NOTES
[1] C. W. Wallace, The First London Theatre (Lincoln, Neb., 1913), p. 24.
[2] Gerald E. Bentley, “Shakespeare and the Blackfriars Theatre,” Shakespeare Survey, I (1948), p. 47.
[3] Peter Streete agreed, in this contract dated January 8, 1600, to complete his construction by July 25, 1600 (E. K. Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage (Oxford, 1923), II, p. 438), a period of about twenty-eight weeks. However, it was covenanted that “the saide Peeter Streete shall not be chardged with anie manner of pay[ntin]ge in or aboute the saide fframe howse or Stadge or anie parte thereof, nor rendringe the walls within” (Chambers, II, p. 437). Consequently, we must add to the twenty-eight weeks an indeterminate period during which the playhouse was painted, thus bringing the estimated completion of the Fortune to some time in August at least. It is probable that in computing the schedule for the Fortune, Streete utilized his experience at the Globe, particularly since the new stage was to be so much like the Globe’s. Streete would find such computation easy after allowing for differences in building conditions. On the one hand the fact that the timber from the Theatre was to be used for the Globe suggests that the frame for the Globe took less time to erect. On the other hand, the fact that the Globe had to be built on piles might reasonably suggest that laying its foundations required more time. If Henslowe’s notation of payment “to the laberers at the eand of the fowndations the 8 of maye 1600” (Philip Henslowe, Papers, ed. W. W. Greg, p. 10), correctly reflects the time consumed in erecting these of the Fortune, a matter of about sixteen weeks, then we must assume that the base of the Globe was not ready to take a frame until the middle of June. As Henslowe’s Diary and Papers indicate, Streete probably consummated his portion of the contract somewhat later than he had estimated, that is, about the first week in August (Henslowe, p. 11). But even if there were some delay, as Greg believes, Streete had erred merely by a matter of two weeks. I believe that his initial estimate, fundamentally reliable, reflected his experience at the Globe.
[4] Among others Heminges testified that he shared in profits from the presentation of plays at Blackfriars for four years previous to 1612 (Kirkham vs. Painton, as reprinted in F. G. Fleay, A Chronicle History of the London Stage (London, 1890), pp. 225, 235, 238, 244, 249). The only time when the plague bills declined sufficiently to permit the possibility of performances was in March, 1609. The weekly count of plague deaths was thirty-two as of March 2, forty-three as of March 9, and thirty-three as of March 16. Thereafter, the plague increased in severity and the weekly number of deaths fell below forty only once again before December, 1609. (Statistics from John Bell, London’s Remembrancer (London, 1665) as reprinted in J. T. Murray, English Dramatic Companies (London, 1910), II, pp. 186-187.)
[5] E. K. Chambers, William Shakespeare (Oxford, 1930), I; Alfred Harbage, Annals of the English Drama (London, 1940); William Shakespeare, The Complete Works of, ed. G. L. Kittredge (New York, 1936); James McManaway, “Recent Studies in Shakespeare’s Chronology,” Shakespeare Survey, III (1950), 22-33. In composing the list of plays performed by the Globe company, I have relied on Chambers, compared with Harbage and Kittredge, and checked against McManaway’s survey of studies in the chronological order of Shakespeare’s plays. Later theories on particular plays have been examined when relevant.
[6] Twelfth Night, ed. J. D. Wilson (Cambridge, 1930); Leslie Hotson, The First Night of Twelfth Night (New York, 1954).
[7] Percy Allen, “The Date of Hamlet,” T.L.S., January 2, 1937, 12; Chambers, William Shakespeare, I, p. 423; also “The Date of Hamlet,” Shakespearean Gleanings (London, 1944), pp. 68-75; Hamlet, ed. J. D. Wilson (Cambridge, 1936), 2nd ed.; H. D. Gray, “The Date of Hamlet;” J.E.G.P., XXX (1932), 51-61; L. Kirschbaum, “The Date of Hamlet,” S.P., XXXIV (1937), 168-175.
[8] Leslie Hotson, “Love’s Labour’s Won,” Shakespeare’s Sonnets Dated (New York, 1949), 37-56.
[9] A. Hart, “The Date of Othello,” T.L.S., October 10, 1935, 631; A. Cairncross, “A Reply to Hart,” T.L.S., October 24, 1935, 671; Richmond Noble, “A Reply to Hart,” T.L.S., December 14, 1935, 859; W. W. Greg, “The Date of King Lear and Shakespeare’s Use of Earlier Versions of the Story,” Library, XX (1940), 377-400.
[10] Chambers, William Shakespeare, I, p. 522.
[11] Macbeth, ed. J. D. Wilson (Cambridge, 1947), pp. xl-xlii. Wilson offers a fanciful argument to support his theory that the play was first performed before James in Edinburgh in 1601–1602. Kenneth Muir (Arden edition, 1951), p. xxvi, reviewing this argument, concludes, “It is reasonable to assume that the play was first performed in 1606, first at the Globe, and afterwards at Court—perhaps with a few minor alterations.”
