Shakespearean Playhouses

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.]

*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 Phœnix 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 xvii^e 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.

Phœnix. 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.)

Footnotes

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.)

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.

3 See especially The Acts of the Privy Council and The Remembrancia of the City of London.

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.”

5 The Remembrancia shows that the inn-playhouses remained for many years as sharp thorns in the side of the puritanical city fathers.

6 Grosart, Nash, i, 179.

7 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, vi, 168.

8 W. Rendle, The Inns of Old Southwark, p. 235.

9 A. Feuillerat, Documents Relating to the Office of the Revels in the Time of Queen Elizabeth, p. 277.

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.

11 Arber’s English Reprints, p. 40.

12 See The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 55-57.

13 See The Remembrancia, in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 66.

14 C.W. Wallace, The First London Theatre, p. 11.

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.”

16 First printed in 1611; reprinted by J.O. Halliwell for The Shakespeare Society in 1844.

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.

18 Lansdowne MSS. 60, quoted by Collier, History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), i, 265.

19 The Remembrancia, The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 73.

20 See W. Rendle, The Inns of Old Southwark, p. 236.

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.

22 The Remembrancia, The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 85.

23 They had to use the Rose nevertheless; see page 158.

24 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 265.

25 So the Lord Mayor characterized playgoers; see The Remembrancia, in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 75.

26 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 164.

27 The Remembrancia, in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 69.

28 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, viii, 131, 132.

29 For the complete document see W.C. Hazlitt, The English Drama and Stage, p. 27.

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.

31 Deposition by Robert Myles, 1592, printed in Wallace’s The First London Theatre, p. 141.

32 See page 134.

33 See The Remembrancia, p. 274; Stow, Survey. The Corporation of London held the manor on lease from St. Paul’s Cathedral until 1867.

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.

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.

36 Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 365. The suit concerns the Curtain property, somewhat south of the Alleyn property, but a part of the Priory.

37 I have based this map in large measure on the documents presented by Braines in his excellent pamphlet, Holywell Priory.

38 For proof see Braines, op. cit.

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.

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.

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.

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.

43 Quoted from Burbage v. Alleyn, Court of Requests, 1600, Wallace, op. cit., p. 182.

44 That is, about £80.

45 Wallace, op. cit., p. 134; cf. p. 153.

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.)

47 The name is often spelled “Braynes.”

48 Wallace, op. cit., p. 109.

49 See Wallace, op. cit., pp. 139 seq.

50 That is, half-interest.

51 Wallace, op. cit., p. 40.

52 Wallace, op. cit., p. 136.

53 Brayne v. Burbage, 1592. Printed in full by Wallace, op cit. p. 141.

54 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 213, 217, 263, 265, et al.

55 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 137, 141, 142, 148, 153.

56 Alleyn v. Burbage, Star Chamber Proceedings, 1601-02; printed by Wallace, op. cit., p. 277.

57 Myles v. Burbage and Alleyn, 1597; printed by Wallace, op. cit., p. 159; cf. pp. 263, 106, 152.

58 See Wallace, op. cit., p. 277.

59 This agrees with the claim of Brayne’s widow.

60 Wallace, op. cit., p. 120.

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.

62 The rest of his speech indicates that he had the Theatre in mind. The passage, of course, is rhetorical.

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.

64 Quoted by W.B. Rye, England as Seen by Foreigners, p. 88.

65 Wallace, op. cit., p. 177.

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.

67 Wallace, op. cit., p. 135.

68 For depositions to this effect see Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 350 ff.

69 I suspect that the same terms were made with the actors by the proprietors of the inn-playhouses.

70 Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 317.

71 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 142, 148.

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.

73 Wallace, op. cit., p. 103.

74 See Wallace, op. cit., pp. 201, 239, 240, 242.

75 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 229, 234, 228, 233.

76 Wallace, op. cit., p. 55.

77 Ibid., p. 105.

78 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 57, 60, 62.

79 Ibid., p. 121.

80 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 63, 97, 100, 101, 114.

81 See Wallace, op. cit., pp. 195, 212, 216, 250, 258, et al.

82 Wallace, op. cit., p. 246.

83 Ibid., p. 184.

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.

