¹ (Oxford, 1903), ii, 377–379.

² “Some English Plays and Players,” Furnivall Miscellany (Oxford, 1901), pp. 222–234.

³ London, 1898.

⁴ Op. cit., p. 126; and Chambers, op. cit., ii, 377.

⁵ Leach, op. cit., pp. 223–225; Wordsworth, op. cit., p. 141; Chambers, op. cit., ii, 379.

⁶ The items in these volumes concern tithes collected, income from property rentals, endowment, and all such smaller sources of the Chapter's income as collections from charity boxes, contributions at services, and the like, with the payments to prebendaries, chantry-priests, of all items of domestic expense, of fees, charitable grants etc. In a word, it comprises all the ordinary financing of the Cathedral body. There is an analogous series of accounts devoted exclusively to the Fabric Funds—money for repair, extension, and upkeep of the edifice itself—which were not examined for the purposes of this paper. Actually, though the Fabric Accounts seem unlikely to contain such temporal material as references to current dramatic performances, there is indication in a few cases that grants made to certain vicars or chaplains were occasionally supplemented by money from this fund; there was, however, no hint that an exhaustive search of these volumes would yield anything that the Commons Accounts have not already recorded.

I have not made any attempt to glean further references to the Feast of Fools or to those ludi which obviously refer to games of one sort or another. Chambers, op. cit., ii, 377, refers to a protest by Bishop Grosseteste against the Feast of Fools, recorded in the Lincoln Cathedral Statutes of Henry Bradshaw and Christopher Wordsworth (Cambridge, 1892 and 1897, 3 vols.) which I fail to find in this work. There is, however, in Vol. iii (p. 247, n.) such an outburst in the thirteenth-century Consititutiones of that bishop reading: “Execrabilem eciam consuetudinem que consueuit in quibusdam ecclesiis obseruari de faciendo festo stultorum speciali authoritate rescripti apostolici penitus inhibemus … Precipimus eciam ut in singulis ecclesiis denuncietur solenniter ne quisquam leuet arietes super rotas, vel alios ludos statuat, in quibus decertatur probrauio; nec huiusmodi ludis quisquam intersit …” To this might be added the archiepiscopal remonstrance of 1390 (referred to by Leach, op. cit., p. 222) also in the Lincoln Statutes (iii, 247–248): “Et quia in eadem visitacione nostre coram nobis a nonnullis fide dignis delatum extitit quod vicarij et clerici ipsius ecclesie in die Circumcisionis Domini induti veste laicali per eorum strepitus truffas garrulaciones et ludos quos festa stultorum communiter et convenienter appellant, diuinum officium multipliciter et consueti impediunt tenore presencium.”

⁷ Bj.2.4 (1304–18, by Hervey de Luda and Philip de Gretton). There are no page numbers in most of the accounts volumes, so that references may be made solely by means of the year and expense heading. In connection with this note of a Christmas play, attention should be called to the Pastores and Stella included in the York Statutes; See Chambers, op. cit., ii, 399.

⁸ ii (Oxford, 1933), 29 ff., gives a discussion of these plays.

⁹ Bj.2.5 (1318–40, with 1334–35 missing), under “minute expense.” There is also in this volume an item for gloves in the accounts for 1319–20 reading, “Item in diam duodena cyrotecis—x d” (under Curialitates). These Twelfth Night gloves may be for players, and even for those in the play already mentioned, but there is nothing further in the records to confirm this suggestion.

¹⁰ Young, op. cit., ii, 29 ff.