[12] Leslie Hotson, Shakespeare vs. Shallow (Boston, 1931), pp. 111-122; P. Alexander, Shakespeare’s Life and Art (London, 1939), p. 125; William Green, Shakespeare’s Garter Play (unpublished dissertation, Columbia University, 1959), believes that Lord Hunsdon commissioned Shakespeare to write the play for performance on April 23, 1597. However, his explanation for the omission of the play’s title from Meres’ list is essentially hypothetical (pp. 249-251).
[13] Eight early plays of Shakespeare’s were actually revived during the Globe period, or supposedly revived according to the title pages of early editions. These plays were The Comedy of Errors, Love’s Labour’s Lost, The Merchant of Venice, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Richard II, Richard III, Romeo and Juliet, and Titus Andronicus. Seven of the eight, all but the first, were printed in quartos. However, the texts of later editions were set up from the early editions without appreciable alterations. The Folio text of Dream does include some additions to the stage directions which may be illuminating but which do not change the theatrical elements. The Fourth Quarto (1608) of Richard II is the first edition to contain the abdication scene, and the Folio text of Titus Andronicus contains additional stage directions and a new scene. But these omissions in the early copies do not seem to be a result of staging conditions. There are two possible inferences. Either the later texts had no connection with the playhouse and therefore merely copied the earlier texts, or the productions did not change sufficiently over the years to cause variations in the texts. As a result I have decided to use these plays for occasional reference only.
[14] The dating of these and the succeeding plays is based upon Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, III, pp. 214, 293, 431, 513; IV, pp. 1, 8, 12, 27, 30, 42, 54.
[15] Baldwin Maxwell, Studies in the Shakespeare Apocrypha (New York, 1956), pp. 99-106, dates the play between 1599 and 1600.
[16] A Yorkshire Tragedy has been identified with Miseries of Enforced Marriage by F. G. Fleay and others. Mark Friedlaender, “Some Problems of A Yorkshire Tragedy,” S.P., XXXV (1938), 238-253, in his reconsideration of the evidence rejects this theory. He suggests that both plays were made from a single original play. In a more recent study Baldwin Maxwell (pp. 153 ff.) considers the plays to be independent works. Whatever the theory, it is certain that both plays were staged and must be enumerated separately.
[17] Thomas Kyd, The Works, ed. Frederick S. Boas (Oxford, 1955), p. xlii. Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, IV, p. 23, suggests that the present text was the one presented at the Globe about 1604. However, the suggestion is hedged with so many qualifications that I thought it better to exclude this piece.
[CHAPTER ONE]. THE REPERTORY
[1] The material for the succeeding pages comes from an analysis of Philip Henslowe’s Diary, ed. W. W. Greg (London, 1904–1908), the dates being based on Greg’s correction of Henslowe. Mention must be made of the new edition of Henslowe’s Diary, prepared by R. A. Foakes and R. T. Rickert (Cambridge, 1961), which appeared while the present work was in press. The editors offer slight correction of the primary evidence and some fresh interpretations of its significance.
[2] Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, IV, pp. 322-325.
[3] Henslowe, I. The list of plays from November 10, 1595–January 17, 1596 may be found on page 27. Fuller descriptions of the plays mentioned by name may be found in Volume II, pp. 167-168, 175-177.
[4] Performances: Nov. 24-25, Hercules, I and II; Nov. 26, Longshank; Nov. 27, New World’s Tragedy; Nov. 28, Henry V (new); Nov. 29, The Welshman; Dec. 1, A Toy to Please; Dec. 2, Henry V; Dec. 3, Barnardo and Fiametta; Dec. 4, Wonder of a Woman; Dec. 6, Crack Me This Nutte.
[5] Belin Dun was performed regularly from June 10 to November 15, 1594, and regularly from March 31 to June 25, 1597, yet there was an isolated performance on July 11, 1596. See Henslowe, II, p. 164.
[6] Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, II, pp. 143ff.; Henslowe, II, pp. 118-119, 124-127.
[7] Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, II, pp. 165-172, 177-180. From 1597 to 1603 nine men, Chettle, Day, Dekker, Drayton, Hathway, Haughton, Munday, Smith, and Wilson, furnished sixty-four of the eighty-eight plays which were finished and produced.
[8] These are: Phaethon, Earl of Godwin and His Three Sons I and II, King Arthur I, Black Bateman of the North, Madman’s Morris, Pierce of Winchester, Civil Wars of France I and II, Fount of New Fashions, Brute, The Spencers, The Page of Plymouth, Troy’s Revenge or Polyphemus, Cox of Collumpton, Fortunatus, atient Grissel, Seven Wise Masters, Strange News out of Poland, Cupid and Psyche, Six Yeomen of the West, Cardinal Wolsey, Thome Strowd III, The Conquest of the West Indies, Judas, Malcolm King of Scots, Love Parts Friendship, Jephthah.
[9] Henslowe, II, p. 112.