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.

86 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 216, 249.

87 Ibid., pp. 277, 288.

88 The date, January 20, 1599, seems to be an error.

89 Wallace, op. cit., p. 238.

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.

91 For a list of the Queen’s Men see Wallace, op. cit., p. 11.

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.

93 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 66.

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.

95 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 170, 172.

96 The letter is printed in full in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 164.

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.

98 Wallace, op. cit., p. 11.

99 Murray, English Dramatic Companies, i, 321.

100 Tarlton’s Jests, ed. by J.O. Halliwell, p. 16. Tarleton died in 1588.

101 Wallace, op. cit., pp. 101, 126.

102 The Black Booke, 1604.

103 Wallace, op. cit., p. 101.

104 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, ii, 83. The Admiral’s Men were reorganized in 1594, and occupied the Rose under Henslowe’s management.

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.

106 The site is probably marked by Curtain Court in Chasserau’s survey of 1745, reproduced on page 79.

107 Ed. by J.O. Halliwell, for The Shakespeare Society (1844), p. 105.

108 The Rose and the Red Bull derived their names in a similar way from the estates on which they were erected.

109 Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 364.

110 Tomlins, Origin of the Curtain Theatre, and Mistakes Regarding It, in The Shakespeare Society’s Papers (1844), p. 29.

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.

112 Ed. by J.P. Collier, for The Shakespeare Society (1843), p. 85.

113 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxvii, 313.

114 It seems, however, to have been smaller than the Theatre.

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.

116 Malone, Variorum, iii, 54; cf. also Ellis, The Parish of St. Leonard.

117 Did Steevens base his statement on this passage in Aubrey?

118 Brayne v. Burbage, 1592, printed in full by Wallace, The First London Theatre, pp. 109-52. See especially pp. 126, 148.

119 Easer?

120 Wallace, op. cit., p. 148; cf. p. 126.

121 Tomlins, op. cit., pp. 29-31.

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.

123 Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 365.

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.

125 Tomlins, op. cit., p. 31.

126 View of Sundry Examples, 1580.

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.

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.

129 For details see the chapter on the Swan.

130 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxvii, 313.

131 Marston, The Scourge of Villainy (1598); Bullen, The Works of John Marston, iii, 372.

132 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 52.

133 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 82.

134 Wallace, op. cit., p. 148.

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.

136 Ibid., p. 230.

137 Possibly Derby’s Men.

138 See Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxxi, 346.

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.

140 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 266.

141 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 61; Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxxii, 511.

142 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 270.

143 English Dramatic Companies, i, 230.

144 Malone, Variorum, iii, 59; cf. Chalmers’s Supplemental Apology, p. 213, note y. Murray gives the date incorrectly as 1623.

145 Murray, English Dramatic Companies, i, 237, note 1.

146 Malone, Variorum, iii, 54, note 2.

147 See Jeaffreson, Middlesex County Records, iii, 164, from which the notice was quoted by Ordish, Early London Theatres, p. 106.

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.

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.

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.

151 The breadth is elsewhere given as twenty-six, and twenty-seven feet.

152 The date from which the lease was made to run.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

157 Wallace, The Evolution of the English Drama, p. 163.

158 Wallace, The Evolution of the English Drama, p. 153.

159 More had “refused to accept any rent but conditionally.” Probably he refused written consent to the sublease for the same reason.

160 Wallace, The Evolution of the English Drama, p. 154.

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.”

162 Murray, English Dramatic Companies, i, 325, erroneously says: “Their public place was, probably, from the first, the courtyard of St. Paul’s Cathedral.”

163 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 95.

164 That is, in or near Pater Noster Row.

165 Annales, or A Generall Chronicle of England, 1631, signature liii 1, verso.

166 F.G. Fleay, A Biographical Chronicle of the English Drama, ii, 76; W.J. Lawrence, The Elizabethan Playhouse, p. 17.

167 R.W. Bond, The Complete Works of John Lyly, iii, 408. Higher prices of admission were charged to all the private playhouses.

168 John Marston, Antonio’s Revenge, acted at Paul’s in 1600.

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.