¹¹ For the development of the Peregrini play see Young, op. cit., i, 449, 463 ff., 466 ff., and 470. We already have proof of the Peregrini play in England from the Shrewsbury fragments (see Young, op. cit., ii, 514), and from the Lichfield Statutes. The latter are quite significant for Lincoln, as the oldest copy of these statutes is to be found in the Lincoln muniment room, and as they are known to have closely influenced Lincoln custom. Mark especially that they refer to a Peregrini representation for that same Monday of Easter week which Lincoln devoted to the play of St. Thomas of India. The extract reads: “Item in nocte Natalis representacio pastorum fieri consueuit et in diluculo Pasche representacio Resurreccionis dominice et representacio peregrinorum die lune in septimana Pasche sicut in libris super hijs ac alijs compositis eontinetur.—(From Lincoln Cathedral Statutes, II, 15; also quoted by Young, op. cit., ii, 522, and Chambers, op. cit., ii, 108, 377.)

¹² Bj.2.5, accounts for 1323–24 under “Expense Minute.”

¹³ Ibid., accounts for 1326–27 under “Expense Minute.”

¹⁴ Ibid., accounts for 1332–33 under “Expense Minute.”

¹⁵ Bj.2.6 (John de Branspeth, 1357–69 with 1357–59 in pieces, and 1363–64 and 1366–67 missing), accounts for the year 1368–69.

¹⁶ Bj.2.7 (Ralph Bailly de Quadring, 1378–87), accounts for the year 1383–84.

¹⁷ Ibid. (Simon de Luffenham), accounts for 1386–87.

¹⁸ Bj.2.8, (Simon de Luffenham also, 1389–1395, with 1391–92 missing).

¹⁹ Ibid., accounts for 1393–94 under “Expense minute.”

²⁰ Ibid., accounts for 1394–95 under “Expense minute.”

²¹ Bj.2.9, (Simon de Luffenham 1395–96) under “Expense minute” for 1395–96. This item seems to have been repeated, for immediately following this series of accounts is another labelled and dated identically, containing a verbatim repetition of this item—to wit: “Item in iij paribus cirothecarum emptis pro Maria Anglo & Elizabeth die Natalis domini in Aurora—iiij d.”

²² Young, op. cit., ii, 247 ff.

²³ Ibid., ii, 248 ff.

²⁴ Ibid., ii, 172 ff.

²⁵ Bj.2.9, accounts for 1395–96 under “Expense minute.”

²⁶ Young, op. cit., i, 489 ff.

²⁷ Bj.2.9, accounts for 1396–97 under “Expense minute.”

²⁸ Ibid., accounts for 1397–98 under “Expense minute.”

²⁹ Bj.2.10 (Alan de Humberston and Brian de la Mare, 1399–1409 with 1405–06, 1406–07, and part of 1407–08 missing), accounts for 1399–1400 under “Expense minute.”

³⁰ Ibid., accounts for 1401–02 under “Expense minute.”

³¹ Ibid., accounts for 1402–03 under “Expense Minute.”

³² Ibid., accounts for 1404–05 under “Expense minute.”

³³ Ibid., accounts for 1407–08—heading missing. Wordsworth in his Mediaeval Services (p. 126) refers to an entry of this character for 1406, but there are no accounts for this year in this volume, and they must have been missing at the time this volume was bound.

³⁴ Ibid., accounts for Brian de la Mare, 1408–09 under “Expense minute.”

³⁵ Bj.2.11 (Thomas Grave, 1420–24, with 1421–22, 1422–23 missing). Stray leaves of accounts in the same hand as the main volume precede the 1420–21 accounts and contain this and the following item, both undated; the first is under “Expense Minute,” the second, “Curialitates.”

³⁶ Ibid., accounts for 1420–21 under “Expense minute.” I find no mention here of the allotment of tithes to one William Chamberlayne for the getting up of a visus called the “Rubum quern viderat” which Wordsworth refers to (Mediaeval Services, p. 126) and which Chambers repeats (op. cit., ii, 377–378).

³⁷ Ibid., accounts for 1423–24 under “Expense minute.”

³⁸ Bj.2.12, (Robert Melton, 1440–11) accounts for 1440–41 under “Expense Minute.”

³⁹ Bj.2.13 (Thomas Ryngstede, 1442–45) accounts for 1442–43 under “Expense Minute cum consuetudine.”

