This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 68-2997 HAWLEY, James Abgriffith, 1932- INIGO JONES AND THE NEW ENGLISH STAGECRAFT. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1967 Speech-Theater University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan INIGO JONES AND THE NEW ENGLISH STAGECRAFT DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio S ta te U n iv ersity By James Abgriffith Hawley* B.F.A., M.S. ******** The Ohio State University 1967 Approved by v /A dviser Department of Speech VITA October 28, 1932 Born - Davenport, Iowa 1 9 5 ^ ...................... B.F.A,, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa 195^ 1956 . Teaching Assistant, Department of Speech, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 1956 .................. M.S., Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 1956-1957 . Instructor of Speech, Designer/Technical Director of Theatre, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa 1957-1958 . U. S, Army 1959-1961 . Graduate Assistant in Theatre, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1961-1963 Instructor of Speech, Designer/Technical Director of Theatre, Washington University, St, Louis, Missouri 1963-1967 . Assistant Professor of Speech, Designer/Technical Director of Theatre, The College of Wooster, Wooster, Ohio PUBLICATIONS "Touring with Benson," The Ohio State University Theatre Collection B u lle tin , No, 6, Spring 1959* "Staging at the Opera," The Ohio State University Theatre Collection B u lle tin , No, 8, Spring 1961. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Design and Technical Theatre T heatre H isto ry , Dr, John H, McDowell Production and Direction. Dr, Roy H. Bowen and Dr, Everett Sohreck Technical Production. Dr. Walter S. Dewey i i CONTENTS Page VITA ................................................................... ...................................................... i i ILLUSTRATIONS................... ..................................................................................... v Chapter I . INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 1 Purpose o«aa.«..o.»..»»a ao..a..a 2 Problem aaaaaaaaeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 3 Sources aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 3 Procedure a«..aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 7 Definitions • 9 I I . BACKGROUNDS . 13 Early Court Masques ..•••••••..............................a . 13 Scenery in the Early Masques aaaaa.a.aaaa.a 15 Inigo Jones aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaaaa l6 I I I . THE EARLY MASQUES ...... a . ............................................. 23 The Masque o f Blackness o.a.a.aa.aaaaae. 26 Periaktoi and Scene Change ............... 30 Hvmenaei 33 The Scaffold Stage 40 The Haddington Masque 42 A Style of Scenery 46 The Masque o f Queenes 47 Oberon. The Faery Prince . 51 Shutters and the Split Stage ••••.«••••••.. 53 IV. THE LEAN YEARS ............ 0 . ...................... 58 The Masque o f Aueures ......................... 59 Time V indicated •••••••••••••••••••• 62 Two Masques 63 The Caroline Stage • ••••»•••••*.«..*•. 64 V. THE GREAT MASQUES ............................... ............ 65 i i i CONTENTS (C ontd.) Chapter Page The Triumph of Peace ...................... * . • . 74 Coelum Britannicum ........................... 77 The Temple o f Love .................. 82 Florimene 84 The Prlnee d1 Amour......................... 86 Britannia Triunrohans . ............................................... 87 Luminalia ............................................................ 92 Salmacida Spplia ................................................................. 93 The End of an Era 99 VI. SCENIC DEVELOPMENT.................................. 101 Scenic Elem ents ......................................................................... 103 Machinery ............................................ ............ 108 S h u tters .................. I l l Wings ..................••••.............................. V II. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................ 118 Methods of S taging 119 Experimentation .................... 125 Contributions ...................... ..... 126 APPENDIX............................................................ 131 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................. 146 iv ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Periaktoi at Oxford, Ground Plan ...................................... 132 2 e The Globe of Hvmenaei • • • • • ..................................... 133 3. A Cloud Machine from the Early Masque.......................................... 134 4. A Circular Wheel of Fire • .••••••••••••••• 135 5. The Scaffold Stage «••••• ............................... ...... 136 6. Cliff Shutter, The Haddington Masque ,..•••••••• 137 7. The Masquers Seat, Elevation •••••••••»••••• 138 8. Florimene. Section of Ground Plan ......»•••••• 139 9. Britannia Triumphans. The Palace of Fame .•••••••• 140 10. Britannia Triumphans. Scenic Arrangement........ 141 11. Salmacida Spolia. Ground Plan 142 12. Salmacida Spolia. Section...................................................................... 143 13* A Composite Early Masque, Ground Plan ••••••••.•• 144 14. A Composite E arly Masque, Section 145 v CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Although there has been a great deal of research into the areas of Elizabethan and Shakespearian staging, detailed examination of Court masque productions of the same period has been lim ited. The body of work dealing with the Court masque treats at length its literary importance, its history, and its major contributions to scenic spectacle and later staging practice. However, with some notable exceptions, the majority of studies in the field fail to treat the masque as a unified production, or body of productions; tending to examine in terms of isolated elements, extent of foreign influence, and historical curosia. Most treatments of the masque consider the scenic contributions of the form as the basis of modern staging practices and as an indication of the development of Continental stagecraft in Jhgland, All of these treatments are, in their way, correct. No treatment of the period neglects mention of the designer who contributed so much to masque staging, Inigo Jones, The period of Jones' works, extending from 1604 to the close of the theatres, parallels the period, of public staging activity we now call Shakespearian, It is generally accepted that the influence of Jones extended from the masque to the public theatre of the Restoration through the offices of his apprentice, John Webb, W, Grant Keith, W, J, Lawrence, Richard Southern, Glynne Wickham, and A llardyce N ic o ll, among o th e rs, d eal w ith th e lin k 1 between the masque and the public stage» They Indicate a direct connection between the theatre of Jones* and the production of The Siege of Rhodes, in 1656. The bond is apparent. These treatments are also correct, Inigo Jones is given credit for the introduction and the use in England of many scenic devices and design concepts. His artistry is hailed as a great influence upon succeeding periods of staging. The glories and wonders of the masque stage* and Jones* designs for scenery and machinery, have been long, loudly, and thoroughly praised. This is as it should be. What is not found in the body of the writing of the period is an examination of the total staging contributions of the masques reached through an analysis of Jones* precise methods of staging. Introductory reading in the area leads to certain questions about the relationship of Jones to the masque. What were his unique contributions? What staging experiments did he make? How were Continental forms modified for the masque stage? Purpose It is the purpose of this study to examine the staging of the Court masque productions in search of answers to three specific q u e stio n s: 1, What were the methods used by Jones in staging Court masques? 2, Were the staging methods used by Jones developed through e xpe r iment at ion ? 3* What were the unique contributions of Jones to English staging p ra c tic e ? Problem Three major problems face the researcher in any study of masque staging* The first problem is one of isolating the contributions of a single individual* That problem does not apply to this study for Inigo Jones designed and staged over ninety percent of the Court masques produced between 160*4* and 16*42, and stands above the other masque designers who contributed only incidentally* A second problem is one of relating the work of one individual to the body of staging contribu­ tions* This problem is eased in the case of Jones by the clear contri­ bution of The Siege of Rhodes as a point of direct transfer between the masque theatre and the public stage later in the century. The major problem of this study is one of analysis: fitting together a total picture from the scattered elements of masque staging; finding develop­ mental aspects in a continuing series of masque productions; and relating those developmental aspects to specific staging practice* Sources Of the many references associated with the Court masque stage, the majority deal with areas of the masque not covered in this study and w ill serve as background material for the general area* Two of the major sources for placing the masque into historical perspective are S ir E* K. Chambers 1 three-volume work, The Elizabethan Stage: and Enid Welsford*s The Court Masque. Although these two works concentrate largely on literary aspects of the masque, they