.
+
+Fleay, F.G., 112, 115, 179 _n._, 201 _n._, 311 _n._, 323, 335 _n._,
+ 350 _n._, 354 _n._, 377, 402 _n._, 416 _n._
+
+Flecknoe, Richard, 6, 7, 17, 111, 311 _n._
+
+Fleet Street, 231, 314, 424 f.
+
+Fleetwood, William, 20, 46, 69-70, 71.
+
+Fletcher, Dr., 172.
+
+Fletcher, John, 251, 304, 325, 419.
+
+Floridor, Josias, 401, 420-24.
+
+Fortescue, Sir John, 211.
+
+Fortune Playhouse, 45, 85, 88, 156-57, 176, 177 _n._, 229, 246, 259 _n._,
+ 267-93, 295, 297, 298, 302, 303, 327 _n._, 333 _n._, 353 _n._, 364 _n._,
+ 368, 374, 375, 379, 381 _n._, 425 _n._
+
+_Fortunes of Nigel, The_, 310 _n._
+
+Fowler, Thomas, 172, 410.
+
+_Fox, The_, 404.
+
+Frederick V, Elector Palatine of Palsgrave, 393.
+
+French Ambassador, 113 _n._, 220-21, 261, 316.
+
+French players, 401, 420-24.
+
+French Players' Theatre, 420-24.
+
+_Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay_, 150.
+
+Frith, Sir Richard, 96, 190.
+
+
+Gabriel. _See_ Spencer.
+
+Gaedertz, Karl T., 167.
+
+Gardiner, William, 34.
+
+Garrard, G., 231, 232.
+
+Gasquine, Susan, 159 _n._
+
+Gayton, Edmund, 303.
+
+_Gazette, The_, 341 _n._
+
+_General, The_, 419.
+
+George Yard, 313.
+
+Gerschow, Frederic, 197, 208.
+
+Gibbon's Tennis-Court Playhouse, 309 _n._
+
+Gildersleeve, Virginia C., 320 _n._
+
+Giles, Nathaniel, 201-13, 220 _n._
+
+Gill, John, 300.
+
+Gill, Richard, 300 _n._
+
+Giolito, Gabriel, 411.
+
+Giunti, 411.
+
+Glapthorne, Henry, 369, 423.
+
+Globe Playhouse, 65, 74, 85, 86, 86 _n._, 88, 112, 128, 146, 146 _n._,
+ 155, 156, 159 _n._, 176, 180, 200, 209, 210, 214 _n._, 219 _n._, 223,
+ 224, 227, 229, 233 _n._, 234-66, 267, 274-76, 282, 286, 289 _n._, 295,
+ 297, 298, 311 _n._, 324, 328.
+
+Goad, Christopher, 374.
+
+Godfrey (Master of the Bear Garden), 337.
+
+Godfrey, W.H., 277 _n._
+
+Golding Lane, 88, 268 f.
+
+Goodman, Nicholas, 180-81, 336.
+
+Gosson, Stephen, 11, 47, 113.
+
+Goulston Street, 17.
+
+Govell, R., 369 _n._
+
+Gower, Edward, 405.
+
+Grabu, M., 408.
+
+Grace Church Street, 7 f., 67, 68.
+
+_Grateful Servant, The_, 349.
+
+Grave, Thomas, 387.
+
+Graves, T.S., vii, 47 _n._, 177 _n._
+
+Gray, Lady Anne, 184.
+
+Greene, Robert, 150.
+
+Greene, Thomas, 296, 298-99.
+
+_Greene's Tu Quoque_, 298.
+
+Greenstreet, J., 317.
+
+Greenwich, 384.
+
+Greg, W.W., ix, 73, 148, 159 _n._, 179 _n._, 335 _n._, 377.
+
+Grigges, John, 48.
+
+Grymes, Thomas, 206.
+
+Guildford, Lady Jane, 184.
+
+Gunnell, Richard, 368-72, 374, 375.
+
+Gwalter, William, 285 _n._
+
+Gyles, Thomas, 113-15, 206.
+
+
+Hall, Ralph, 308.
+
+_Hamlet_ (Pre-Shakespearean), 74, 140.
+
+_Hamlet_ (Shakespeare), 208-10, 212 _n._, 248 _n._, 261.
+
+Hammon, Thomas, 395.
+
+Hampton Court, 384, 385, 401, 402, 404.
+
+Harberte, Thomas, 81.
+
+Harington, Sir John, 69.
+
+Harper, Sir George, 184.
+
+Harrison, Joan, 34-35.
+
+Harrison, Thomas (Colonel), 304.
+
+Hart, William, 304, 363.
+
+Harvey, Gabriel, 48.
+
+Hathaway, Richard, 158.
+
+Hatton, Sir Christopher (Vice-Chamberlain), 70.
+
+Hatton House, 363.
+
+Haukins, William, 85.
+
+Hawkins, Alexander, 211, 213, 214, 215.
+
+Hayward, John, 411.
+
+Heath, John, 297.