⁴⁰ Ibid., accounts for 1443–44 under “Expense Minute.”

⁴¹ Bj.2.14 (Richard Leescy, 1445–48) accounts for 1445–46 under “… in ecclesia Cathedrali lincoln.”

⁴² Ibid., accounts for 1446–47 under “consuetudo soluta in ecclesia Cathedrali.”

⁴³ Ibid., accounts for 1447–48; heading along with part of the entry is rotted away. The heading “ffeod” follows.

⁴⁴ Bj.2.15 (John Colynson, 1448–51), accounts for 1448–49 under “consuetude soluto in ecclesia Cathedrali.”

⁴⁵ Ibid., for 1449–50.

⁴⁶ Ibid., for 1450–51 (mislabelled 1440–41).

⁴⁷ Bj.2.16 (Richard Meelys, 1452–66) accounts for 1452–53 under “Consuetudo solita in ecclesia Cathedrali.”—Also referred to in Wordsworth's Mediaeval Services, p. 126, and quoted in Lincoln Cathedral Statutes, ii, p. lv.

⁴⁸ Ibid., for 1453–54.

⁴⁹ Ibid., for 1454–55.

⁵⁰ Ibid., for 1455–56.

⁵¹ Ibid., for 1456–57.

⁵² Ibid., for 1457–58.

⁵³ Ibid., for 1458–59.

⁵⁴ Ibid., accounts for 1458–59 under “Allocaciones.”

⁵⁵ See Leach, op. cit., p. 225; Leach's error concerns a similar entry in the Chapter Acts for 1488, but the correction applies here as well as later.

⁵⁶ Ibid., accounts for 1459–60 under “consuetudo solita in ecclesia lincolniensi.”

⁵⁷ Ibid., loc. cit., under “Allocaciones.”

⁵⁸ Ibid., accounts for 1460–61 under “Consuetudo solita in ecclesia lincolniensi.”

⁵⁹ Ibid.

⁶⁰ Ibid., loc. cit., under “Allocaciones.”

⁶¹ Ibid., accounts for 1462–63 under “Cosuetudo (sic) solita in ecclesia Lincoln.”

⁶² Ibid., loc. cit., under “Allocaciones.”

⁶³ Ibid., accounts for 1463–64 under “Consuetudo solita in ecclesia lincoln.”

⁶⁴ Ibid., loc. cit. under “Allocaciones.”

⁶⁵ Ibid., accounts for 1464–65 under “Consuetudo solita in ecclesia Lincoln.”

⁶⁶ Ibid., loc. cit., under “Allocaciones.”

⁶⁷ Ibid., accounts for 1465–66 under “Consuetudo solita in ecclesia lincoln.”

⁶⁸ A.2.36 (Chapter Acts, 1465–78) fol. 32. Marginal note: “decretum pro expensis in die Sancte Anne circa assumpsionem domine nostre.” This folio is rotted away at the edge, leaving the gaps indicated in the MS.; it is possible to fill in some, but others are out of the range of hypothesis even—the surviving letters of one line are not even certain. Fortunately the meaning is perfectly clear. References to this are in Leach, op. cit., p. 223, and in Chambers, op. cit., ii, 379.

⁶⁹ Bj.3.1. (Philip Cokeland, 1478–79).

⁷⁰ A.2.37 (Chapter Acts, 1479–92) fol. 27. In the next volume of Acts, A.3.1 (1479–1502) fol. 18—which is a fair copy of the preceding—is another version of this resolution substantially the same as this one except for minor details: For the date copy two reads “septimo die videlicet Junij” and for the year “Anno Domini predicto.” In the sentence beginning “Interogatum quis eciam fuit…,” copy two omits “quis.” Likewise it omits the first part of the sentence beginning “Et in casuquod … ” through “persicere voluerit”; reads “ordinaverunt” for “ordinarent,” “adtunc” for “pertunc,” and omits the questionable “extra” in the last line of copy one. The construction of the last line or so of this extract is a puzzle; even having two copies of the passage is little help. The scribe may have made a mistake or an omission, but what it was I am at a loss to suggest; I can merely expand the words following “Domino Subdecano” as the signs of the manuscript dictate; “Preposito” and “prepositur” are pretty surely correct, unless the latter is “prepositus,” which would be even worse to construe than “prepositur”; I have no suggestions about the expansion of the “existen'” whatever. Leach (op. cit., p. 225) gives a translation of the essential parts of this second item; cf. also Chambers (op. cit., ii, 379).

