No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Toward a Reappraisal of the Children's Troupes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 July 2009
Extract
Although most of the extant plays acted by children's troupes were performed in the late 1590s or 1600s, the companies themselves actually grew out of the elaborately formalized court life of the late Middle Ages, and their social functions changed remarkably little over the years. We can therefore best understand certain aspects of this diversified body of work by studying the role played by the children's troupes in the ritualistic entertainments which Elizabeth and James inherited from their Lancaster and Tudor forebears.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society for Theatre Research 1972
References
Notes
1 Huizinga, J., The Waning of the Middle Ages, trans. Hopman, F., (Garden City, N. Y., 1956), pp. 243–244Google Scholar. I am indebted to several anthropologists who have discussed the advantages and limitations of approaching art in terms of its social functions: Redfield, Robert, “Art and Icon,” in Aspects of Primitive Art, Lecture Series No. 1, The Museum of Primitive Art (New York, 1959), pp. 11–40Google Scholar; The Artist in Tribal Society, ed. Smith, Marian W., Proceedings of a Symposium held at the Royal Anthropological Institute in 1957 (London, 1961)Google Scholar; Tradition and Creativity in Tribal Art, ed. Biebuyck, Daniel P. (Los Angeles, 1969)Google Scholar.
2 The most informative histories of the children's troupes are Hillebrand, H. N., The Child Actors. University of Illinois Studies in Language and Literature, XI (Urbana, 1926; reprinted New York, 1964)Google Scholar; and Chambers, E. K., The Elizabethan Stage (Oxford, 1923), II, 1–76Google Scholar. Further details concerning the actual operation of a children's troupe can be gleaned from Sisson, C. J., Lost Plays of Shakespeare's Age (Cambridge, 1936), pp. 12–79Google Scholar. For an unsympathetic account of the companies, see Harbage, Alfred, Shakespeare and the Rival Traditions (New York, 1952), pp. 29–57Google Scholar. See also Gair, W. R., “La Compagnie des Enfants de St. Paul (1599–1606),”Google ScholarLecocq, Louis, “Le Théatre de Blackfriars de 1596 à 1606,”Google Scholar André Bry, “Middleton et le Public des ‘City Comedies,’” and Jacquot, Jean, “Le Répertoire des Compagnies d'Enfants à Londres (1600–1610),” in Dramaturgie et Société, ed. Jacquot, Jean (Paris, 1968), II, 655–782Google Scholar.
3 Gombrich, E. H., Art and Illusion, 2nd edn. (Princeton, 1961), p. 145. Biebuyck, pp. 17–18Google Scholar, raises some relevant and stimulating questions about the possible functions of a work of art in tribal societies: “Is the art object understood to be the iconic transcription of a myth? Is it a mnemotechnical device or a didactic element used in a system of teachings and initiations? Is it understood to represent some essential aspects of a dead person or of an ancestor, or is it meant to be a stereotyped rendering of a supernatural being? Is it intended to express several meanings in one or to illustrate the opposite of what the value code stands for? Is it intended for masquerades and choreographed dances, or is it to be used, rather, as an emblem, a crest, a token or as an initation object? Is it made for private purpose or for public display? Is it meant to be a mark of difference and autonomy? Does it symbolize the integral unity of a large group of people or express the power structure of that group?”
4 Wickham, Glynne, Early English Stages:1300 to 1600 (London, 1959–1963), I, xliii, 186, 206, 229, 263 ff. and II, Part I, passimGoogle Scholar.
5 Anglo, Sydney, Spectacle, Pageantry, and Early Tudor Policy (Oxford, 1969)Google Scholar. For other useful accounts of court revels, see Chambers, E. K., The Mediaeval Stage (Oxford, 1903), I, 390–419Google Scholar; Stevens, John, Music and Poetry in the Early Tudor Court (Lincoln, Neb., 1961), pp. 233–264Google Scholar; Hunter, G. K., John Lyly (London, 1962), pp. 89–158; and Wickham, I, 177–253Google Scholar.
6 Schramm, Percy E., A History of the English Coronation, trans. Legg, L. G. Wickham (Oxford, 1937), p. 91Google Scholar.
7 Payne, E. R., ed., Sapientia Solomonis, Yale Studies in English, LXXXIX (New Haven, 1938), pp. 4–8, 41, 45Google Scholar; Chambers, , The Elizabethan Stage, IV, 378Google Scholar.
8 For the evidence relating to the theater in St. Paul's, see my article, “Three Notes on the Theatre at Paul's…,” Theatre Notebook, XXIV (1970), 147–151Google Scholar: for the Blackfriars theaters, see Sarlos, R.K., “Development and Operation of the First Blackfriars Theatre,” in Studies in the Elizabethan Theatre, ed. Prouty, C. (Hamden, Conn., 1961), p. 159Google Scholar; Hosley, R., “A Reconstruction of the Second Blackfriars,” in The Elizabethan Theatre I, ed. Galloway, David (Toronto, 1969), pp. 74–88Google Scholar; and Chambers, , The Elizabethan Stage, II, 488–489, 496, and 512–14Google Scholar.