170 Malone, Variorum, iii, 432.

171 The Children of the Chapel, p. 153.

172 A Chronicle History of the London Stage, p. 152.

173 Cunningham, Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels, p. xxxviii.

174 Nichols, The Progresses of James, iv, 1073.

175 Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 80.

176 Ibid., p. 95.

177 “Pingues tauri cornupetæ, seu vrsi immanes, cum obiectis depugnant canibus.”

178 The map is reproduced in facsimile by Rendle as a frontispiece to Old Southwark and its People.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

183 Stow, Annals (ed. 1631), p. 696.

184 Philip Stubbes, The Anatomie of Abuses (ed. Furnivall), p. 179.

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).

186 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 65.

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

192 The Calendar of State Papers, Venetian, xv, 258.

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.

194 Collier, The Alleyn Papers, p. 31.

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.

196 The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1547, February 5, p. 1; cf. Tytler’s Edward VI and Mary, i, 20.

197 See page 29.

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.)

199 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xii, 15.

200 Ibid., xiv, 102.

201 Apology, p. 403.

202 History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), iii, 131.

203 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xiv, 99.

204 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, ii, 50, 73.

205 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 42.

206 Ibid., pp. 43-44.

207 There is no evidence that Henslowe owned the house at Newington; he might very well have rented it for this particular occasion.

208 Wallace, The First London Theatre, p. 2.

209 Page 1004.

210 W. Rendle, in The Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer, viii, 60.

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.)

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.

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.

214 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xv, 271.

215 Discovered by Mr. Wallace and printed in the London Times, April 30, 1914.

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.

217 If we may believe Johannes de Witt, the Rose was “more magnificent” than the theatres in Shoreditch. See page 167.

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.

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.

220 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 7.

221 For a list of their plays see Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 13 ff.

222 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 42.

223 See Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 43. For a general discussion of various problems involved, see Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, ii, 51-2.

224 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 16.

225 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 17.

226 He is so described, for example, in the warrant issued by the Privy Council on May 6, 1593, to Strange’s Men.

227 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 4.

228 For the details of this episode see the chapter on the Swan.

229 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 54.

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.

231 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxx, 395.

232 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 131.

233 The Remembrancia, ii, 189; The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 85.

234 On March 19 the Privy Council formally ordered the suppression of all plays. This was five days before the death of Queen Elizabeth.

235 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 190.

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.”

237 The old rental was £7 a year.

238 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 178.

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.

240 For the tourist the memory of the old playhouse to-day lingers about Rose Alley on the Bank.

241 Or “Parish Garden.” See the note on page 121.

242 The sale took the form of a lease for one thousand years.

243 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 74-76.

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.

245 Quoted in Rye, England as Seen by Foreigners, p. 183.

246 Reproduced by Rendle, The Bankside, Southwark, and the Globe Playhouse.

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.

248 Apparently he allowed Van Buchell to transcribe the description and the rough pen-sketch from his notebook or traveler’s diary.

249 This interesting document was discovered by Dr. Karl T. Gaedertz, and published in full in Zur Kenntnis der altenglischen Bühne (Bremen, 1888).

250 “Viâ quâ itur per Episcopalem portam vulgariter Biscopgate nuncupatam.”

251 “Theatrorum.”

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”?

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.

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.

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.

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.

257 Nashes Lenten Stuffe (1599), ed. McKerrow, iii, 153.

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.

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.”

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.)

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).

262 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, XXVII, 338.

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.

264 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxviii, 327.

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.

266 Dasent, Acts of the Privy Council, xxx, 327.

267 Ibid., 395.

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.

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).

270 From the broadside printed in The Harleian Miscellany, x, 198. For a photographic facsimile, see Lawrence, The Elizabethan Playhouse (Second Series), p. 68.

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.

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.

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.

274 Wallace, op. cit., p. 390, note 1.

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.

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.

277 The Petition of 1619, in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 93.

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.

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.

280 Blackfriars Records, in The Malone Society’s Collections, (1913).

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.

282 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, pp. 7, 12.

283 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, p. 7.

284 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, pp. 105-06.

285 In all probability it was separated from the Hall and Parlor by a passage leading through the Infirmary into the Inner Cloister yard.

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.