+
+_Hector of Germany, The_, 89, 321 _n._
+
+Heminges, John, 62, 73, 84, 204, 208 _n._, 223, 224, 235-41, 255, 257,
+ 258, 261-62, 319, 355.
+
+Heminges, Thomasine, 261.
+
+Henrietta Maria, Queen of England, 232-33, 420-22.
+ Her players, _see_ Queen's Company, King's and Queen's Company.
+
+_Henry IV_, 7 _n._, 404.
+
+_Henry V_ (not Shakespeare's), 13.
+
+_Henry V_ (Shakespeare), 77 _n._, 348.
+
+_Henry VI_, 150.
+
+_Henry VIII_, 251-55, 391 _n._
+
+Henry VIII, 29, 186, 391.
+
+Henry, Prince of Wales, 282-83, 392-93.
+ His players, _see under_ Admiral.
+
+Henslowe, Agnes, 283.
+
+Henslowe, Philip, 73, 85, 140, 140 _n._, 142-60, 161, 166, 174-75, 179,
+ 213 _n._, 234, 244-46, 267-74, 281-83, 321-22, 324-35, 342-43, 346.
+
+Henslowe, William, 268 _n._
+
+Hentzner, Paul, 131, 162.
+
+Herbert, Sir Henry, 89, 225, 232, 250, 301, 307 _n._, 351 _n._, 357 _n._,
+ 358, 359, 360, 360 _n._, 367, 368, 369, 373, 374, 376, 377, 377 _n._,
+ 378, 380, 381, 400, 401 _n._, 403, 412 _n._, 420-24.
+
+Herbert, Sir Philip, 392.
+
+Herbert, Thomas, 81.
+
+Herne, John, 370, 380.
+
+Herne, John (the younger), 380-81.
+
+Heton, Richard, 356 _n._, 357 _n._, 378-80, 427.
+
+Heywood, Thomas, 158, 235 _n._, 247 _n._, 277 _n._, 298-99, 382, 394-95.
+
+Hide, John, 51, 53-55, 70 _n._
+
+High Street, Southwark, 121.
+
+Hill, John, 50.
+
+Hoby, Sir Edward, 220.
+
+Hoby, Sir Philip, 184.
+
+Hockley-in-the-hole, Clerkenwell, 340.
+
+Hogarth, William, 409 _n._
+
+_Hog Hath Lost His Pearl, The_, 320.
+
+Holinshed, Raphael, 385.
+
+Holland, Aaron, 294-96.
+
+Holland, Henry, 127, 146.
+
+Hollandia, Dona Britannica, 180.
+
+_Holland's Leaguer_ (Goodman), 180, 336.
+
+_Holland's Leaguer_ (Marmion), 259, 375, 377, 415.
+
+Hollar, W., 181, 259, 329-30.
+
+Hollywell Lane, 81.
+
+Holywell Priory, 30 f., 75 f., 88, 182, 183.
+
+Honduis, J., 127, 146, 265, 329 _n._
+
+Hope Playhouse, 46, 128, 133, 146 _n._, 166, 179, 180, 248 _n._, 322,
+ 324-41, 346, 355.
+
+Horton, Joan, 143.
+
+Houghton, John, 129.
+
+Housekeepers, 225, 234 _n._, 236, 237 _n._, 351 _n._, 421 _n._
+
+Howard, Charles, the Lord Admiral. _See_ Nottingham.
+
+Howell, James, 248, 329 _n._
+
+Howes, Edmund, 7, 45 _n._, 111, 141, 251, 257, 285, 349, 350, 352, 372.
+ _See also_ Phillipps.
+
+_Humour Out of Breath_, 315.
+
+_Hungarian Lion, The_, 368.
+
+Hunks, Harry, 121.
+
+Hunnis, William, 102-10, 202, 203.
+
+Hunsdon, George Carey, Lord, 184, 189, 198, 199, 212 _n._, 214.
+
+Hunsdon, Henry Carey, Lord, 14, 68 _n._, 71, 184.
+
+Hunsdon's Company (not the Strange-Derby, etc. Company), 69-71.
+
+Hunsdon's Company. _See under_ Strange-Derby, etc. Company.
+
+Hutchinson, Christopher, 350 _n._, 362.
+
+Hynde, John, 11.
+
+
+Ianthe, 406.
+
+Ibotson, Richard, 11.
+
+_Inner Temple Masque, The_, 350.
+
+_Isle of Dogs, The_, 84, 154, 170-75.
+
+_Isle of Guls, The_, 220.
+
+Italian players, 21.
+
+
+_Jack Drum's Entertainment_, 115.
+
+James I, 215, 217, 218, 221, 227, 250, 258, 281, 310 _n._, 316, 387,
+ 392, 413, 416.
+ His players, _see_ Children of His Majesty's Revels, King's Revels
+ Company, Strange-Derby, etc. Company.
+
+James, William, 264.
+
+Jeaffreson, J.C., 85, 410.
+
+Jeffes, Anthony, 174 _n._
+
+Jeffes, Humphrey, 174 _n._
+
+Jerningham, Sir Henry, 184, 189.
+
+_Jew, The_, 11.