[10] F. G. Fleay, A Chronicle History of the London Stage, p. 117.
[11] Sir Henry Herbert, The Dramatic Records of Sir Henry Herbert, ed. J. Q. Adams (New Haven, 1917), pp. 66-67.
[12] The Virgin Martyr involved the addition of a scene, The Tragedy of Nero was allowed for printing, Come See a Wonder is listed for “a company of strangers,” and “the company at the Curtain” is in dispute.
[13] 1604–1605: 10 plays presented, 7 by Shakespeare; 1611–1612: 23 plays, 2 by Shakespeare, 5 by others, 16 unidentified; 1612–1613: 20 plays, 8 by Shakespeare, 12 by others; 1618: 3 plays, 2 by Shakespeare, 1 by another poet; 1633: 22 plays, 4 by Shakespeare, 18 by others; 1636: 19 plays, 3 by Shakespeare, 16 by others; 1638: 7 plays, 1 by Shakespeare, 6 by others; 1638–1639: 17 plays, 2 by Shakespeare, 15 by others. See Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, IV, pp. 171-183; Mary S. Steele, Plays and Masques at Court (New Haven, 1926).
[14] Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, IV, pp. 350-351. Periods during which plague forced the closing of the theaters between 1599 and 1608 were: March—December, 1603, c. October 5—December 15, 1605, July—December, 1606, July—November 19, 1607, August—December, 1608.
[15] Days without performances because of Lenten observance are not counted.
[16] Chambers, William Shakespeare, II, p. 332.
[17] Henslowe, II, pp. 83, 124-125, 149.
[18] The eight plays are Suckling’s Aglaura (1638), Cartwright’s The Royal Slave (1636), and Habington’s Cleodora (1640), which were presented for Their Majesties by courtiers seeking favor (see Steele, pp. 265, 268; Herbert, p. 58); Carlell’s The Deserving Favourite (1629) and Mayne’s City Match (1639) (see Steele, pp. 263, 274, 277); Two Merry Milkmaids (1620), which may or may not have been presented publicly (Steele, p. 206); Middleton and Rowley, A World Tost at Tennis (1620), which was conceived as a masque, but apparently presented publicly (Steele, p. 227); and As Merry as May Be (1602–1603).
[19] Herbert, p. 32. Also see pp. 19, 19 n., 36.
[20] Ibid., pp. 22, 35, 54; also Bentley, II, p. 675.
[21] J. C. Adams, The Globe Playhouse (Cambridge, 1942), pp. 59-89; T.W. Baldwin, The Organization and Personnel of the Shakespearean Company (Princeton, 1927), pp. 332-338; Alfred Harbage, Shakespeare’s Audience (New York, 1941), p. 33.
[22] Chambers, Elizabethan Stage, IV, pp. 166-175. From Elizabeth the Lord Chamberlain’s men received £30 (3.6 per cent) in 1599–1600, £30 (3.6 per cent) in 1600–1601, £40 (4.8 per cent) in 1601–1602, and £20 (2.4 per cent) in 1602–1603. The percentages indicate that portion of their income derived by the players from the Court. (Based upon Baldwin’s low estimate of £840 annual income.)
[23] Frances Keen, “The First Night of Twelfth Night,” T.L.S., December 19, 1958, 737.
[CHAPTER TWO]. THE DRAMATURGY
[1] The recognition of this deficiency forced Thomas W. Baldwin to develop his theory of Shakespeare’s five-act structure in reference to the Renaissance critics of France, Italy, and Germany (Shakespeare’s Five-Act Structure, Urbana, 1947). Henry Popkin, Dramatic Theory of the Elizabethan and Jacobean Playwrights (unpublished dissertation, Harvard, 1950) endeavors to show that the Elizabethan and Jacobean playwrights were aware of prevailing theories of drama, but he does not go on to show that they introduced what they knew into what they wrote.
[2] Baldwin, Shakespeare’s Five-Act Structure, pp. 305, 315, 321, 326.
[3] Muriel C. Bradbrook, Themes and Conventions of Elizabethan Tragedy (Cambridge, 1935), p. 5.
[4] Madeleine Doran, Endeavors of Art (University of Wisconsin, 1954), p. 5.
[5] Heinrich Wölfflin, Principles of Art History (New York, 1932), pp. 14-16, 159; Doran, p. 6.
[6] George Puttenham, The Arte of English Poesie (1589), as reprinted in Gregory Smith, Elizabethan Critical Essays (Oxford, 1904), II, pp. 19-20.
[7] Francis Fergusson, The Idea of a Theater (Princeton, 1949), pp. 229-230.
[8] Hardin Craig, “Shakespeare’s Development as a Dramatist in the Light of His Experience,” S.P., XXXIX (1942), 226; also S. L. Bethell, Shakespeare and the Dramatic Tradition (London, 1944), p. 70.
[9] Doran, pp. 103, 263.
[10] Ibid., p. 296.
[11] Ibid., p. 264.