287 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, p. 105.

288 Ibid., p. 124.

289 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, p. 8.

290 For the deed of sale see ibid., p. 60.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

296 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, pp. 43, 47, 48.

297 Ibid., p. 52.

298 Ibid., p. 51.

299 Feuillerat, Blackfriars Records, p. 121.

300 Ibid., p. 122.

301 Wallace, The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 39, note 1.

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?

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.

304 Cf. Playhouse Yard in the London of to-day.

305 The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 43, note 3.

306 The Diary of the Duke of Stettin-Pomerania, in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (1892), vi, 26.

307 For the full document see Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 304. For the date, see The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 91.

308 Shortly after this he was appointed Lord Chamberlain, under which name his troupe was subsequently known.

309 Petition of 1619, The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 91.

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.)

311 Fleay, A Chronicle History of the London Stage, p. 234.

312 Ibid., p. 211.

313 This theory has been urged by Fleay, by Mr. Wallace in The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, and by others.

314 The full commission is printed in Wallace, The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 61.

315 Fleay, A Chronicle History of the London Stage, p. 248.

316 Ibid., p. 234. Note that Evans is not to “continue” a troupe there, as Fleay and Wallace believe, but to “erect” one.

317 Possibly Robinson and the “others” were merely deputies.

318 Field became later famous both as an actor and playwright. His portrait is preserved at Dulwich College.

319 Salathiel Pavy, whose excellent acting is celebrated in Jonson’s tender elegy, quoted in part below.

320 Star Chamber Proceedings, printed in full by Fleay, op. cit., p. 127.

321 Father Hubbard’s Tales (ed. Bullen, viii, 77).

322 Jonson, Epigrams, cxx, An Epitaph on Salathiel Pavy, a Child of Queen Elizabeth’s Chapel.

323 Diary, August 18, 1660.

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.

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.

326 The Children were acting light comedies such as Cynthia’s Revels; the Lord Chamberlain’s Men were acting Hamlet.

327 Shakespeare’s troupe is known to have been traveling in the spring of 1601.

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.

329 The full complaint is printed by Fleay, op. cit., p. 127.

330 Ibid., pp. 244-45.

331 Wallace, The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 84, note 4.

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.

333 Fleay, op. cit., p. 248.

334 We find in Henslowe’s Diary a player named William Kendall, but we do not know that he was related to Thomas.

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.

336 Fleay, op. cit., pp. 211-13; 216; 220.

337 Ibid., p. 220.

338 Ibid., p. 217.

339 Fleay, op. cit., p. 235.

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.

341 A letter from Daniel to the Earl of Devonshire vindicating the play is printed in Grosart’s Daniel, i, xxii.

342 See Dobell, “Newly Discovered Documents,” in The Athenæum, March 30, 1901.

343 Cunningham, Revels, p. xxxviii.

344 Fleay, op. cit., p. 221.

345 Except carelessly, as when sometimes called “The Children of the Chapel.”

346 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 82.

347 Ibid., pp. 81, 86, 89, 93.

348 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 80 ff.

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.

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.

351 Birch, Court and Times of James the First, i, 60; quoted by E.K. Chambers, in Modern Language Review, iv, 158.

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.)

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.

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.

355 Fleay, op. cit., pp. 221-22.

356 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, pp. 83, 97.

357 Ibid., p. 87.

358 Ibid., p. 90.

359 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 97.

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.

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.

362 The method is clearly explained in the documents of 1635 printed by Halliwell-Phillipps, in Outlines, i, 312.

363 See Wright, Historia Histrionica, Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 406.

364 Malone, Variorum, iii, 71.

365 Act iii, scene iv. Cf. also Webster’s Preface to The White Devil, acted at the Red Bull about 1610.

366 Fleay, A Chronicle History of the London Stage, p. 248.

367 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 91.

368 Halliwell-Phillipps, Outlines, i, 311.

369 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 281.

370 Ibid., i, 282.

371 Collier, History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), i, 455.

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 13s. 4d.

373 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 99; 387.

374 The Earl of Strafforde’s Letters (Dublin, 1740), i, 175.

375 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 388.