+
+_Jew of Malta, The_, 140, 150, 395.
+
+Johnson, Henry, 60.
+
+Johnson, Peter, 191-92, 196.
+
+Johnson, Samuel, 264.
+
+Jones, Inigo, 389, 395-400.
+
+Jones, Richard, 168, 174, 318.
+
+Jones, Robert, 343.
+
+Jonson, Ben, 78, 84, 85, 171-73, 174 _n._, 206, 207, 217, 226, 244, 246,
+ 247, 251, 255, 259, 319, 325, 330, 334, 419, 424.
+
+Joyner, William, 194.
+
+_Julius Cæsar_, 404.
+
+_Just Italian, The_, 356.
+
+
+Katherens, Gilbert, 326-30.
+
+Kempe, Anthony, 189.
+
+Kempe, William, 62, 73, 84, 115, 158, 235-40, 298.
+
+Kelly, William, 17.
+
+Kendall, Richard, 177 _n._, 333 _n._
+
+Kendall, Thomas, 213-22.
+
+Kendall, William, 213 _n._
+
+Kenningham, Robert, 41.
+
+Keysar, Robert, 117, 218-19, 222-24, 317-20.
+
+Kiechel, Samuel, 47, 77.
+
+Kildare, Earl of, 419.
+
+Killigrew's playhouse, 382.
+
+Kinaston, Edward, 207, 366.
+
+_Kingdom's Weekly Intelligencer, The_, 291, 293 _n._
+
+_King Lear_, 261.
+
+_King Leir_, 153.
+
+Kingman, Philip, 343.
+
+King's and Queen's Company (or Beeston's Boys), 357-62.
+
+King's Company. _See under_ Strange-Derby, etc.
+
+King's (James I's) Revels Company, 311-18.
+
+King's (Charles I's) Revels Company, 287, 374, 377-79.
+
+Kingsland Spittle, 89.
+
+Kingston, Lady Mary, 189.
+
+Kingston, Sir William, 184.
+
+Kirkham, Edward, 116, 208 _n._, 213-22, 226.
+
+Kirkman, Francis, 296-97, 305, 358-59.
+
+Knowles, John, 241-42.
+
+Kymbre, 41.
+
+Kynaston, Edward, 207, 366.
+
+Kyrkham, Sir Robert, 184.
+
+
+_Ladies' Priviledge, The_, 423.
+
+Lady Elizabeth's Company. _See_ Princess Elizabeth's Company.
+
+_Lady Mother, The_, 369.
+
+La Fèvre de la Boderie, Antoine, 220-22, 316 _n._
+
+Lamb, Charles, 299.
+
+Lambarde, William, 15.
+
+Lambeth, 121, 161.
+
+_Landgartha_, 418.
+
+Laneham, Robert, 128.
+
+Langley, Francis, 161, 170-76, 234.
+
+Lanham, John, 67, 69, 80 _n._
+
+Lanman, Henry, 78-82, 83, 86, 87, 144, 234.
+
+Lanteri, Edward, 265 _n._
+
+Lau, Hurfries de, 423.
+
+Laud, William, 228-30.
+
+Lawrence, W.J., vii, 48 _n._, 112, 177 _n._, 293 _n._, 313 _n._, 350 _n._,
+ 365 _n._, 398, 408, 423 _n._
+
+Leaden Hall, 12.
+
+Lee, Sir Sidney, 124 _n._, 294 _n._, 350 _n._, 408 _n._
+
+Le Febure (or Fevure), 422-23.
+
+Leicester, Robert Dudley, Earl of, 106-07.
+
+Leicester's Company, 22, 66, 67, 71, 80 _n._
+
+Lennox, James Stuart, 4 Duke of, 232.
+
+Lennox, Ludovick Stuart, 2 Duke of, 261.
+
+Lenton, Francis, 356.
+
+Leveson, Sir Richard, 405.
+
+Levison, William, 240.
+
+Lewes, Thomas, 382.
+
+Lilleston, Thomas, 366.
+
+Lincoln's Inn Fields, 348 _n._, 352, 382, 414 f.
+
+Lodge, Thomas, 74.
+
+_London's Lamentation for her Sins_, 302.
+
+Long, Maurice, 81.
+
+Lorkin, Thomas, 254, 389.
+
+_Lost Lady, The_, 404.
+
+_Loves and Adventures of Clerico and Lozia, The_, 359.
+
+_Love's Mistress, or the Queen's Masque_, 382.
+
+Lowin, John, 158, 363, 400.
+
+_Loyal Protestant, The_, 339.
+
+_Loyal Subject, The_, 366.
+
+Ludgate, 7 f., 226.
+
+Ludlow, 71.
+
+Luther, Martin, 113 _n._, 411.
+
+Lyly, John, 109-10, 112, 113-14, 194, 202.
+
+
+Machiavel, 411.
+
+Machin, Lewis, 316.
+
+Machyn, Henry, 124 _n._
+
+Mackaye, Steele, 398.
+
+Madden, Sir Frederick, 130.
+
+Madison Square Theatre, 398.
+
+Maiden Lane, 88, 144, 243 f., 341.