9 See my “Three Notes on the Theatre at Paul's…,” pp. 151–54; and Gair, , Dramaturgie et Société, II, 666Google Scholar.
10 Barber, C. L., Shakespeare's Festive Comedy (Princeton, 1959), p. 7Google Scholar.
11 Frye, Northrop, A Natural Perspective (New York, 1965), p. 102Google Scholar.
12 Hardison, O. B., The Enduring Monument (Chapel Hill, 1962)Google Scholar.
13 Barish, Jonas, Ben Jonson and the Language of Prose Comedy (Cambridge, Mass. 1960), p. 244Google Scholar.
14 The festival of the Boy Bishop, which was known all over Western Europe and survived in England into Mary's reign, was generally observed in the following manner: The choristers selected one of their number to serve as Bishop on Innocents' Day (28 December), also called Childermas, while other boys served as priests, deacons, and canons. On Innocents' Eve, garbed in the vestments of their offices, the choristers led a regular service in which the previously elected Boy Bishop preached a sermon and sometimes delivered the benediction, while the real clergymen, in place of the choristers, carried candles and censers. The service was usually followed by a dinner, at which the Boy Bishop and his staff occupied the places of honor. Afterwards, the Bishop and his retinue led a procession through the streets, singing hymns and providing an opportunity for great mirth on the part of the general public. On the following day, the Boy Bishop and his staff paid official visits to nearby religious establishments and residences of distinguished personages, where they demanded a small contribution from each host. At Vespers the boys resumed their rightful places and the ceremony came to an end. For a full discussion of the tradition, see Hillebrand, pp. 22–28; and Chambers, , The Mediaeval Stage, I, 336–371Google Scholar, who also describes the Feast of Fools, pp. 274–335. Descriptions of saturnalian traditions in other cultures can be found in SirFrazer, James, The Golden Bough, 3rd edn. (New York, 1935), VIII, 66–67 and IX, 136–37, 306 ffGoogle Scholar: and Elliott, Robert C., The Power of Satire (Princeton, 1960), pp. 78–84Google Scholar. Kaplan's, Joel “John Marston's Fawn: A Saturnalian Satire,” SEL, IX (1969), 335–350Google Scholar, is a stimulating study, but he employs general notions of saturnalia rather than those involved in the particular festal tradition under discussion and sees no special significance in the fact that the play was performed by a children's troupe.
15 Tilley, M. P., A Dictionary of English Proverbs in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Ann Arbor, 1950), C–328Google Scholar. Cf. Lyly, John, Endimion, in The Works of John Lyly, ed. Bond, R. W. (Oxford, 1902), IV, iii, 101–102Google Scholar; and Marston, John, Jack Drum's Entertainment, in The Plays of John Marston, ed. Wood, H. H. (Edinburgh, 1934–1939), III, 221Google Scholar. I quote throughout from these editions. Although most characters in the children's plays were adults, the audiences were frequently reminded that the actors were children; see my article, “Children's Troupes: Dramatic Illusion and Acting Style,” Comparative Drama, III (1969), 42–48Google Scholar.
16 The Scholemaster, in The English Works of Roger Ascham, ed. Wright, W. A. (Cambridge, 1904), p. 210Google Scholar. Cf. Ari`es, P., Centuries of Childhood, trans. Baldick, R. (New York, 1965), pp. 101–127et passimGoogle Scholar.
17 Although the date for the resumption of playing at Paul's is usually given as 1599 and sometimes as 1598, I have recently discovered evidence indicating that theatrical activities at Paul's had resumed by the fall of 1597; see N & Q, CCXVI (1971), 14–16Google Scholar.
18 In The Complete Works of John Lyly, III, 342Google Scholar.
19 Ben Jonson, ed. Herford, C. H. and Simpson, P. E. (Oxford, 1925–1952). IV, 48. I quote throughout from this editionGoogle Scholar.
20 Even the Children of the King's Revels, a more commercial enterprise than either the Children of Paul's or the Blackfriars troupe, praised its audience in language reminiscent of Lyly and the royal banqueting halls. See the Epilogue to Lording Barry's Ram Alley and the Prologue to Edward Sharpham's Cupid's Whirligig.
21 In The Plays of George Chapman, ed. Holaday, Allan (Urbana, 1970), I, 296. I quote throughout from this editionGoogle Scholar.