376 The Earl of Strafforde’s Letters (Dublin, 1740), i, 511.

377 The Herbert MS., Malone, Variorum, iii, 167.

378 See The Academy, 1882, xxii, 314. Exactly the same fate had overtaken the Globe ten years earlier.

379 That even James Burbage is to be put in this class cannot be disputed.

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.)

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.”

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.”

387 For the discussions of the subject, see the Bibliography.

388 This was probably not the only means of approach.

389 Wallace, in the London Times, April 30, 1914, p. 10; Notes and Queries (xi series), xi, 448.

390 An Execration upon Vulcan.

391 The Guls Hornbook, published in 1609, but written earlier.

392 Jonson’s Works, ed. Cunningham, i, 71.

393 In the first quarto edition of Every Man Out of His Humour.

394 The Stage of the Globe, p. 356.

395 Induction to Every Man Out of His Humour (ed. Cunningham, i, 66).

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.

397 See Hamlet, ii, ii, 378.

398 Malone, Variorum, iii, 67.

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.

400 The London Times, October 2, 1909.

401 Possibly he gives this evidence in his The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 29, note 4.

402 Wallace, in the London Times, May 1, 1914.

403 Printed in The Malone Society Collections, i, 264.

404 Howes’s continuation of Stow’s Annals (1631), p. 1003.

405 Reliquiæ Wottonianæ (ed. 1672), p. 425.

406 Ralph Winwood, Memorials of Affairs of State (ed. 1725), iii, 469.

407 Printed in Birch, The Court and Times of James the First (1849), i, 251.

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.

409 Punning on the title All is True.

410 An Execration upon Vulcan.

411 These interesting facts were revealed by Mr. Wallace in the London Times, April 30 and May 1, 1914.

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.”

413 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 60.

414 Works (1630), p. 31; The Spenser Society reprint, p. 515.

415 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 61.

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.)

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.

418 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 70.

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.

420 Rendle, Bankside, p. xvii.

421 Birch, The Court and Times of James the First, i, 329; quoted by Wallace, The Children of the Chapel at Blackfriars, p. 35.

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.

423 Printed by Mrs. Stopes, Burbage and Shakespeare’s Stage, p. 117, with many other interesting references to the great actor.

424 Wallace, “Shakespeare and the Globe,” in the London Times, April 30 and May 1, 1914.

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.

426 Printed in The Academy, October 28, 1882, p. 314. Should we read the date as 1644/5?

427 William Martin, The Site of the Globe, p. 171.

428 Printed in The Builder, March 26, 1910, from the Conway MSS. in Mrs. Thrale’s handwriting.

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.

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.

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.

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.

433 Ibid., p. 50.

434 Ibid., p. 49; cf. p. 51.

435 Collier, The Alleyn Papers, p. 98. For a slightly different measurement of the plot see Collier, Memoirs of Edward Alleyn, p. 167.

436 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 49.

437 Ibid., p. 50.

438 Ibid., p. 51.

439 See page 174.

440 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 10.

441 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 158-59.

442 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 108.

443 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 124.

444 For the full document see Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 4.

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.

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.

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.”

448 The Roaring Girl, i, i. Pointed out by M.W. Sampson, Modern Language Notes, June, 1915.

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.

450 Nichols, The Progresses of King James, iv, 67.

451 Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, i, 174.

452 See the Company’s Patent of 1606, in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 268.

453 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 13.

454 For an ordinance concerning “lewd jiggs” at the Fortune in 1612, see Middlesex County Records, ii, 83.

455 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 27; Young, The History of Dulwich College, ii, 260.

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.

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.

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.

459 Prynne, Histriomastix, Epistle Dedicatory.

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).

461 Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 408.

462 Stow, Annals, 1631.

463 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 29. Half-shares were £41 13s. 4d., which Murray (English Dramatic Companies) confuses with whole shares.

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.

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.

466 For details of this move see the chapter on the Salisbury Court Playhouse.

467 Young, The History of Dulwich College, i, 114.

468 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 391, 392; Malone, Variorum, iii, 239.

469 Young, The History of Dulwich College, i, 114.

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 14s. 5d. See Collier, The Alleyn Papers, pp. 95-98.