+
+Malcolm, J.P., 339.
+
+Malone, Edmund, vii, 77, 89, 160 _n._, 225, 248, 367, 373, 375-76, 420.
+
+Manchester, Edward Montagu, Earl of, 122, 337.
+
+_Mankind_, 2-4.
+
+Manningham, John, 178.
+
+Mantzius, Karl, 48 _n._
+
+Markham, Gervais, 316.
+
+Marlowe, Christopher, 73.
+
+Marmion, Shackerley, 259, 375, 376, 377, 415.
+
+Marston, John, 85 _n._, 112, 115, 116, 196 _n._, 216, 217-18, 223.
+
+Martin, William, 265 _n._
+
+Martin Marprelate Controversy, 114.
+
+_Martin's Month's Mind_, 10, 69.
+
+Mason, John, 315, 316.
+
+_Masque, The_, 369 _n._
+
+Massinger, Philip, 325, 382 _n._
+
+Mathews, John, 14.
+
+Meade, Jacob, 326-36, 346.
+
+_Measure for Measure_, 388.
+
+_Melise, ou Les Princes Reconnus, La_, 420.
+
+Mercer, Will, 338.
+
+_Merchant of Dublin, The_, 418.
+
+_Mercurius Fumigosus_, 307 _n._
+
+_Mercurius Politicus_, 292.
+
+Meres, Francis, 175 _n._, 176.
+
+Merian, M., 146 _n._, 180 _n._, 248, 328 _n._
+
+Merry, Edward, 192.
+
+_Merry Devil of Edmonton, The_, 404.
+
+_Merry Wives of Windsor, The_, 388, 404.
+
+_Midas_, 112.
+
+Middlesex Street, 17.
+
+Middleton, Thomas, 116, 207, 209 _n._, 278, 315, 350, 419.
+
+Mohun, Michael, 304.
+
+Monk, General. _See_ Albemarle.
+
+Monkaster. _See_ Mulcaster.
+
+Montmorency, Duke of, 385.
+
+Moore, Mr. (of Pepy's _Diary_), 405.
+
+Moor Field, 81.
+
+_Moor of Venice, The_, 367, 387.
+
+More, Sir Christopher, 184.
+
+More, Sir William, 96-110, 113, 184, 189-90, 208.
+
+Morocco Ambassador, 339.
+
+Morris, Isbrand, 241-42.
+
+Motteram, John, 206.
+
+Mountjoy, Lord, 81.
+
+Mulcaster, Richard, 206.
+
+Munday, Anthony, 82.
+
+Murray, J.T., 71, 88, 89 _n._, 111 _n._, 286 _n._, 298 _n._, 311 _n._,
+ 323, 354 _n._, 377, 378.
+
+Myles, Ralph, 57.
+
+Myles, Robert, 28 _n._, 42, 43, 54-58.
+
+
+Nash, Thomas, 10 _n._, 69, 84, 114-15, 154, 171-73.
+
+Neuendorf, B., vii.
+
+Neville, Sir Henry, 95-100, 102 _n._, 184.
+
+Newgate Market, 122.
+
+Newington Butts Playhouse, 73, 134-41, 151, 154.
+
+New Inn Yard, 34, 79.
+
+Newman, John, 107-08.
+
+Nexara, Duke of, 130.
+
+Nicholas, Basilius, 224.
+
+Nightingale Lane, 410-12.
+
+_Noble Stranger, The_, 373 _n._
+
+Norden, John, 128 _n._, 145.
+
+Northbrooke, John, 76.
+
+_Northern Lass, The_, 404.
+
+Northup, Clark S., ix.
+
+Nottingham, Charles Howard, Earl of, 155 _n._, 268-70, 272-73.
+ His players, _see_ Admiral.
+
+_No Wit, No Help like a Woman's_, 419.
+
+
+Ogilby, John, 294, 417-19.
+
+Ogilby, John, and William Morgan, 294.
+
+Ogilby's Dublin Theatre, 417-19.
+
+_Oldcastle_, 404.
+
+Opera, 365, 425.
+
+Ordish, T.F., vii, 48 _n._, 341 _n._
+
+_Orlando Furioso_, 150.
+
+Osteler, William, 225 _n._, 237, 260.
+
+_Othello_, 367, 387, 388.
+
+Oxford, Edward de Vere, Earl of, 16, 108-10, 157, 202.
+
+Oxford's Company, 16, 87 _n._, 157-59.
+
+
+Palatine. _See_ Frederick V.
+
+Palladio, Andrea, 398.
+
+Pallant, Robert, 158.
+
+Palmyra, 265.
+
+Palsgrave. _See_ Frederick V.
+
+Palsgrave's Company. _See under_ Admiral.
+
+_Pappe with an Hatchet_, 112.
+
+Paris, Robert de, 122.
+
+Paris Garden. _See_ Bear Garden.
+
+Paris Garden, Manor of, 121 f., 135, 161 f.
+
+Park, The, 241.
+
+Park Street, 265.
+
+Parliament Chamber, 186 f.
+
+_Passionate Lovers, The_, 404.
