Repertory by Genre at Lisle's Tennis Court

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Repertory by Genre at Lisle's Tennis Court A University of Sussex PhD thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX LANA MARIE HARPER PHD ENGLISH THE DEVELOPMENT OF EARLY ENGLISH PLAYHOUSES, 1560-1670 I hereby declare that this thesis has not been and will not be submitted in whole or in part to another university for the award of any other degree Signature: Lana M Harper Abstract This thesis presents a study of playhouse spaces and the theatre industry in early modern England, and how they developed from 1560-1670. The period considered spans the English civil wars and Commonwealth to complicate the notion of a cessation of theatrical activity in 1642, and argues against the division of theatre history into distinct Renaissance and Restoration periods. The study builds on recent scholarly trends which have productively read early modern playing companies as consistent cultural entities with individual identities, by extending and applying this methodology to playhouse spaces. As such, this thesis proposes that all early modern playhouses had unique identities, and suggests that the frequent division into amphitheatre and indoor playhouses can produce an oversimplified binary with homogenising consequences. Moreover, it argues that a problematic, undertheorized hierarchy of playhouses exists; a key factor being the strength of the playhouse’s connection to Shakespeare, which has led to the prioritisation of the Globe in particular. This thesis problematises the metrics which have been used to assess the importance of playhouses; it offers alternative factors but also suggests it is more important to ascertain unique aspects of playhouse identities than to create a hierarchy between them. Case studies of the Curtain (c.1577-c.1625), Salisbury Court (1629-1666) and Gibbons’ Tennis Court (1653-c.1669) demonstrate how distinct aspects of playhouses’ identities can be established by proposing dimensions of their unique reputations based on their known repertories. Collectively, these studies also demonstrate how playhouse space developed over time. This study concludes that each of these playhouses have been undervalued in scholarly narratives. By producing substantial accounts of these neglected spaces this thesis contributes towards a rebalancing of emphasis in early modern scholarship, and it also demonstrates that a wider reappraisal of early modern playhouse space is necessary in the future. 1 Acknowledgements I owe a debt of gratitude to an enormous number of people and institutions, without whom this thesis would not have been possible. I am grateful to the AHRC for funding my research, and to the University of Sussex library, the British Library, the Bodleian Library and Shakespeare’s Globe library for allowing me to access their collections. Thanks to everyone at MOLA for allowing me to view their excavation of the Curtain, and especially to Julian Bowsher for sharing his thoughts on the playhouse so extensively with me. Thank you also to Eva Griffith for her encouragement, generosity and inspiring work. Staff at the University of Sussex Doctoral School have made the experience far more rewarding with their workshops and guidance; my particular thanks to Catherine Pope and Liz Sage for Thesis Boot Camp, during which a significant percentage of the first draft of this thesis was written. Working at Shakespeare’s Globe kindled my interest in this topic, and I am deeply grateful to many of my colleagues there for their friendship and support when I needed it most. Ruth Frendo and Derek Dunne lent their expert eyes to the funding proposal for this research, without which it may never have happened. Kim Gilchrist has been an extraordinary and generous friend ever since then, and is one of the most inspiring and passionate researchers I have met. Thank you for bringing me on board to set up Shakesposium, and thank you to everyone who has attended it for their ideas, energy and helping to create such a lovely community. The Centre of Early Modern and Medieval Studies at the University of Sussex has made me welcome for many years, so thank you to all members of the centre. Without Margaret Healy and Mat Dimmock’s teaching and encouragement as an undergraduate I would not have continued studying the early modern period. Duncan Fraser very generously proofread this thesis in a questionable timeframe and with inimitable attention to detail. In particular, of course, thank you to my supervisor Andrew Hadfield for originally encouraging me to pursue a PhD, his geniality and patience throughout, and the