471 Printed in The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1639, p. 140.

472 The Prologue is printed in full by Malone, Variorum, iii, 79.

473 Not even the Globe was entirely free from this; see the Prologue to The Doubtful Heir.

474 Malone, Variorum, iii, 79.

475 The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1643, p. 564.

476 For an interesting comment on the situation, especially in the year 1649, see Notes and Queries (series x), I, 85.

477 Printed in The Academy, October 28, 1882, p. 314.

478 See The Journals of the House of Commons, July 26, 1648.

479 Warner, Catalogue, xxxi; Greg, Henslowe’s Diary, ii, 65.

480 The entire report is printed in Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 95.

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.

482 Young, The History of Dulwich College, ii, 265.

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.

484 This playhouse is not to be confused with the famous Bull Tavern in Bishopsgate Street, for many years used as a theatre.

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.

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.

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.

488 Raven’s Almanack (1609); Dekker’s Works (ed. Grosart), iv, 210.

489 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 265.

490 Wallace, Three London Theatres, p. 18.

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.

492 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 270.

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.”

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.

495 Malone, Variorum, iii, 223; Young, The History of Dulwich College, ii, 51; Warner, Catalogue, p. 165; Collier, Memoirs of Edward Alleyn, p. 107.

496 The play is not otherwise known; a play with this title, however, was entered on the Stationers’ Register in 1653.

497 For details of this change, and of the quarrels that followed, see the chapter on the Cockpit.

498 The name is also given, incorrectly, as Richard Gill.

499 Jeaffreson, Middlesex County Records, ii, 165-66; 175-76.

500 Malone, Variorum, iii, 62; The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 284.

501 Chalmers, Supplemental Apology, p. 213.

502 Ibid., pp. 213-14.

503 Quoted by Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), iii, 121.

504 Malone, Variorum, iii, 70.

505 Randolph’s Works (ed. Hazlitt), p. 504.

506 Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 407.

507 Pleasant Notes on Don Quixote, p. 24.

508 J. Tatham, Fancies Theatre. For a fuller discussion of the shifting of companies in 1635 and 1640 see the chapter on “The Fortune.”

509 Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 409.

510 Ibid., 409-10.

511 Cited by C.H. Firth, in Notes and Queries, August 18, 1888, series vii, vol. vi, p. 122.

512 Ibid.

513 Hazlitt, The English Drama and Stage, p. 69.

514 The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1655, p. 336.

515 For a further account of this episode see Mercurius Fumigosus, No. 69.

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.

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.

518 See Pepys’ Diary, April 25, 1664.

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.

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.

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.

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.

523 Greenstreet, The New Shakspere Society’s Transactions (1887-90), p. 275.

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.

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.

526 At this time the Children of Blackfriars had lost their patent, so that the Children at Whitefriars were the only Revels troupe.

527 Also spelled Slater, Slaughter, Slather, Slawghter. Henslowe often refers to him as “Martin.”

528 Mr. Wallace (The Century Magazine, 1910, lxxx, 511) incorrectly says that Whitefriars was held by “six equal sharers.”

529 Letter of M. De La Boderie, the French Ambassador to England; quoted by E.K. Chambers, Modern Language Review, iv, 159.

530 Greenstreet, The New Shakspere Society’s Transactions (1887-90), p. 283.

531 Printed in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 271.

532 See Keysar v. Burbage et al., printed by Mr. Wallace, in his Shakespeare and his London Associates, pp. 80 ff.

533 Ibid., p. 90.

534 Wallace, Shakespeare and his London Associates, p. 95.

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.”

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.

537 Malone, Variorum, iii, 52.

538 See the chapter on “Rosseter’s Blackfriars.” The documents concerned in this venture are printed in The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 277.

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.

540 The agreement has been lost, but for a probably similar agreement, made with the actor Nathaniel Field, see Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 23.

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.)

542 Bartholomew Fair, v, iii. The part of Littlewit was presumably taken by Field himself.

543 Malone, Variorum, iii, 52.

544 The contract is printed in full in Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 19.

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.

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.

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.

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.”

549 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 87. The articles of agreement between Henslowe and Meade and the company, are printed by Greg on page 23.