[12] Bradbrook, pp. 30, 75.
[13] Doran, p. 295.
[14] See especially Twelfth Night, I, i-iii; Hamlet, I, i-iii; Lear, I, i; Measure for Measure, I, i; The Devil’s Charter, dumb show.
[15] The other ranking figures are Antonio in The Revenger’s Tragedy, Malevole, revealed as Duke Altofronto in The Malcontent, young Flowerdale in The London Prodigal, and the husband in A Yorkshire Tragedy. The prodigal son plays, Miseries of Enforced Marriage, The London Prodigal, and A Yorkshire Tragedy, have a double figure, the husband who judges himself and the wife who grants forgiveness.
[16] Discovery: As You Like It, Twelfth Night, Merry Wives of Windsor, All’s Well, Pericles; discovery-single combat: Hamlet, Lear; discovery-suicide: Othello; discovery-trial: Measure for Measure; single combat: Macbeth; suicide: Julius Caesar, Antony and Cleopatra; trial: Coriolanus; siege: Timon of Athens.
[17] Curtis B. Watson, “Shakespeare’s Dukes,” S.A.B., XVI (1941), 33. Watson insists that the Duke employed in this fashion is unique to Shakespeare’s plays. However, as the non-Shakespearean plays reveal, the same functions are carried out by father, king, or lord.
[18] G. Wilson Knight, Principles of Shakespearean Production (Harmondsworth Middlesex, 1949), p. 21.
[19] Ibid., p. 21; W. J. Lawrence, “Some Reflections on Shakespeare’s Dramaturgy,” Speeding Up Shakespeare (London, 1937), p. 43; Richard G. Moulton, Shakespeare as a Dramatic Artist (Oxford, 1893), p. 217.
[20] Moulton, p. 217. He persists in finding a “point” for the climax although he more clearly than any one of the other writers perceives the extended nature of the climax. On page 209 he treats the scenes of Lear’s madness as a “Centerpiece,” apparently realizing their climactic interconnection. Yet he fails to take the next step by abandoning the conception of a climactic moment.
[21] Harley Granville-Barker, Prefaces to Shakespeare (Princeton, 1947), I, p. 274.
[22] The appearance of the “climactic plateau” late in Troilus and Cressida is further support for the theory of a two-part play suggested by T. W. Baldwin in A New Variorum Edition of Troilus and Cressida, ed. Harold N. Hillebrand, supplemental ed. T. W. Baldwin (Philadelphia, 1953), p. 452.
[23] The climax is also associated with the subsequent disappearance of the central figure, a characteristic pointed out by W. J. Lawrence. Both comedy, for example, Twelfth Night and Measure for Measure (Angelo is absent for the third and almost all of the fourth act) and tragedy display the same pattern.
[24] Levin L. Schücking, Character Problems in Shakespeare’s Plays (New York, 1922), p. 114.
[25] Elmer E. Stoll, Shakespeare Studies (New York, 1942), p. 37, corrected edition; G. Wilson Knight, Wheel of Fire (New York, 1949), pp. 13-14.
[26] G. Wilson Knight, Wheel of Fire and Principles, pp. 140-155, for his proposed Macbeth production.
[CHAPTER THREE]. THE STAGE
[1] G. F. Reynolds, “What We Know of the Elizabethan Stage,” M.P., IX (1911), 68.
[2] V. E. Albright, The Shakesperian Stage (New York, 1909), p. 45.
[3] The figures are suggestive rather than definitive. See [Appendix B, chart i], for breakdown according to plays.
[4] H. Granville-Barker, “A Note on Chapters XX and XXI of The Elizabethan Stage,” R.E.S., I (1925), 68.
[5] Ashley Thorndike, Shakespeare’s Theater (New York, 1916), pp. 102 ff.
[6] Twelfth Night, II, ii; Measure for Measure, V, i; Lear, II, i; II, ii; III, i; Othello, V, ii; Antony and Cleopatra, II, vi; III, ii; Troilus and Cressida, IV, i; Coriolanus, I, viii; I, ix; Timon of Athens, I, i; III, iv-vi; IV, ii; Pericles, Chorus, II; II, v; Chorus, III; The Devil’s Charter, prologue; I, i; IV, i; Fair Maid of Bristow, scene xiv.
[7] W. J. Lawrence, The Physical Conditions of the Elizabethan Public Playhouse (Cambridge, Mass., 1927), pp. 22 ff.
[8] W. J. Lawrence, The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies, Series One (Stratford-on-Avon, 1912), p. 23.
[9] Lawrence, Physical Conditions, pp. 22 ff.; J. C. Adams, p. 146.
[10] G. F. Reynolds, “Troilus and Cressida on the Elizabethan Stage,” Joseph Quincy Adams Memorial Studies, ed. James G. McManaway et al. (Washington, 1948), pp. 229-238.
[11] Julius Caesar
Brutus. How many times shall Caesar bleed in sport,
That now on Pompey’s basis lies along
No worthier than the dust!