+
+_Pastorall, The_, 401.
+
+Pavy, Salmon (or Salathiel), 206, 207.
+
+Payne, Robert, 215.
+
+Peckam, Edmund, 51-52, 66.
+
+Pembroke, William Herbert, Earl of, 261.
+
+Pembroke and Montgomery, Philip Herbert, Earl of, 232.
+
+Pembroke's Company, 84, 154-55, 157, 170-75.
+
+Penruddoks, Edward, 430.
+
+Pepys, Samuel, 17, 207, 308, 338, 366, 382, 405.
+
+_Perfect Account, The_, 305.
+
+_Perfect Occurrences_, 304.
+
+Perkins, Richard, 158, 380.
+
+Perrin, Lady, 184.
+
+Peyton, Sir John, 410.
+
+Phillips, Augustine, 62, 73, 84, 224, 235-41, 260.
+
+Phillipps, Sir Thomas (his copy of Stow's _Annals_), 233, 258 _n._, 264,
+ 285 _n._, 291, 330 _n._, 336, 364, 381 _n._
+
+_Philotas_, 216.
+
+Phoenix Playhouse. _See_ Cockpit Playhouse in Drury Lane.
+
+Pierce, Edward, 116, 117, 319-20.
+
+Pierce, James, 382.
+
+Pierce, Mrs. James, 308, 382.
+
+_Pierce the Ploughman's Creed_, 196.
+
+Piozzi, Hester Lynch, 264.
+
+Pipe Office, 190 _n._, 197.
+
+Pit Court, 348 _n._
+
+Plague, 12, 15, 20, 23, 24, 67 _n._, 74 _n._, 152-53, 159, 215, 222, 223,
+ 224, 281, 282, 287-88, 316, 355, 356, 357, 358, 379.
+
+_Playhouse to be Let_, 309.
+
+Playhouse Yard, 197.
+
+Plomer, H.R., 293 _n._
+
+_Poetaster_, 1 _n._, 226.
+
+Pollard, Thomas, 363.
+
+Pope (a scrivener?), 159.
+
+Pope, Alexander, 417.
+
+Pope, Morgan, 159 _n._
+
+Pope, Thomas, 62, 73, 84, 86, 159 _n._, 224, 235-41, 260.
+
+Porter's Hall. _See_ Rosseter's Blackfriars Playhouse.
+
+Portynary, Sir John, 184, 193.
+
+Pride, Thomas, 337.
+
+Prince Charles--2 Red Bull Company:
+ Prince Charles I's Company, 17, 88, 89, 179, 300, 301-02, 334-35, 344,
+ 346, 354-55, 417.
+ 2 Red Bull Company, 301-04.
+
+Prince Charles's (Charles II's) Company. _See under_ Admiral, etc.
+
+Prince Henry's Company. _See under_ Admiral, etc.
+
+Prince's Arms Inn, 180 _n._
+
+Princess Elizabeth's Company, 179, 321, 324, 332-35, 342, 344, 346,
+ 354 _n._, 355.
+
+Prynne, William, 302, 310 _n._, 372 _n._
+
+_Ptolome_, 11.
+
+Puckering, Sir Thomas, 254, 389.
+
+Puddlewharf, 343 f.
+
+Puiseux, M. de, 221 _n._
+
+Puritans, 6, 18-19, 29, 85, 126, 156.
+
+Pykman, Phillipp, 206.
+
+
+Queen Anne's Company. _See under_ Worcester, etc.
+
+Queen's (Elizabeth's) Company, 12, 13, 66-72, 80 _n._, 84, 153.
+
+Queen's (Henrietta's) Company, 355-56, 379-80, 394, 421, 427.
+
+Queen's Revels. _See under_ Children of the Chapel, etc.
+
+Queen's Street, 348 _n._
+
+
+Raleigh, Sir Walter, 126.
+
+_Ram Alley_, 313, 316.
+
+Randolph, Thomas, 303, 349.
+
+Rastell, William, 213-22.
+
+Ratcliffe, 352.
+
+Rathgeb, Jacob, 132.
+
+1 Red Bull Company. _See under_ Worcester, etc.
+
+2 Red Bull Company. _See under_ Prince Charles, etc.
+
+Red Bull Playhouse, 75 _n._, 88, 89, 219 _n._, 226 _n._, 287, 294-309,
+ 311 _n._, 351, 353, 353 _n._, 356, 374, 378.
+
+Red Bull Yard, 294.
+
+Redwood, C.W., ix.
+
+Reeve, Ralph, 343.
+
+Rendle, William, 12, 124 _n._, 143, 178 _n._, 180 _n._, 339.
+
+Reulidge, Richard, 8, 310 _n._
+
+Revels Office, 94, 96.
+
+Reynolds, G.F., vii.
+
+Rhodes, John, 365, 366.
+
+Richards, Hugh, 36.
+
+Richmond, 402, 404.
+
+_Roaring Girl, The_, 278.
+
+Roberts, John, 242.
+
+Robinson, James, 205, 213.
+
+Robinson, Richard, 304.
