The Painting was in every wayes as defective and lame as the Poetry, for I believe he who pictured King Pharaoh, had never seen a King in his life, for all the Majesty he was represented with was goggle Eyes, that his Picture might be answerable to the Verse."
We see by the above extract that much was not expected in a Droll; and, verily, few could have been disappointed. To modern taste the humour of the majority is too coarse; and, therefore, I have been obliged to take, as an exemplar, the most innocent of its class.
[123] It is a curious fact that both Nares and Halliwell, in their glossaries, describe Drolls as being puppet shows, when, as is shown, they were acted by living people.
[124] This theatre was in Clerkenwell, at the corner of what is now Woodbridge Street, and here acted (in October 1617, if not again) Edward Alleyn, the founder of Dulwich College. It is frequently mentioned in contemporary books, notably by Prynne in his Histrio Martix, and by Pepys in his Diary, 4th August 1660, and 23d March and 26th May 1662.
The Humour of Bumpkin.
Argument needless, It being a Thorow Farce
very well known—
[75.] Actors Names.
Acteon, three Huntsmen, Bumpkin, three Country Wenches.
Enter first Huntsman, and Bumkin.