shamefully long loan of much of his personal library. I am also extremely grateful to my colleagues and friends at Sussex for their friendship, support, kindness, ideas, enthusiasm, proofreading skills, and in many cases for finally providing the drunken late-night conversations about poetry and philosophy I have always dreamed of. In particular, thank you to Shanyn Altman, Simon Davies, Laura Fox Gill, Tom Houlton, Nicole Mennell, Anthony O’Shea, Joe Ronan, Mike Rowland, Dominic Walker, 2 Kiron Ward, Pei Yun, and especially Ross Owens - meeting you has been the most wonderful and unexpected part of writing this PhD. This thesis would not have happened without help from some extraordinary people who I love dearly. Dad – thank you for encouraging me while doing something so weird, and for helping to keep me sane with the running. Now there’s more time I can’t wait to do more with you next year. Maureen was a role model and a generous, artistic and intelligent person. It’s no exaggeration to say that her publishing a book was the thing that made me want to write one too. Her delight at the idea of me writing this thesis has never been forgotten – she probably would even have wanted to read it. Adam has lived with this thesis for almost as long as I have, and I know that it, and I, have not always been easy. Thank you for your support, especially these last few months, for sharing your coffee addiction with me, and for teaching me everything I needed to know about pigs. I’m looking forward to the rest of the adventure. Mum has been there throughout the PhD and before, even when that meant tolerating my more challenging moments. It’s impossible to overstate what you’ve done to get me to this point. Neither the thesis nor any of the rest of it would have happened without you – thank you for it all. Kirsty challenges me almost every time I speak to her, and her achievements and drive are – ironically – infectious. I doubt I could have finished this without her support. Thank you for your optimism, your love, the spot on your floor, and for pushing me harder than anyone: I love it. Here’s to Drs2. Finally, Jack was an extraordinary person who was sunny, compassionate, and endlessly enthusiastic. He made life exciting, and everything seem achievable. I miss him, and it is to Jack and Kirsty that this work is dedicated. 3 Table of Contents Abstract p.1 Acknowledgements p.2 Table of Contents p.4 List of Illustrations and Abbreviations p.6 Note on Texts p.8 Introduction 1. Resurgence and continuity in the English theatrical tradition p.9 2. Playhouse identity, space and repertory p.11 Chapter 1 Interpreting Playhouse Development in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries 1. The Canonisation of Playhouse Space p.15 2. Assessing the Importance of an Early Modern Playhouse p.32 3. Outdoor and Indoor Public Playhouses p.46 Chapter 2 Theatrical Traditions and Performance Venues during the Commonwealth and Restoration p.53 1. The English Tradition of Interrupted and Illicit Playing p.56 2. The Continuation of English Theatrical Traditions 1642-1660 p.69 Chapter 3 Case study: The Curtain p.83 1. Factual overview and existing scholarship p.84 2. Reinterpreting the evidence and reassessing the Curtain’s importance p.89 3. Clowning, jigging and Thomas Greene at the Curtain p.106 4. Nationalism and xenophobia in the Curtain repertory p.111 5. Conclusion p.121 Chapter 4 Case study: Salisbury Court p.122 1. Factual overview p.123 2. Existing scholarship and position in theatre history narratives p.131 3. Salisbury Court after 1642 p.142 4. Topographical comedy in Salisbury Court’s pre-war repertory p.145 5. Conclusion p.160 4 Chapter 5 Case study: Gibbons’ Tennis Court Theatre p.161 1. Factual overview p.162 2. Existing scholarship and position in theatre history narratives p.166 3. Repertory at Gibbons’ Tennis Court Theatre p.178 4. Legacy and influence on English theatre tradition p.199 5. Conclusion p.205 Conclusion: The Development of Early English Playhouses p.206 Bibliography p.209 Appendix 1 – Plays performed at The Curtain p.225 Appendix 2 – Plays performed at Gibbons’ Tennis Court Theatre p.227 5 List of illustrations Figure 1. Graph to show the number of years early modern playhouses operated for, according to conventional scholarly definition and with venues of the same name considered separately. p.35. Figure 2. Graph to show the number of years early modern playhouses operated for, according to conventional scholarly definition and with venues of the same name considered as one. p.37. Figure 3. Graph to show number of years early modern playhouses operated from first to last recorded performance.