(III, i, 114-116)
Antony. Then burst his mighty heart;
And in his mantle muffling up his face,
Even at the base of Pompey’s statue,
(Which all the while ran blood) great Caesar fell.
(III, ii, 191-194)
Plutarch, Julius Caesar in Shakespeare’s Plutarch, I, p. 102. “But when [Caesar] saw Brutus with his sword drawn in his hand, then he pulled his gown over his head, and made no more resistance and was driven either casually or purposedly by the counsel of the conspirators against the base whereupon Pompey’s image stood, which ran all of a gore-blood till he was slain.”
[12] See [Appendix B, chart ii], for the list of properties in Shakespeare.
[13] Henslowe, Papers, pp. 116-118.
[14] Antony and Cleopatra, I, ii; II, vii; Timon of Athens, I, ii; III, vi; Cromwell, scene vii; The Devil’s Charter, V, iv; The Revenger’s Tragedy, V, iii.
[15] Probably Macbeth, III, iv; As You Like It, II, v; undetermined Pericles, II, iii.
[16] Brought out: Hamlet, V, ii; The Devil’s Charter, IV, iii; V, vi; probably brought out: The Devil’s Charter, prologue; uncertain: Every Man Out of His Humour, V, iv; discovered: Othello, I, iii.
[17] A parallel instance is found in Volpone. In the last scene in which the bed is employed, Mosca says to Volpone, then lying in the bed:
Patron, go in, and pray for our successe. (III, ix, 62)
The line suggests that the bed was removed rather than hidden by a curtain.
[18] Warren Smith, “Evidence of Scaffolding on Shakespeare’s Stage,” R.E.S., n.s. II (1951), 22-29.
[19] Richard Hosley, “The Discovery-Space in Shakespeare’s Globe,” Shakespeare Survey, XII (1959), 35-46. Many of my own conclusions parallel those of Mr. Hosley. See my dissertation, The Production of Shakespeare’s Plays at the Globe Playhouse, 1599–1609 (Columbia University, 1956).
[20] Ibid., 46. Both Cromwell, sc. vi, and Merry Wives of Windsor, III, iii, require similar facilities.
[21] Richard Southern, “On Reconstructing a Practicable Elizabethan Public Playhouse,” Shakespeare Survey, XII (1959), p. 33.
[22] Hosley, 44-45.
[23] Alone: Devil’s Charter, IV, i; I, iv; Cromwell, sc. iii, vi; attended: Devil’s Charter, V, vi; Cromwell, sc. xii.
[24] A Yorkshire Tragedy, sc. v; The Revenger’s Tragedy, II, iv; The Merry Devil of Edmonton, prologue.
[25] The Revenger’s Tragedy, I, iv; V, i.
[26] Fastidious Briske takes down a “base viol” from a wall. Such action may depend upon the discovery of an interior. (III, ix, 81)
[27] Concealment: As You Like It, III, ii (?); Twelfth Night, IV, ii; Hamlet, III, i, III, iv; Merry Wives of Windsor, III, iii; Measure for Measure, III, i; Lear, III, vi; Coriolanus, II, i; discovery: Othello, I, iii, V, ii; Timon, V, iii; Pericles, I, i, III, i, V, i; tents: Julius Caesar, IV, ii-iii; Troilus and Cressida, passim.
[28] See Two Elizabethan Stage Abridgements: The Battle of Alcazar and Orlando Furioso, ed. W. W. Greg (The Malone Society, 1922), pp. 34-35.
[29] Merry Wives of Windsor, II, ii, III, v; Every Man Out of His Humour, V, iv; Merry Devil of Edmonton, sc. i; Miseries of Enforced Marriage, sc. v; A Yorkshire Tragedy, sc. iii-v.
[30] Adams, p. 289.
[31] Devil’s Charter, II, i, IV, iv; Timon, V, iv; Coriolanus, I, iv; A Larum for London, sc. ii. There is no stage direction specifying Sancto Davila’s appearance on the walls. However, he is “walking about Castle” and he answers to the question, “Whose that above?” (sig. B2v).
[32] Othello, I, i; Volpone, II, ii; Every Man Out of His Humour, I, ii; Devil’s Charter, III, ii.
[33] Richard Hosley, “The Gallery over the Stage in the Public Playhouse of Shakespeare’s Time,” S.Q., VIII (1957), 31.
[34] J. C. Adams, pp. 209-215. Also G. F. Reynolds, The Staging of Elizabethan Plays at the Red Bull (New York, 1940), p. 188.
[35] Macbeth, IV, i; Hamlet, V, i; A Larum for London, scene xii; The Devil’s Charter, prologue; III, v, IV, i, V, vi. For Hamlet, I, iv and v, see [Chapter Five].
[36] Leslie Hotson, Shakespeare’s Wooden O (London, 1959), p. 13.
[37] Hotson, The First Night of Twelfth Night, p. 67, also p. 119; Nagler, p. 11.