22 See my “Children's Troupes: Dramatic Illusion and Acting Style,” pp. 50–52.
23 See, for example, the Prologues to Richard Edwards' Damon and Pythias, Jonson's Epicoene, Chapman's All Fools, Marston's The Fawne, and Beaumont's The Woman Hater—all acted by children's troupes. Other denials of intentional “application” are printed in Klein's, DavidThe Elizabethan Dramatists as Critics (New York, 1963), pp. 111–119. Harbage, pp. 78–80, lists instances of deliberate “application,” while Sisson discusses a case in which the victims brought libel charges against the dramatist, Chapman, and the managers of the Children of Paul'sGoogle Scholar.
24 Doran, Madeleine, Endeavors of Art (Madison, 1954), pp. 169–170; Ben Jonson, ed. Herford and Simpson, IX, 396–99Google Scholar.
25 Tomkis, Thomas, Lingua (London, 1607), Sig. D3. Subsequent references are to this editionGoogle Scholar.
26 As quoted in Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage, IV, 253Google Scholar.
27 Day, John, The Isle of Gulls, ed. Harrison, G. B., Shakespeare Association Facsimiles, No. 12 (Oxford 1936), Sig. A2v Subsequent references are to this editionGoogle Scholar.
28 See my “Children's Troupes: Dramatic Illusion and Acting Style,” pp. 43–44.
29 This speech is omitted in the quarto, which Herford and Simpson, IV, 17–22, believe was printed from a version cut for court performance, although Jonson probably wrote the full text with a court audience in mind.
30 Campbell, O. J., Comicall Satyre and Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida (San Marino, Calif., 1938). Most of the plays Campbell discusses were acted by the children's troupes. Jonson's Every Man Out of his Humour, which Campbell calls the earliest “comicall satyre,” was performed by a troupe of adult actors, but may have been written for performance at court or at one of the inns of court, in other words, for an audience like those at the private theaters; see Herford and Simpson, I, 22–23 and III, 412–13Google Scholar. Similarly, some scholars argue that Troilus and Cressida was also written primarily for performance at one of the inns of court; see Coghill, N., Shakespeare's Professional Skills (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 78–97Google Scholar; and Kimbrough, R., Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida and Its Setting (Cambridge, Mass., 1964), pp. 10–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
31 Although no author's name appears on the title pages of the early editions of Sir Giles Goosecap, the play is usually attributed to Chapman; see Chambers, , The Elizabethan Stage, IV, 15Google Scholar; and Parrott, T. M., ed., The Plays and Poems of George Chapman (London, 1910–1914), II, 889–897Google Scholar.
32 Kay, W. David, “Ben Jonson, Horace, and the Poetomachia,” unpublished doctoral dissertation (Princeton, 1968), pp. 168–172, refutes the arguments identifying Brabant Senior with JonsonGoogle Scholar. On the satirizing of the conventional satirist, see Kernan, A., The Cankered Muse: Satire of the English Renaissance, Yale Studies in English, CXLII (New Haven, 1959), pp. 150–158Google Scholar; Nicoll, Allardyce, “The Dramatic Portrait of George Chapman,” PQ, XLI (1962), 215–228, identifies Chapman with the satiric playwright Bellamont, who is humiliated in Northward Ho, acted at Paul's around 1605Google Scholar.
33 Armstrong, W. A., “The Audience of the Private Theatres,” RES, n.s., X (1959), 236 ffGoogle Scholar. See also Finkelpearl, P. J., John Marston of the Middle Temple (Cambridge, Mass., 1969), p. 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stone, Lawrence, The Crisis of the Aristocracy, 1558–1641 (Oxford, 1965), pp. 386–387 and 690–91Google Scholar; Bry, A., Dramaturgie et Société, II, 715–716Google Scholar, points out the anti–legal satire in Middleton's children's plays, especially Michaelmas Term, where the villain Quomodo thrice remarks that his imbecilic son is a student of the law and, addressing the spectators directly, asks them to “Admire me, all you students at inns of cozenage” (The Works of Thomas Middleton, ed. Bullen, A. H. [London, 1885], II, ii, 486–487. Subsequent references are to this edition.)Google Scholar
34 A useful attempt to define and describe this sub-genre is Gibbons, Brian, Jacobean City Comedy (Cambridge, Mass., 1968)Google Scholar. See also A. Bry, Dramaturgie et Société.
35 Quinn, A. H., ed., The Fair Maid of Bristowe (Philadelphia, 1912), p. 27Google Scholar. Cf. Thorp, Willard, The Triumph of Realism in Elizabethan Drama (Princeton, 1928), pp. 87–95Google Scholar; and Hunter, R. G., Shakespeare and the Comedy of Forgiveness (New York, 1965), pp. 1–84Google Scholar.
36 The relevant scholarship, especially the work of Bard, Fisher, and Christian, is cited in George, David, “Thomas Middleton's Sources: A Survey,” N & Q, CCXVI (1971), 16–22Google Scholar.
37 The Phoenix II, iii, 38–96Google Scholar and The Family of Love I, iii, 169–170Google Scholar.