550 Works, Folio of 1630; The Spenser Society’s reprint, p. 307.

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.

552 John Taylor’s Works, Folio of 1630, p. 142; The Spenser Society’s reprint, p. 304.

553 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 89.

554 Ibid., pp. 86, 89.

555 Collier, Memoirs of Edward Alleyn, p. 127; Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 91.

556 Collier, Memoirs of Edward Alleyn, p. 127.

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.

558 Greg, Henslowe Papers, p. 93. Cf. also the chapter on “Rosseter’s Blackfriars.”

559 Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), iii, 102; Ordish, Early London Theatres, p. 237.

560 Arthur Tiler, St. Saviour’s, p. 51; Reed’s Dodsley, ix, 175.

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.

562 The Remembrancia, p. 478. Quoted by Ordish, Early London Theatres, p. 241.

563 British Museum Additional MSS. 5750; quoted by Cunningham, Handbook of London (1849), i, 67.

564 The Antiquarian Magazine and Bibliographer, viii, 59.

565 James Peller Malcolm, Anecdotes of the Manners and Customs of London from the Roman Invasion to the Year 1700 (London, 1811), p. 425.

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.

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.

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.

569 Malone, Variorum, iii, 52.

570 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 277. For the location of Puddlewharf see the map of the Blackfriars precinct on page 94.

571 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 277.

572 Ibid., p. 373.

573 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 373.

574 Ibid.

575 See the chapter on “The Hope.”

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.

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.

578 Stow’s Annals (1631), p. 1004.

579 Some scholars have supposed that the playhouse, when attacked by the apprentices in 1617, was burned, and that the name “Phœnix” was given to the building after its reconstruction. But the building was not burned; it was merely wrecked on the inside by apprentices.

580 Continuation of Stow’s Annals (1631), p. 1026.

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.”

582 Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 408.

583 Fleay and Lawrence are wrong in supposing that the Cockpit was circular.

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.”

585 Wallace, Three London Theatres, p. 35.

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.

587 Annals (1631), p. 1026.

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.

589 Greenstreet, Documents, The New Shakspere Society’s Transactions (1880-86), p. 504.

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.

591 Wallace, Three London Theatres, p. 33.

592 He had joined Prince Charles’s Men.

593 Wallace, Three London Theatres, p. 38.

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.)

595 Malone, Variorum, iii, 59.

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 2d. to the parish poor for each day that there was acting at the Cockpit. (See ibid., p. 236.)

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.

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.)

599 Herbert Manuscript, Malone, Variorum, iii, 240.

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.

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.

602 Herbert Manuscript, Malone, Variorum, iii, 240.

603 The Malone Society’s Collections, i, 392.

604 The Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1636-1637, p. 254.

605 Ibid., 1637, p. 420.

606 Malone, Variorum, iii, 240.

607 He is referred to as their Governor on August 10, 1639; see Malone, Variorum, iii, 159.

608 Malone, Variorum, iii, 241.

609 Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), ii, 32; Stopes, op. cit., p. 102.

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).

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.

612 Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), ii, 32, note 1.

613 John Parton, Some Account of the Hospital and Parish of St. Giles in the Fields, p. 235.

614 Hazlitt’s Dodsley, xv, 409.

615 See The Academy, October 28, 1882, p. 314. The soldiers here mentioned also “pulled down on the inside” the Fortune playhouse.

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.

617 Malone, Variorum, iii, 93; Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), ii, 48.

618 For his troubles with the Master of the Revels see Halliwell-Phillipps, A Collection of Ancient Documents, p. 26.

619 Parton, op. cit., p. 236.

620 Malone, Variorum, iii, 244 ff.

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.

622 Malone, Variorum, iii, 66.

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.

624 Malone, Variorum, iii, 66, 122, 176, 177.

625 The Blackfriars auditorium was sixty-six feet in length and forty-six feet in breadth.

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.’”

627 Annals (1631), p. 1004. In 1633 Prynne (Histriomastix) refers to it as a “new theatre erected.”

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.”

629 I have not been able to examine this. In the only copy of the second edition accessible to me the Epistle is missing.

630 Malone, Variorum, iii, 178.

631 Halliwell-Phillipps, A Collection of Ancient Documents, p. 27.

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.”