Recommended publications
  • Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship Conference
    Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship Conference Oakland Marriott City Center Hotel October 11–14, 2018 Table of Contents Schedule of Events ....................................................... 2 Biographies/Titles/Abstracts .............................. 6 —In order of presentation Dark Lady Essays .......................................................23 Dark Lady Sonnets ....................................................29 Page 1 SOF Conference—Schedule of Events THURSDAY: October 11, 2018 10:00—1:00 Conference Registration 1:00—1:15 Welcome, Introductions and Orientation. 1:15—2:00 Wally Hurst: Blame It on the Bard: Why the Author ‘Shakespeare’ is Responsible for World War I and World War II. 2:00—2:45 David Rains Wallace: Shakespeare, Beowulf, and Wilderness. 2:45—3:15 Coffee/Tea Break 3:15—4:00 Theresa Lauricella: “I Took Thee for thy Better”: The Prestige of Polonius. 4:00—4:45 Robert Detobel (Read by Don Rubin): The Soul of Nero. 4:45—5:30 Steven Sabel: Not to Modernize: Why the ‘translating’ of the Bard’s texts to modern language corrupts performance of the works and further conceals the true author. 5:30—7:00 Hosted Wine and Cheese reception. FRIDAY: October 12, 2018 8:30—9:15 Julie Bianchi: Twins Separated at Birth? A Cultural and Genealogical Investigation of Two Identities Set in Stone. 9:15—9:30 John Hamill: Shakespeare Oxford Fellowship Research Grants Report 9:30—10:15 Michael Delahoyde and Coleen Moriarty: De Veres di Venezia 10:15—10:45 Coffee/Tea Break 10:45—12:30 Panel: An Oxfordian Timeline for Dating Shakespeare’s Plays: Ramon Jiménez, Katherine Chiljan, and Kevin Gilvary 12:30—1:30 Lunch (on own). 1:30—2:15 W.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Theses and Dissertations--History History 2016 Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945 Danielle K. Dodson University of Kentucky, [email protected] Digital Object Identifier: http://dx.doi.org/10.13023/ETD.2016.339 Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Dodson, Danielle K., "Minding the Gap: Uncovering the Underground's Role in the Formation of Modern London, 1855-1945" (2016). Theses and Dissertations--History. 40. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/history_etds/40 This Doctoral Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the History at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations--History by an authorized administrator of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT AGREEMENT: I represent that my thesis or dissertation and abstract are my original work. Proper attribution has been given to all outside sources. I understand that I am solely responsible for obtaining any needed copyright permissions. I have obtained needed written permission statement(s) from the owner(s) of each third-party copyrighted matter to be included in my work, allowing electronic distribution (if such use is not permitted by the fair use doctrine) which will be submitted to UKnowledge as Additional File. I hereby grant to The University of Kentucky and its agents the irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to archive and make accessible my work in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known.
    [Show full text]
  • Shakespeare's Elizabethan Public
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 1-1925 Shakespeare's Elizabethan public. Joseph Anderson Burns University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Recommended Citation Burns, Joseph Anderson, "Shakespeare's Elizabethan public." (1925). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 182. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/182 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE SHAKESPEARE'S ELIZABETHAN PUBLIC A Dissertation SUbm! tted to the Faculty Of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of English By Joseph Anderson Burns 1925. 7 Of all the arts drama is the most democratic. Other forms of artistic and aesthebic expression, literature, music, painting, may be cultivated in solitude. not so the drama. It is demanded by the public; produced for the public nd unless it is ~pproved by the public ito doom is certain. r/hy it; is that the drama can- not at any time break away from the .t.."as ...• es, prejudices, and ide 1 of the public for which it s written, M. Edelstand Du · eril has 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    Early Theatre 9.2 Issues in Review Lucy Munro, Anne Lancashire, John Astington, and Marta Straznicky Popular Theatre and the Red Bull Governing the Pen to the Capacity of the Stage: Reading the Red Bull and Clerkenwell In his introduction to Early Theatre’s Issues in Review segment ‘Reading the Elizabethan Acting Companies’, published in 2001, Scott McMillin called for an approach to the study of early modern drama which takes theatre companies as ‘the organizing units of dramatic production’. Such an approach will, he suggests, entail reading plays ‘more fully than we have been trained to do, taking them not as authorial texts but as performed texts, seeing them as collaborative endeavours which involve the writers and dozens of other theatre people, and placing the staged plays in a social network to which both the players and audiences – perhaps even the playwrights – belonged’.1 We present here a variation on this approach: three essays that focus on the Red Bull theatre and its Clerkenwell locality. Rather than focusing on individual companies, we take the playhouse and location as our organising principle. Nonetheless, we are dealing with precisely the kind of decentring activity that McMillin had in mind, examining early drama through collaborative performance, through performance styles and audience taste, and through the presentation of a theatrical repertory in print. Each essay deals with a different ‘social network’: Anne Lancashire re-examines the evidence for the London Clerkenwell play, a multi-day biblical play performed by clerks in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries; John Astington takes a look at acting traditions and repertory composition at the Red Bull and its fellow in the northern suburbs, Golden Lane’s Fortune playhouse; and Marta Straznicky looks at questions relating to the audience for Red Bull plays in the playhouse and the print-shop.