+
+Rochester, John Wilmot, Earl of, 340.
+
+_Romeo and Juliet_, 85.
+
+Roper, Lactantius, 241-42.
+
+_Rosania_, 259, 419.
+
+Rose Alley, 144, 160 _n._
+
+Rose Playhouse, 16, 16 _n._, 61 _n._, 63, 73 _n._, 75 _n._, 77 _n._, 128,
+ 139, 140, 142-60, 167, 168 _n._, 174, 179, 182, 238, 248, 265, 267,
+ 296, 324, 332 _n._
+
+Rosseter, Philip, 117, 118, 224, 317-23, 324-25, 330-32, 335, 342-47.
+
+Rosseter's Blackfriars Playhouse, 322, 336, 342-47, 355.
+
+Rossingham, Edmond, 288.
+
+Rowlands, Samuel, 185 _n._
+
+Roxalana, 406.
+
+_Royal Master, The_, 419.
+
+_Rump, The_, 382.
+
+Russell, Dowager Lady Elizabeth, 199.
+
+Rutland, Edward Manners, Earl of, 36, 36 _n._, 37.
+
+Rutland House, 364.
+
+Ryther, Augustine, 277.
+
+
+Sacarson, 121.
+
+_Sackful of News, A._, 10.
+
+St. Bride's, Parish of, 425 f.
+
+St. Dunstan's, Parish of, 425 f.
+
+St. Giles, Cripplegate, 268 f.
+
+St. Giles in the Fields, 355, 362.
+
+St. James, Palace of, 384, 392.
+
+St. James, Parish of, 294 f.
+
+St. John's Gate, 294.
+
+St. John's Street, 11, 96, 294 f., 305.
+
+St. Mary Overies, 64-65, 168 _n._, 238.
+
+St. Mildred, Parish of, 143, 159.
+
+_St. Patrick for Ireland_, 419.
+
+St. Paul's Boys. _See_ Children of St. Paul's.
+
+St. Paul's Cathedral, 29 _n._, 167.
+
+St. Paul's Playhouse, 8, 111-18, 349.
+
+St. Saviours, Parish of, 145, 170, 259.
+
+St. Warburg's Street, Dublin, 418.
+
+Salisbury, Mr. (portrait painter), 366.
+
+Salisbury, Robert Cecil, Earl of, 221.
+
+Salisbury Court Playhouse, 233, 259, 287, 291, 302, 350, 357 _n._,
+ 360 _n._, 364, 368-83, 427.
+
+Sampson, M.W., 279 _n._
+
+Sandwich, Edward Montagu, Earl of, 405.
+
+_Sapho and Phao_, 109, 113.
+
+_Satiromastix_, 332.
+
+Saunders, Lady, 343 f.
+
+Saunders, Sir Thomas, 184.
+
+Savage, Thomas, 240.
+
+_Scornful Lady, The_, 403, 406.
+
+Scott, Sir Walter, 310 _n._
+
+Scuderi, Georges de, 421 _n._
+
+Sellers, William, 242.
+
+Shadwell, Thomas, 310 _n._
+
+Shakespeare, William, 62, 63, 65, 73, 84, 85, 140, 150, 186, 208-10,
+ 212 _n._, 224, 235-41, 249, 251, 261-62, 298, 348, 391 _n._
+
+Shanks, John, 263.
+
+Sharp, Lewis, 373 _n._
+
+Sharpham, Edward, 316.
+
+Shatterel, Edward, 304-05, 308.
+
+Shaw, Robert, 168, 172-74.
+
+Sherlock, William, 380.
+
+Shirley, James, 259, 349, 376, 377, 406 _n._, 419.
+
+Shoreditch, 30, 78, 185.
+
+Sibthorpe, Edward, 315.
+
+_Siege of Rhodes, The_, 364.
+
+_Silent Woman, The_, 319, 405.
+
+Silver, George, 13 _n._, 194-95.
+
+Silver, Thomas, 381, 383.
+
+Singer, John, 235 _n._
+
+_Sir Francis Drake_, 364.
+
+_Sir Giles Goosecappe_, 373.
+
+Skevington, Richard, 172.
+
+_Skialetheia_, 46, 61.
+
+Slaiter, Martin, 315, 317-18.
+
+Slye, William, 224, 225 _n._, 235 _n._, 260.
+
+Smallpiece, Thomas, 108.
+
+Smith, Isack, 366.
+
+Smith, John, 351 _n._
+
+Smith, Captain John, 369 _n._
+
+Smith, Wentworth, 158.
+
+Smith, William, 63.
+
+Smithfield, 332.
+
+Somerset House, 404.
+
+Sophocles, 398.
+
+Soulas, Josias de, 420-24.
+
+Spanish Ambassador, 281, 339.
+
+_Spanish Curate, The_, 404.
+
+_Spanish Tragedy, The_, 150, 261.
+
+_Sparagus Garden, The_, 379.
+
+Sparks, Thomas, 285 _n._
+
+Speed, John, 265.
+
+Spencer, Gabriel, 168, 172-74, 235 _n._
+
+Spiller, Sir Henry, 230.