⁷¹ Bj. 3.2 (Gerard Pynchbek, 1480–95), accounts for 1482–83 under “Allocaciones.”

⁷² Hardin Craig, “The Lincoln Cordwainers' Pageant,” PMLA, vol. xxxii (1917), 610 ff.

⁷³ Young, op. cit., ii, 225 ff., gives what remaining evidence there is of drama of the Assumption in the mediaeval Church. The Spanish plays are: (1) an Assumpcío de madone Sta. María published by Joan Pie, “Autos sagramentals del sigle xiv,” Revista de la Asociacíon astística-arqueologica Barcelonesa, Año 2 (1893), 673–686 and 726–744. (2) an Assumption of the Virgin played at Elche in the fifteenth century—and still performed in the church of Elche—the text of which is published by L. Milá y Fontanals, Obres Completas (Barcelona, 1898) vi, 341 ff. See also p. 205 ff. of the same work. There is a Valencian Assumption also published by D. José [María] Ruiz de Lihory y Pardines, Baron de Alcahalí y Mosquera in La Musica en Valencia (Valencia, 1903), pp. 83–91. Two of these were called to my attention by an excellent new work on the mediæval theater of Spain, The Multiple Stage in Spain, by William H. Shoemaker (Princeton, 1935). The German play is well known, and is contained in Franz Joseph Mone's collection, Altteutsche Schauspiele (Quedlinburg and Leipzig, 1841) and is entitled Marïa Himmelfart. Doubtless more examples of such analogies could be found, but these will serve to show that the Lincoln play is not an isolated phenomenon.

⁷⁴ A.2.37, fol. 46. There is a fair copy of this same item in A.3.1, fol. 54 v. which reads: “Et eodem die ijdem canonici concesserunt Domino Thesaurario puntare & nominare ad illam Cantariam in Burton quam Dominus Robertus Clerke in punti obtinet quecumque idoneum Capellanum quandocumque contigerit ipsam Cantariam proximam vacare et ipsum Dominum Robertum secum retinere pro eo quod est ita ingeniosus in ostensione & lusu vocato assensionem vistato singulis Annis in festo Sancte Anne….” Reference to this entry will be found in Leach, op. cit., p. 225, and in Chambers, op. cit., ii, 379.

⁷⁵ Bj.3.2, accounts for 1485–86 under “Allocaciones.” There are items in this volume also relative to the attendance of the canons residenciary at a Corpus Christi Play, but these deserve discussion with the municipal records of civic plays rather than here.

⁷⁶ Ibid., accounts for 1489–90 under “Allocaciones.”

⁷⁷ Ibid., for 1490–91.

⁷⁸ Ibid., accounts for 1493–94 under “Curialitates.”

⁷⁹ Bj.3.4 (John Stanlow, 1502–20), accounts for 1501–02 under “Allocaciones.”—This must be an old number, for the volume should be Bj.3.3, as the next volume is relabelled Bj.3.4 from Bj.3.5. There is no other Bj.3.3. This item and those following are those referred to by Wordsworth in his Mediaeval Services (p. 141). John Barnes is the porter of the close.

⁸⁰ Ibid., for 1502–03.

⁸¹ Ibid., for 1503–04.

⁸² Ibid., for 1506–07.

⁸³ Ibid., accounts for 1507–08.

⁸⁴ Ibid., accounts for 1508–09.

⁸⁵ Ibid., accounts for 1509–10 under “Curialitates.”