[38] Thomas Dekker, The Gull’s Hornbook, in Alois Nagler, Sources of Theatrical History (New York, 1952), p. 135.
[39] Hosley, “The Gallery,” 28.
[40] Alois Nagler, Shakespeare’s Stage (New Haven, 1958), pp. 10-11.
[41] George R. Kernodle, From Art to Theatre (Chicago, 1944), pp. 87-89, 120-121, 124, 129.
[42] C. Walter Hodges, “The Lantern of Taste,” Shakespeare Survey, XII (1959), 8.
[43] J. C. Adams, pp. 135, 233, 259.
[44] John Summerson, Architecture in Britain 1530–1830 (London, 1953), p. 59.
[45] C. Walter Hodges, The Globe Restored (New York, 1953), Appendix A, pp. 170-177.
[46] Kernodle. Quotations were selected from pp. 7, 70, 110, 134 respectively.
[47] J. A. Gotch, Architecture of the Renaissance in England (London, 1894), I, p. xix.
[48] Ellis Waterhouse, Painting in Britain 1530–1790 (Baltimore, Md., 1953), p. 1.
[49] A Calendar of Dramatic Records in the Books of the Livery Companies of London 1485–1640, The Malone Society. Collections, Volume III (1954), p. xxvi.
[50] Ibid., pp. 9 (1521), 21 (1534), 26 (1535), 27-29 (1536), 33 (1541), 38 (1546), 39 (1556), 41 (1561), 47 (1568), 53 (1581), 58 (1601), 59 (1602).
[51] Ibid., pp. 18 (1529), 37 (1540), 46 (1566), 47 (1568).
[52] Charles M. Clode, The Early History of the Guild of Merchant Taylors (London, 1888), II, p. 267. For Harper, see II, p. 267; For the Merchant Tailors Company, I, p. 187.
[53] The Dramatic Records of the City of London, The Malone Society, Collections, Volume II, Part III (1931). See p. 311 for example.
[54] Clode, I, p. 187.
[55] Robert Withington, English Pageantry (Cambridge, Mass., 1918–1920), II, p. 23.
[56] Gotch, p. xxii; Summerson, pp. 22 ff.
[CHAPTER FOUR]. THE ACTING
[1] Alfred Harbage, “Elizabethan Acting,” P.M.L.A., LIV (1939), 687. Although Professor Harbage modified his views later (“B. L. Joseph, Elizabethan Acting,” S.Q., II (1951), 360-361. A Review.) and arrived at the position that I describe on pp. 157 ff., his original thesis has served as the basis for most discussion of the subject and may well be used as a point of departure. In Theatre for Shakespeare (Toronto, 1955), he reprints his original article as a “personal indulgence.”
[2] W. F. McNeir, “E. Gayton on Elizabethan Acting,” P.M.L.A., LVI (1941), 579-583; Robert H. Bowers, “Gesticulation in Elizabethan Acting,” So. Folklore Quarterly, XII (1948), 267-277; A. G. H. Bachrach, “The Great Chain of Acting,” Neophilologus, XXXIII (1949), 160-172; Bertram L. Joseph, Elizabethan Acting (London, 1951). In a later book, The Tragic Actor (London, 1959), Joseph disclaims any intention of associating formality with oratory. Both acting and oratory “had the same object, the imitation of human emotions as they are to be recognized in human beings in life” (pp. 19-21). In effect, he adopts the position of the naturalists (p. 27).
[3] Joseph, Elizabethan Acting, p. 1.
[4] Harbage, “Elizabethan Acting,” 698. Quoted from the ms. of The Cyprian Conqueror.
[5] Joseph, Elizabethan Acting, p. 60.
[6] John Russel Brown, “On the Acting of Shakespeare’s Plays,” Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIX (1953), 477-484; Marvin Rosenberg, “Elizabethan Actors: Men or Marionettes?” P.M.L.A., LXIX (1954), 915-927; R. A. Foakes, “The Player’s Passion: Some Notes on Elizabethan Psychology and Acting,” Essays and Studies, VII (1954), pp. 62-77.
[7] Foakes, 76.
[8] Leonard Cox, The Arte or Crafte of Rhethoryke (1527–1530), ed. Frederic I. Carpenter (Chicago, 1899); Richard Sherry, A Treatise of the figures of grammar and rhethorike (1555); Richard Rainolde, A Book called the foundation of Rhetorike (1562); Roger Ascham, The Schoolmaster (1570); Gabriel Harvey, Rhetor (1577); Dudley Fenner, Artes of Logicke and Rhetoric (1584); Henry Peacham, The Garden of Eloquence (1593), ed. William G. Crane (Gainesville, Fla., 1954); John Hoskins, Directions for Speech and Style (c. 1590), ed. Hoyt H. Hudson (Princeton, 1935); Edmund Coote, The Englishe Schoole-Maister (1596); Alexander van den Busche, The Orator, tr. L. P. (Anthony Munday?) (1596); Sir Francis Bacon, Works, ed. James Spedding (London, 1858), vols. iv-vi.