    [Show full text]
  • M a K in G a N D U N M a K in Gin Early Modern English Drama
    Porter MAKING AND Chloe Porter UNMAKING IN EARLY MODERN ENGLISH DRAMA Why are early modern English dramatists preoccupied with unfinished processes of ‘making’ and ‘unmaking’? And what did ‘finished’ or ‘incomplete’ mean for spectators of plays and visual works in this period? Making and unmaking in early IN EARLY MODERN ENGLISH DRAMA IN EARLY UNMAKING AND MAKING modern English drama is about the prevalence and significance of visual things that are ‘under construction’ in early modern plays. Contributing to challenges to the well-worn narrative of ‘iconophobic’ early modern English culture, it explores the drama as a part of a lively post-Reformation visual world. Interrogating the centrality of concepts of ‘fragmentation’ and ‘wholeness’ in critical approaches to this period, it opens up new interpretations of the place of aesthetic form in early modern culture. An interdisciplinary study, this book argues that the idea of ‘finish’ had transgressive associations in the early modern imagination. It centres on the depiction of incomplete visual practices in works by playwrights including Shakespeare, John Lyly, and Robert Greene. The first book of its kind to connect dramatists’ attitudes to the visual with questions of materiality, Making and Unmaking in Early Modern English Drama draws on a rich range of illustrated examples. Plays are discussed alongside contexts and themes, including iconoclasm, painting, sculpture, clothing and jewellery, automata, and invisibility. Asking what it meant for Shakespeare and his contemporaries to ‘begin’ or ‘end’ a literary or visual work, this book is invaluable for scholars and students of early modern English literature, drama, visual culture, material culture, theatre history, history and aesthetics.
    [Show full text]
  • English Renaissance
    1 ENGLISH RENAISSANCE Unit Structure: 1.0 Objectives 1.1 The Historical Overview 1.2 The Elizabethan and Jacobean Ages 1.2.1 Political Peace and Stability 1.2.2 Social Development 1.2.3 Religious Tolerance 1.2.4 Sense and Feeling of Patriotism 1.2.5 Discovery, Exploration and Expansion 1.2.6 Influence of Foreign Fashions 1.2.7 Contradictions and Set of Oppositions 1.3 The Literary Tendencies of the Age 1.3.1 Foreign Influences 1.3.2 Influence of Reformation 1.3.3 Ardent Spirit of Adventure 1.3.4 Abundance of Output 1.4 Elizabethan Poetry 1.4.1 Love Poetry 1.4.2 Patriotic Poetry 1.4.3 Philosophical Poetry 1.4.4 Satirical Poetry 1.4.5 Poets of the Age 1.4.6 Songs and Lyrics in Elizabethan Poetry 1.4.7 Elizabethan Sonnets and Sonneteers 1.5 Elizabethan Prose 1.5.1 Prose in Early Renaissance 1.5.2 The Essay 1.5.3 Character Writers 1.5.4 Religious Prose 1.5.5 Prose Romances 2 1.6 Elizabethan Drama 1.6.1 The University Wits 1.6.2 Dramatic Activity of Shakespeare 1.6.3 Other Playwrights 1.7. Let‘s Sum up 1.8 Important Questions 1.0. OBJECTIVES This unit will make the students aware with: The historical and socio-political knowledge of Elizabethan and Jacobean Ages. Features of the ages. Literary tendencies, literary contributions to the different of genres like poetry, prose and drama. The important writers are introduced with their major works. With this knowledge the students will be able to locate the particular works in the tradition of literature, and again they will study the prescribed texts in the historical background.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in the Work of Colley Cibber
    BULLETIN OF THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS HUMANISTIC STUDIES Vol. 1 October 1, 1912 No. 1 STUDIES IN THE WORK OF COLLEY CIBBER BY DE WITT C.:'CROISSANT, PH.D. A ssistant Professor of English Language in the University of Kansas LAWRENCE, OCTOBER. 1912 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY CONTENTS I Notes on Cibber's Plays II Cibber and the Development of Sentimental Comedy Bibliography PREFACE The following studies are extracts from a longer paper on the life and work of Cibber. No extended investigation concerning the life or the literary activity of Cibber has recently appeared, and certain misconceptions concerning his personal character, as well as his importance in the development of English literature and the literary merit of his plays, have been becoming more and more firmly fixed in the minds of students. Cibber was neither so much of a fool nor so great a knave as is generally supposed. The estimate and the judgment of two of his contemporaries, Pope and Dennis, have been far too widely accepted. The only one of the above topics that this paper deals with, otherwise than incidentally, is his place in the development of a literary mode. While Cibber was the most prominent and influential of the innovators among the writers of comedy of his time, he was not the only one who indicated the change toward sentimental comedy in his work. This subject, too, needs fuller investigation. I hope, at some future time, to continue my studies in this field. This work was suggested as a subject for a doctor's thesis, by Professor John Matthews Manly, while I was a graduate student at the University of Chicago a number of years ago, and was con• tinued later under the direction of Professor Thomas Marc Par- rott at Princeton.