+
+Spykes School, 206.
+
+_Squire of Alsatia, The_, 310 _n._
+
+Stanley, Ferdinando, Lord Strange. _See_ Derby.
+
+Star of the West, 133.
+
+Steevens, George, 77-78.
+
+Stepney Field, 352.
+
+Stettin-Pomerania, Philip Julius, Duke of, 207, 214-15.
+
+Stevens, John, 183.
+
+Stockwood, John, 8, 26, 46, 48.
+
+Stone, George, 121.
+
+Stopes, Charlotte C., 361 _n._
+
+Stoughton, Robert, 36.
+
+Stow, John, 124, 136, 166, 348, 388, 391.
+ _See also_ Howes, Phillipps, and Strype.
+
+Strafford, Thomas Wentworth, Earl of, 417-18.
+
+Strange, Lord. _See_ Derby.
+
+Strange--Derby--1 Chamberlain--Hunsdon--2 Chamberlain--King James I--King
+ Charles I's Company:
+ Strange's Company, 14, 139, 150-54.
+ Derby's Company, 73, 87 _n._, 153.
+ 1 Chamberlain's Company, 14-15, 150, 153-54.
+ Hunsdon's Company, 199, 199 _n._
+ 2 Chamberlain's Company, 16, 61, 61 _n._, 62, 68 _n._, 73-74, 84, 85,
+ 150, 154-55, 159 _n._, 174-75, 176, 200, 209 _n._, 212 _n._, 235-38,
+ 249, 267, 272-73, 351.
+ King James I's Company, 88, 118, 223-27, 250-62, 295, 320-21, 324,
+ 325, 374.
+ King Charles I's Company, 227-33, 262-63, 302, 365, 374, 378, 400,
+ 401, 402.
+
+Street, Peter, 63, 64, 239, 269, 273-74.
+
+Strype, John, 243, 340, 391, 408 _n._
+
+Stubbes, Philip, 83, 125.
+
+Stutville, George, 374.
+
+Summer playhouse, 67-68, 225, 250, 321, 324, 325, 342.
+
+Sumner, John, 380.
+
+Sussex's Company, 152.
+
+Swan Inn, 180 _n._
+
+Swan Playhouse, 77 _n._, 84, 154-55, 161-81, 182, 238, 273, 321, 324,
+ 326, 327, 329, 334, 342-43.
+
+Swanston, Eilliard, 400.
+
+Swinerton, Sir John, 321.
+
+Swynnerton, Thomas, 296.
+
+
+_Taming of a Shrew, The_, 140.
+
+Tarbock, John, 318.
+
+Tarleton, Richard, 12, 13, 14 _n._, 67, 69, 72, 72 _n._, 235, 298.
+
+_Tarlton's Jests_, 13.
+
+_Tarlton's News out of Purgatory_, 69, 75.
+
+Tatham, John, 289, 303 _n._, 382.
+
+Taylor, John (the Water Poet), 251, 257, 259, 329, 332-34.
+
+Taylor, Joseph, 363, 400.
+
+Taylor, Robert, 320.
+
+Theatre Playhouse, 8, 10, 11 _n._, 15, 26, 27-74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 83,
+ 84, 91, 112, 135, 138, 154, 155, 167, 172 _n._, 182, 199, 200, 234-35,
+ 239, 244, 249.
+
+Thespis, 398.
+
+Thoresby, Henry, 410.
+
+Thorndike, A.H., vii.
+
+Thrale, Mrs. Henry, 264.
+
+Three Kings Ordinary, 425, 429, 430.
+
+Tilney, Edmund, 66, 85.
+
+_Titus Andronicus_, 140, 152.
+
+Tomlins, T.E., 76.
+
+_Tom Tell Troth's Message_, 146.
+
+Tooley, Nicholas, 350 _n._
+
+Topclyfe, Richard, 172-73.
+
+_Totenham Court_, 373.
+
+_Toy, The_, 419.
+
+Trevell, William, 315.
+
+_Trompeur Puni, Le_, 421.
+
+Trussell, Alvery, 206.
+
+Tunstall, James, 350 _n._
+
+_Turk, The_, 316.
+
+Turner, 178.
+
+Turner, Anthony, 308, 380.
+
+Turnor, Richard, 50.
+
+_Two Maids of Moreclacke, The_, 316.
+
+
+Underwood, John, 86.
+
+_Unfortunate Lovers, The_, 233, 404.
+
+University of Illinois, 277 _n._
+
+
+Vaghan, Edward, 410.
+
+_Valient Cid, The_, 406.
+
+Vaughan, Sir William, 125.
+
+Venetian Ambassador, 280.
+
+Vennar, Richard, 177-78, 333 _n._
+
+Vere, Lady Susan, 392.
+
+Verneuil, Madame de, 220-21.
+
+Vertue, George, 387 _n._, 396.
+
+Virgin, performance by a, 74 _n._
+
+Visscher, C.J., 127, 128, 146 _n._, 164-65, 248, 253, 328, 328 _n._, 329.
+
+_Volpone_, 404.