633 For Dorset’s interest in the matter see Cunningham, The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 96.

634 In December, 1631; see Malone, Variorum, iii, 178.

635 Malone, Variorum, iii, 178.

636 The Cockpit, for which Shirley had been writing.

637 Cf. “new poets” of Marmion’s Prologue.

638 An allusion to the smallness of the Salisbury Court Playhouse?

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.

640 Ibid., iii, 178.

641 English Dramatic Companies, i, 221.

642 Richard Heton, “Instructions for my Pattent,” The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 96.

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.

644 Cunningham, The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 96.

645 Malone, Variorum, iii, 240.

646 For certain troubles at Salisbury Court in 1644 and 1648, see Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), ii, 37, 40, 47.

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.)

648 That is, stripped of its benches, stage-hangings, and other appliances for dramatic performances.

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 Phœnix and the Fortune.

650 Cunningham, The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 103.

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.

652 Cunningham, The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 103.

653 Malone, Variorum, iii, 257; Halliwell-Phillipps, A Collection of Ancient Documents, p. 27.

654 By Philip Massinger.

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.

656 Edition of 1808, iv, 434. See also Stow’s Chronicle, under the year 1581.

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.

658 Stow’s Annals, continued by Edmund Howes (1631), p. 891.

659 John Nichols, The Progresses of James, ii, 162.

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.

661 Book vi, page 6.

662 Winwood State Papers (1725), ii, 41.

663 See Cunningham, Extracts from the Accounts of the Revels, pp. xiii-xiv.

664 John Nichols, The Progresses of James, ii, 466.

665 See The Dramatic Works of Thomas Heywood (1874), vi, 339.

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.

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.

668 Reprinted here by the kind permission of Mr. Bell and the editors of The Architectural Record.

669 Lord Chamberlain’s Office-Book, C.C. Stopes, “Shakespeare’s Fellows and Followers,” Shakespeare Jahrbuch, xlvi, 96.

670 Herbert MS., Malone, Variorum, iii, 237.

671 Herbert MS., Malone, Variorum, iii, 237.

672 Lord Chamberlain’s Office-Book, Chalmers’s Apology, p. 508.

673 Ibid., p. 509.

674 The Herbert MS., Malone, Variorum, iii, 238.

675 Fleay in his elaborate studies of performances at Court ignores it entirely, as do subsequent scholars.

676 Chalmers, Apology, p. 510.

677 Herbert MS., Malone, Variorum, iii, 241.

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.

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.

680 By James Shirley, licensed 1641.

681 By Corneille.

682 Mrs. Betterton.

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.

684 I quote from W.J. Lawrence, The Elizabethan Playhouse (First Series), p. 144.

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.

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.

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.)

688 The place is not indicated, but it was probably outside the city.

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.

690 Collier, op. cit., i, 443.

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.

692 I quote the letter from Collier, The History of English Dramatic Poetry (1879), i, 444.

693 Bliss’s edition, iii, 741.

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.

[695] Aubrey mentions this as having been “written in Dublin, and never printed.”

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.

697 Never licensed for England; reprinted in 1657 with St. Patrick for Ireland.

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.

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.”

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.

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.

702 That is, Passion Week, during which time the English companies were never allowed to give performances.

703 This must be an error, for Easter Monday fell on March 30.

704 Le Trompeur Puni, ou Histoire Septentrionale, by Scuderi.

705 Wednesday was the 15th.

706 Alcimedon, by Duryer.

707 Malone, Variorum, iii, 121, note.

708 This clause I insert from Mrs. Stopes’s notes on the Lord Chamberlain’s records, in the Shakespeare Jahrbuch, xlvi, 97.

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.

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.

711 Malone, Variorum, iii, 122, note.

712 Act ii, Scene i. This passage is pointed out by Lawrence, The Elizabethan Playhouse, p. 137.

713 Stopes, op. cit., p. 98, Chalmers, Apology, p. 509.

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.”

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.

716 Cunningham, The Whitefriars Theatre, in The Shakespeare Society’s Papers, iv, 96.

717 See the chapter on the Second Blackfriars.

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.