    [Show full text]
  • A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement
    A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement California’s Home for the Classics California’s Home for the Classics California’s Home for the Classics Table of Contents Dating Shakespeare’s Plays 3 Life in Shakespeare’s England 4 Elizabethan Theatre 8 Working in Elizabethan England 14 This Sceptered Isle 16 One Big Happy Family Tree 20 Sir John Falstaff and Tavern Culture 21 Battle of the Henries 24 Playing Nine Men’s Morris 30 FUNDING FOR A NOISE WITHIN’S EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IS PROVIDED IN paRT BY: The Ahmanson Foundation, Alliance for the Advancement of Arts Education, Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, Employees Community Fund of Boeing California, The Capital Group Companies, Citigroup Foundation, Disney Worldwide Outreach, Doukas Family Foundation, Ellingsen Family Foundation, The Herb Alpert Foundation, The Green Foundation, Kiwanis Club of Glendale, Lockheed Federal Credit Union, Los Angeles County Arts Commission, B.C. McCabe Foundation, Metropolitan Associates, National Endowment for the Arts, The Kenneth T. and Eileen L. Norris Foundation, The Steinmetz Foundation, Dwight Stuart Youth Foundation, Waterman Foundation, Zeigler Family Foundation. 2 A Noise Within Study Guide Shakespeare Supplement Dating Shakespeare’s Plays Establishing an exact date for the Plays of Shakespeare. She theorized that authorship of Shakespeare’s plays is a very Shakespeare (a “stupid, ignorant, third- difficult task. It is impossible to pin down rate play actor”) could not have written the exact order, because there are no the plays attributed to him. The Victorians records giving details of the first production. were suspicious that a middle-class actor Many of the plays were performed years could ever be England’s greatest poet as before they were first published.
    [Show full text]
  • English Professional Theatre, 1530-1660 Edited by Glynne Wickham, Herbert Berry and William Ingram Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-10082-3 - English Professional Theatre, 1530-1660 Edited by Glynne Wickham, Herbert Berry and William Ingram Index More information Index Note: search under ‘London and Environs’; ‘Playing Companies’; ‘Playhouses’; and ‘Stage Characters’ for individual entries appropriate to those categories. Abell, William (alderman), 586 Andrews, Richard (player), 245 Abuses, 318 Anglin, Jay P., ‘The Schools of Defense’, Acton, Mr (justice of the peace), 158 296 Actors. See Players Anglo, Sydney, 20; ‘Court Festivals’, 291 Adams, John (player), 300 Annals of England. See Stow, John Adams, Joseph Quincy, Shakespearean Playhouse, Anne, Queen, 119, 122, 125, 513–14, 561, 562, 550n, 597n, 626n; Dramatic Records of Sir 564, 580, 625, 630–1; her company of Henry Herbert, 581, 582, 582n players, see Playing Companies Admiral, Lord. See Lord Admiral Apothecaries, 388, 501 Admiral’s players. See Playing Companies Arber, Edward, 192 Aesop, 171 Archer, George (rent gatherer), 611n Agrippa, Henry Cornelius (writer), 159 Arches, Court of the, 292, 294n, 312 Alabaster, William (playwright), 650 Ariosto, Ludovico, I Suppositi, 297n Aldermen of London. See London Armin, Robert (player and writer), 123, 196, Alderson, Thomas (sailor), 643 197, 198; Foole vpon Foole, 411–12 All Hallowtide, 100 Army Plot, The, 625, 636 All Saints Day, 35 Arthur, Thomas (apprentice player), 275–7 Allen, Giles, 330–2&n, 333–6&n, 340, 343–4, Arundel, Earl of (Henry Fitzalan, twelfth Earl), 346–7, 348, 352, 355, 356–7, 367–72, 372–5, 73, 308; his company
    [Show full text]
  • An A2 Timeline of the London Stage Between 1660 and 1737
    1660-61 1659-60 1661-62 1662-63 1663-64 1664-65 1665-66 1666-67 William Beeston The United Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company @ Salisbury Court Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company & Thomas Killigrew @ Salisbury Court @Lincoln’s Inn Fields @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields Sir William Davenant Sir William Davenant Rhodes’s Company @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ Red Bull Theatre @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields George Jolly John Rhodes @ Salisbury Court @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane The King’s Company The King’s Company PLAGUE The King’s Company