⁸⁶ A.3.4 (1509–13), fol. 6v.

⁸⁷ Bj.3.3 (John Stanlowe, 1502–20) accounts for 1510–11 under “Curialitates.”—Also the accounts for 1511–12, 1512–13, 1513–14, 1514–15, under the same heading in this volume.

⁸⁸ Ibid., for 1515–16.

⁸⁹ A.3.3 (1507–20), fol. 87; marginal entry: “Johannes Barne.”

⁹⁰ Bj.3.3 (Bj.3.4, John Stanlow) accounts for 1516–17, 1517–18, 1518–19, 1519–20 under “Curialitates”; Bj.3.4 (has been Bj.3.5 at one time—Thomas Lililowe, 1520–28) accounts for 1520–21 under “Curialitates.”

⁹¹ Ibid., accounts for 1521–22, 1522–23, 1523–24, 1524–25, 1425–26, 1526–27, under “Curialitates.”

⁹² Bj.3.5 (Richard Bevercote, 1529–46), page 22. The leaves of this volume are partly paginated. The set of accounts from which this item is taken is labelled merely “A.D. 1529”; it seems likely that the fiscal year is that of 1528–29, the one immediately succeeding the last set of the preceding volume, as the clerk would have been more apt to date his final accounts for the last half of the fiscal year. This would date the St. Anne expense 1529. It is likely that Thomas Watson held the office of beadle before becoming porter. For the 1528 entry, see Bj.3.4, accounts for 1527–28 under “Curialitates.”

⁹³ Ibid., p. 66, dated A.D. 1530; p. 112, dated 1531—the Third Year of Richard Bevercote (I fail to find the entry of gloves for Mary, angels and prophets mentioned as a customary of this year by Wordsworth in his Med. Ser. p. 126); p. 152, dated 1533, probably wrongly, as the following year is labelled the Fifth Year of Bevercote—this should logically be labelled 1532 (1531–32) and Bevercote's Fourth Year. From this point in the volume there are no page numbers; the items will be found under “Curialitates” for the Fifth [1532–33], Sixth [1533–34], Seventh [1534–35], Eighth [1535–36] and Ninth [1536–37] years of the same clerk.

⁹⁴ Ibid., Tenth year of Richard Bevercote [1537–38] under “Curialitates.”

⁹⁵ Victoria History of the County of Lincoln, William Page, ed. (London, 1906), ii, 49–50.

⁹⁶ Bj.3.5, Eleventh year of R. Bevercote [1538–39] under “Curialitates.”

⁹⁷ Ibid., loc. cit.

⁹⁸ Ibid., Twelfth year.

⁹⁹ Ibid., Thirteenth year.

¹⁰⁰ Ibid., Fourteenth year.

¹⁰¹ Ibid.

¹⁰² Ibid., Fifteenth year.

¹⁰³ Craig, op. cit., p. 608–609.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid., p. 609; also Historical Manuscripts Commission, Fourteenth Report, No. 8, pp. 47–48.

¹⁰⁵ Bj.3.67 (sic) (Thomas Robertson, labelled 1549–77, but does not actually begin until 1552) accounts for 1552–53 under “Curialitates.” Thomas Watson, the porter, continues to be paid for the “horilogio,” but I have not thought this item as it stands alone of sufficient value to be worth including here; it is unlikely that it had dramatic significance.

¹⁰⁶ Ibid., accounts for 1553–54 under “Curialitates.”

¹⁰⁷ Ibid., for 1555–57 (which year this belongs to is uncertain).

¹⁰⁸ Ibid., for 1557–58.

¹⁰⁹ Ibid., for 1558–59

¹¹⁰ Ibid., for 1559–60.

¹¹¹ Ibid., for 1560–61.

¹¹² Ibid., for 1561–62.—See Wordsworth's note on “pro excludend Alleluya” at last service before Septuagesima, Lincoln Cathedral Statutes, ii, lv.