+
+_Vox Graculi_, 89.
+
+Vuolfio, Giovanni. _See_ John Wolf.
+
+
+Walker, Thomas, 337.
+
+Wallace, C.W., ix, 67, 71, 110 _n._, 115, 117, 140, 148 _n._, 160 _n._,
+ 168 _n._, 170 _n._, 177 _n._, 178 _n._, 179 _n._, 192 _n._, 196 _n._,
+ 197, 197 _n._, 201 _n._, 204 _n._, 208, 212 _n._, 215 _n._, 221 _n._,
+ 243, 248-49, 258 _n._, 259 _n._, 266, 285 _n._, 353 _n._
+
+Walsingham, Sir Francis, 110.
+
+Warburton, John, 369 _n._
+
+War of the Theatres, 250.
+
+Warwick, Ambrose Dudley, Earl of, 12.
+
+Water Lane, Blackfriars, 98, 102.
+
+Water Lane, Whitefriars, 371.
+
+_Way to Content all Women, or How a Man May Please his Wife_, 368-69.
+
+Webster, John, 116, 158, 226 _n._
+
+_Weekly Account, The_, 290.
+
+_Weekly Intelligencer, The_, 306, 307.
+
+Westcott, Sebastian, 113.
+
+Westminster Cathedral, 126, 167.
+
+Westminster School, 206.
+
+_What You Will_, 112.
+
+Whitaker, Laurence, 230.
+
+White, Thomas, 48, 76.
+
+Whitechapel, 8 _n._, 17.
+
+Whitechapel Street, 7.
+
+Whitecross Street, 268 f.
+
+_White Devil, The_, 226 _n._
+
+Whitefriars Playhouse, 8, 117, 224, 310-23, 324, 342-43, 368 _n._
+
+Whitehall, 356 _n._, 374, 384 f., 387-91, 403.
+
+White Hart Inn, 1.
+
+Whitelock, Bulstrode, 305.
+
+Whitton, Tom, 382.
+
+Wigpitt, Thomas, 285 _n._
+
+Wilbraham, 172.
+
+Wilbraham, William, 374.
+
+Wilkinson, Nicholas, 350 _n._
+
+Wilkinson, R., 259 _n._, 293 _n._
+
+Williams, John, 412-17.
+
+Williamson, Joseph, 306.
+
+Wilson, J.D., 76 _n._
+
+Wilson, Robert, 12, 176.
+
+Winchester, Bishop of, 119, 134, 241 _n._
+
+Windsor, 384.
+ _See also_ Children of Windsor Chapel.
+
+Winter playhouse, 67-68, 225, 233, 250, 321, 324, 325, 342.
+
+Wintershall, William, 308.
+
+Winwood, Sir Ralph, 252, 392.
+
+Wirtemberg, Duke of, 132.
+
+_Witch of Edmonton, The_, 354 _n._
+
+Witt, Johannes de, 77 _n._, 146 _n._, 165-68, 273.
+
+Witter, John, 224, 258.
+
+_Wit Without Money_, 304.
+
+Wolf, John, 410-12.
+
+Wolf's Theatre, 410-12.
+
+Wolsey, Cardinal, 186, 252, 391.
+
+_Woman is a Weathercock, A_, 140, 342 _n._
+
+Wood, Anthony à, 418.
+
+Woode, Tobias, 410.
+
+Woodford, Thomas, 311, 313, 314, 322.
+
+Woodman, 193.
+
+Woodward, 142.
+
+Woodward, Agnes, 142-43, 283.
+
+Woodward Joan, ix, 151.
+
+Worcester College, 395.
+
+Worcester--Queen--1 Red Bull--Children of the Revels Company:
+ Worcester's Company, 16, 72, 87, 157-59, 295, 351.
+ Queen Anne's Company, 16, 87, 88, 158, 295-300, 351, 353.
+ 1 Red Bull Company, 300-01.
+ Children of the Revels, 301.
+
+Wordsworth, William, 299.
+
+Wotton, Sir Henry, 251, 320.
+
+Wright, George R., 401.
+
+Wright, James, 285, 297, 303, 304, 350, 363, 373.
+
+Wyngaerde, A. van den, 124.
+
+
+Yarmouth, 45 _n._
+
+York House, 391.
+
+Young, John, 374.
+
+_Younger Brother, The_, 299.
+
+_Young Gallant's Whirligig, The_, 356.
+
+
+Zanche, Lord, 184.
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SHAKESPEAREAN PLAYHOUSES***
+
+
+******* This file should be named 22397-8.txt or 22397-8.zip *******
+
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+https://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/2/3/9/22397
+
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
+paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+ the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+ you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
+ owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+ has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+ Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
+ must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+ prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+ returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+ sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+ address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+ the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+ you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+ does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+ License. You must require such a user to return or
+ destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+ and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+ Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+ money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+ electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+ of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+ distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf.
+
+
+Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact
+
+For additional contact information:
+ Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+ Chief Executive and Director
+ gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit:
+https://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+ https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
generated by cgit v1.2.3 (git 2.25.1) at 2026-07-16 00:16:42 +0000