The King’s Company The King’s Company Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew June 1665-October 1666 Anthony Turner Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew Thomas Killigrew @ Vere Street Theatre @ Vere Street Theatre & Edward Shatterell @ Red Bull Theatre @ Bridges Street Theatre @ Bridges Street Theatre @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane @ Bridges Street Theatre, GREAT FIRE @ Red Bull Theatre Drury Lane (from 7/5/1663) The Red Bull Players The Nursery @ The Cockpit, Drury Lane September 1666 @ Red Bull Theatre George Jolly @ Hatton Garden 1676-77 1675-76 1674-75 1673-74 1672-73 1671-72 1670-71 1669-70 1668-69 1667-68 The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company The Duke’s Company Thomas Betterton & William Henry Harrison and Thomas Henry Harrison & Thomas Sir William Davenant Smith for the Davenant Betterton for the Davenant Betterton for the Davenant @ Lincoln’s Inn Fields
    [Show full text]
  • Some Named Brewhouses in Early London Mike Brown
    Some named brewhouses in early London Mike Brown On the river side, below St. Katherine's, says ed to be somewhat dispersed through a Pennant, on we hardly know what authority, variety of history texts. Members will be stood, in the reign of the Tudors, the great aware that the Brewery History Society breweries of London, or the "bere house," as has gradually been covering the history it is called in the map of the first volume of of brewing in individual counties, with a the "Civitates Orbis." They were subject to series of books. Some of these, such as the usual useful, yet vexatious, surveillance Ian Peaty's Essex and Peter Moynihan's of the olden times; and in 1492 (Henry VII.) work on Kent, have included parts of the king licensed John Merchant, a Fleming, London in the wider sense ie within the to export fifty tuns of ale "called berre;" and in M25. There are also histories of the main the same thrifty reign one Geffrey Gate concerns eg Red Barrel on Watneys, but (probably an officer of the king's) spoiled the they often see the business from one par- brew-houses twice, either by sending abroad ticular perspective. too much beer unlicensed, or by brewing it too weak for the sturdy home customers. The Hence, to celebrate the Society’s 40th demand for our stalwart English ale anniversary and to tie in with some of the increased in the time of Elizabeth, in whose events happening in London, it was felt reign we find 500 tuns being exported at one that it was time to address the question time alone, and sent over to Amsterdam of brewing in the capital - provisionally probably, as Pennant thinks, for the use of entitled Capital Ale or similar - in a single our thirsty army in the Low Countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Jane Milling
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE ‘“For Without Vanity I’m Better Known”: Restoration Actors and Metatheatre on the London Stage.’ AUTHORS Milling, Jane JOURNAL Theatre Survey DEPOSITED IN ORE 18 March 2013 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10036/4491 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication Theatre Survey 52:1 (May 2011) # American Society for Theatre Research 2011 doi:10.1017/S0040557411000068 Jane Milling “FOR WITHOUT VANITY,I’M BETTER KNOWN”: RESTORATION ACTORS AND METATHEATRE ON THE LONDON STAGE Prologue, To the Duke of Lerma, Spoken by Mrs. Ellen[Nell], and Mrs. Nepp. NEPP: How, Mrs. Ellen, not dress’d yet, and all the Play ready to begin? EL[LEN]: Not so near ready to begin as you think for. NEPP: Why, what’s the matter? ELLEN: The Poet, and the Company are wrangling within. NEPP: About what? ELLEN: A prologue. NEPP: Why, Is’t an ill one? NELL[ELLEN]: Two to one, but it had been so if he had writ any; but the Conscious Poet with much modesty, and very Civilly and Sillily—has writ none.... NEPP: What shall we do then? ’Slife let’s be bold, And speak a Prologue— NELL[ELLEN]: —No, no let us Scold.1 When Samuel Pepys heard Nell Gwyn2 and Elizabeth Knipp3 deliver the prologue to Robert Howard’s The Duke of Lerma, he recorded the experience in his diary: “Knepp and Nell spoke the prologue most excellently, especially Knepp, who spoke beyond any creature I ever heard.”4 By 20 February 1668, when Pepys noted his thoughts, he had known Knipp personally for two years, much to the chagrin of his wife.
    [Show full text]