[9] Abraham Fraunce, The Arcadian Rhetorike (1588), ed. Ethel Seaton (Oxford, 1950), p. 107. Succeeding material has been taken from pp. 112-128.
[10] Baldassare Castiglione, The Courtier, tr. T. Hoby (1561), reprinted in Everyman’s Library Edition (London, 1944), p. 56.
[11] Fraunce, p. 106.
[12] Hoskins, p. 2.
[13] Peacham, Sig. U1v-U2r.
[14] Sir Thomas Elyot, The Boke named the Governour (1531), folios 48-49.
[15] William G. Crane, Introduction to Peacham, p. 23.
[16] Sir Francis Bacon, The Advancement of Learning, in Works, IV, pp. 456-457.
[17] Alan S. Downer, “The Tudor Actor: A Taste of his Quality,” Theatre Notebook, V (1951), 77; Leslie Hotson, Shakespeare’s Motley (New York, 1952).
[18] Albert L. Walker, “Conventions in Shakespeare’s Description of Emotion,” P.Q., XVII (1938), 26-56.
[19] Examination of Augustine Phillips. Chambers, William Shakespeare, II, p. 325.
[20] Two Elizabethan Stage Abridgements: The Battle of Alcazar and Orlando Furioso, ed. W. W. Greg. The parallel texts of the 1594 Quarto and Alleyn’s part occupy pages 142-201.
[21] Compare part line 221 with play line 1171; part lines 223-224 with play line 1175; part line 165 with play line 1012.
[22] Thomas W. Baldwin, The Organization and Personnel of the Shakespearean Company (Princeton, 1927). See charts [opposite p. 229].
[23] Ibid., pp. 197, 232, 248.
[24] Hardin Craig, The Enchanted Glass (New York, 1950), pp. 225-226.
[25] Louise Forest, “Caveat for Critics against invoking Elizabethan Psychology,” P.M.L.A., LXI (1946), 657.
[26] Foakes, 65.
[27] Theodore Spencer, Shakespeare and the Nature of Man (New York, 1943); Lily B. Campbell, Shakespeare’s Tragic Heroes. Slaves of Passion (New York, 1952); E. M. W. Tillyard, The Elizabethan World Picture (London, 1948); John W. Draper, The Humors and Shakespeare’s Characters (Durham, N. C., 1945).
[28] Timothy Bright, A Treatise of Melancholie (1586), pp. 51-52.
[29] Bacon, IV, 432.
[30] Elyot, pp. 146 ff.
[31] Bacon, IV, 457.
[32] F. N. Coeffeteau, A Table of Humane Passions, tr. Edward Grimeston (1621); Ruth Anderson, Elizabethan Psychology and Shakespeare’s Plays in University of Iowa Studies, III (March 15, 1927), 72 ff.; Campbell, p. 69.
[33] Thomas Wright, The Passions of the Minde (1601), p. 88, as quoted by Lawrence Babb, The Elizabethan Malady (East Lansing, Mich., 1950), pp. 17 ff.
[34] Babb, p. 13.
[35] Craig, p. 124.
[36] The display of wit as an individualizing element is usually limited to the following types: ladies, pages or boys, satirists such as Jaques and Thersites, clowns, gulls, braggarts, and occasional generic figures such as gentlemen and citizens. The only characters outside of these types who engage in wit play in Shakespeare’s Globe plays are Paris (Troilus and Cressida, III, i), Lafew, Abhorson, Shallow, and Evans (Merry Wives of Windsor, I, i), also in the same play, Pistol and Nym (I, iii) and the Host (II, iii; III, i). Also Iago (who may be considered a satirist) and Polonius (II, ii).
[37] Draper, for example, considers Cassio a choleric type, yet his description of the sanguine personality would fit as well (p. 15). The sanguine type, as Draper describes it, displays a predominance of blood, a handsome physique, ruddy color, a full body, susceptibility to love, honesty, trueness, and gaiety (pp. 18-23). This description fits Cassio.
[CHAPTER FIVE]. THE STAGING
[1] Ronald Watkins, On Producing Shakespeare (New York, 1950), p. 104.
[2] Summerson, pp. 30-51. See especially the plans of Wollaton Hall, p. 34; Hardwick Hall, p. 36; and Charlton House, p. 48.
[3] The determination upon the figure of more than five characters composing a group scene is not arbitrary. Five actors can function on such a stage as the Globe without encountering problems of covering each other or vying for attention. Furthermore, Shakespearean scenes jump from those with five characters to those with appreciably more. Exceptions are noted in the text of the chapter, especially in the discussion of category two of the group scenes.
[4] A. H. Thorndike, Shakespeare’s Theater (New York, 1916), p. 83. Chambers expresses a similar but less sweeping version of this view in Elizabethan Stage, III, p. 86.
[5] Alfred Harbage, Theatre for Shakespeare (Toronto, 1955) pp. 31 ff., estimates that in the 1,463 scenes of the 86 plays produced in the popular theater between 1576 and 1608, only 90, or slightly more than 6 per cent of the scenes require “the use of a curtained recess or equivalent stage enclosure.”
[6] Sir Mark Hunter, “Act- and Scene-Division in the Plays of Shakespeare,” R.E.S., II (1926), 296 ff. J. Dover Wilson, writing shortly afterward, concurred in this definition. “Act- and Scene-Division in the Plays of Shakespeare: A Rejoinder to Sir Mark Hunter,” R.E.S., III (1927), 385.
[7] C. M. Haines, “The ‘Law of Re-entry,’” R.E.S., I (1925), 449-451.
[8] W. W. Greg, Two Elizabethan Stage Abridgements, pp. 32-33.
[9] The difference between the figure of 339 entrances and 644 entrances and exits results from a difference in dividing scenes in the plays. For the purpose of considering split entrances and exits, I thought it best to eliminate any instances where it was even probable that a scene continued, as in Hamlet, from III, iv, to IV, i.
[10] A. C. Sprague, Shakespeare and the Audience (Cambridge, Mass., 1935), p. 66.
[11] Examples occur in True Tragedy of Richard III, 475-477, 581 ff.; Love and Fortune, 1370 f., Sir Clyomon and Sir Clamydes, 828, 852 f., and Cambises, 127 ff., 602 ff.
[12] Sprague, pp. 67-68.
[13] Warren Smith, “The Third Type of Aside in Shakespeare,” M.L.N., LXIV (1949), 510.
[14] There are five speeches which may or may not be asides. These are not included. Macbeth, I, iii, 116-117; V, iii, 20-28; Lear, I, iv, 244-245, 251, 255-256; IV, ii, 83-87; Hamlet, III, ii, 191. Four additional speeches are written so that the character either speaks loudly enough for the sound but not the sense to be overheard or fears being overheard. Caesar, II, iv, 39-43; Twelfth Night, III, iv, 1-4; Othello, IV, i, 238-249; Antony and Cleopatra, III, vii, 6-10.
[15] Coriolanus, II, i, shows the same characteristics. Brutus and Sicinius who have been talking to Menenius step aside, according to the stage direction (106), when the Roman ladies enter. Shortly after they do so, the triumphal procession for Coriolanus enters, then moves on to the Capitol. Upon this exit Brutus and Sicinius, according to the Folio, “enter” (220 ff.) conversing about what they have seen. Apparently they had gone off and yet they are aware of what has taken place. The circumstances fit the conditions of the observation scene that I have been describing.
[16] Paul V. Kreider, Repetition in Shakespeare’s Plays (Princeton, 1941), Chapter One, “The Mechanics of Disguise”; M. C. Bradbrook, “Shakespeare and the Use of Disguise in Elizabethan Drama,” Essays in Criticism, II (1952), pp. 159-168; Victor O. Freeburg, Disguise Plots in Elizabethan Drama (New York, 1915).
[17] Twelfth Night, IV, ii, 69-70. Maria. “Thou mightst have done this without thy beard and gown. He sees thee not.”
[18] Julius Caesar, IV, iii, 267-308; Macbeth, III, iv, 38-73, 93-107; Hamlet, I, i, 18-69, 126-175; I, iv, 38-91; I, v, 1-113; III, iv, 102-136. From this list I exclude the show of kings in Macbeth, IV, i. The apparitions do not pass over the stage immediately, but assemble upon it until Banquo’s ghost “points at them for his.” The lines that follow being of doubtful authenticity, they offer no assistance in determining how the apparitions depart, though nothing in the text conflicts with the conventional manner of staging ghost scenes.
[19] W. J. Lawrence, Pre-Restoration Stage Studies (Cambridge, 1927), p. 106.
[20] A Warning for Fair Women, Sig. E3v. In the midst of a dumb show which takes place on the platform, the following direction occurs: “Chastitie, with her haire disheveled, and taking mistres Sanders by the hand, brings her to her husbands picture hanging on the wall, and pointing to the tree [above the center trap] seemes to tell her, that that is the tree so rashly cut downe.”
[21] In the Folio Edgar speaks the final lines, but in this respect the Quarto follows general usage. Of the other fourteen Shakespearean Globe plays, the ranking figure definitely speaks the final lines in eleven of them (All’s Well, King; Measure for Measure, Duke; As You Like It, Duke; Twelfth Night, Duke; Coriolanus, Aufidius; Timon, Alcibiades; Macbeth, Malcolm; Hamlet, Fortinbras; Othello, Lodovico; Antony and Cleopatra, Caesar; Pericles, Pericles). The other three plays present special instances. The Merry Wives of Windsor has no ranking figure, but it is appropriate for Ford to conclude the action. Julius Caesar apparently has two ranking figures, Antony and Octavius. But the fact that Octavius speaks last points to his triumph in Antony and Cleopatra. Pandarus concludes Troilus and Cressida. This play, as I have shown, has a unique structure.