Before I quit the year 1581, it is necessary to notice another document in the Lansdown Collection, which makes mention of an interlude player' attached to the Queen's domestic establishment, called John Smith: he is entered in an account furnished to Lord Burghley by Sir Thomas Henneage, Treasurer of the Queen's Chamber, of his disbursements in the twentysecond year of the reign of Elizabeth. Smith's wages are stated to be as usual, 3l. 6s. 8d., with an allowance of 17. 4s. for his livery.' He was one of the old players of interludes' belonging to the royal house

'Willm. Boles bill for cop. frindge, lace, tassells, buttons

£. s. d.

'Twoe mercers billes for cloth of golde, counterfeit cloth 'of silver, tincells, taffeta, taffeta sarcenets, and single 'sarcenets

105 3 0

'The wierdrawer for braunches, plats, and other garnish'ings for the Hall

26 0 0

'John Digges bills for threed silke, &c. and artificiall

'John Sherbornes billes for carrell, baies, candle, fuell,

'The yeoman's bill for gold tincell, &c.

'terfeite perle, &c.

Officers wages

'heares, beards, &c. carriage of stuffe, botehier

'The clerke comptrollers bill for silke floures, &c. coun

'Laid out by the Mr of the Revells for canvas visards,

'fewell, rewards, & other his ordinary allowances

'Wages of artificers & attendants

with the airings for this yeare.'

22 4 0

87 0 0

49 0 0

hold in the reign of Edward VI., and his name is inserted in the same account with the expenses of trumpeters and musicians *. In the four-and-thirty years which elapsed between the settlement of the royal household by the Duke of Somerset in 1547, and the date to which we are now adverting, it is most probable that Smith's fellows, Cock, Birch and Heryet, had died, as their names are not given in the Lansdown MS. which mentions Smith.

The accounts preserved in the office of the Auditors of the Imprest show, that the charge of the Revels in the year 1582, for the amusements at Christ- A. D. mas, Twelfth-tide, and Shrove-tide, was 2881. 1582. 9s. 8d. The plays presented were six in number, viz. :

A Comodie, or Morall, devised on a Game of the ‹ Cards, shewed on St. Stephens daie at night before ' her Majestie at Wyndesor; enacted by the Children of her Majesties Chapple.

'A Comodie of Bewtie & Huswyfery, showed be'fore her Majestie at Wyndesor on St. John's daie ' at night; enacted by the Lord of Hundesdons 'servaunts.

*The cost of these at this date, as appears upon the statement of Sir T. Henneage, was as follows:

6

• A Historie of Love & Fortune*, shewed before her Majestie at Wyndesor on the sondaie at night next 'before newe yeares daie; enacted by the Earle of • Derbies servaunts.

'A Historie of Ferrart, shewed before her Ma'jestie at Wyndesor on Twelf daie at night; enacted by the Lord Chamberleynes servaunts.

6

'A Historie of Telomo, shewed before her Majestie ' at Richmond on Shrove sondaie at night; enacted by 'the Earle of Leicesters servaunts.

"A Historie of Ariodante and Geneuorat, shewed

* Perhaps 'The Rare Triumphs of Love and Fortune,' printed in 1589. A copy, believed to be unique, is in the possession of the Marquis of Stafford. By the kindness of Lord F. L. Gower I obtained the use of it, and it is examined in the Hist. of Dram. Poet.

+ Probably the same piece as 'The History of Error,' mentioned under date of 1576-7. Mr. Boswell (Shakespeare, iii. p. 406.) not very happily conjectured that this was a play written by the celebrated George Ferrers. It is no doubt a mere mistake in the title by the clerk who made out the account, and who wrote by his ear, and not by his copy.

The episode of Ariodante and Geneura had been translated into English, from the Italian of Ariosto, by Peter Beverley, shortly before this play was acted: perhaps the author of the drama derived his plot from Beverley's version, which was printed in small octavo, under the following title, The history of Ariodanto and Jeneura, daughter to 'the King of Scottes, in English verse. Printed by Thomas East, for 'Frauncis Coldocke.' It has no date, but the same author wrote commendatory verses to Geoffrey Fenton's Tragical Discourses,' published in 1579. The only copy of this singular poem I ever saw was among the books in the Gordonstoun Library, and it was bought by Mr. Phelps for 317. 10s. It was the same copy claimed by an individual at the Roxburghe sale, and given up to him, as his property, which the Duke had borrowed.

'before her Majestie on Shrovetuesdaie at night;

' enacted by Mr. Mulcasters children.'

Sundry feats of tumbling' were also exhibited before the Queen on New-year's night, by the servants of Lord Strange, and the shews of the year included also a mask of ladies. Another mask of six seamen was to have been performed, but it was not used.'

The properties on these occasions included little more than a city, and a battlement, employed on former occasions, and twenty-one yards of cotton for the matachins *.

The dispute between the Privy Council, and the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of London, regarding the performance of plays within the limits of the city, had been revived on the 3rd of December, 1581, when, as appears by the Council Registers, a letter was written to the Lord Mayor in which he was ordered' to suffer and permit certain companies of players (who had petitioned the Privy Council for that purpose) 'to use and exercise their trade of playing in and about the city, as they have heretofore accustomed,

upon the week days only, being holidays, or other days; so as they do forbear wholly to play on the Sabbath day, either in the forenoon or afternoon, 'which to do they are by their Lordships order ex'pressly denied and forbidden t.' Whatever might,

*Misprinted Matachius in Malone's Shakespeare, by Boswell, iii., 407. A matachine was a species of mask, in which the performers were armed. The difference between the two may be ascertained by consulting Douce's Illustrations of Shakespeare, ii., 435.

+Chalmers's Apology, p. 382,

6

6

or might not, be the effect of this communication, on the 25th of April, 1582, the Lords of the Council assumed a very different tone, for in a letter to the Lord Mayor, dated on that day, they 'pray his Lordship to revoke his late inhibition against their playing 6 on the holidays, but that he do suffer them, as well within the city as without, to use their exercise of playing on the said holy days after evening prayer, only forbearing the Sabbath day, according to their Lordships' said order; and when he shall find that the 'continuance of the same their exercise, by the increase ' of sickness and infection, shall be dangerous, to cer'tify their Lordships, and they will presently take ' order accordingly.' The inhibition, here spoken of, against playing on holidays, had perhaps been provoked by the letter of the Lords of 3rd of December, 1581, in which they ordered' the Lord Mayor to allow the players to act upon the week days only, being holidays.'

In a preceding part of the letter of the 25th of April, 1582, the Lords of the Privy Council adverted to the reasonableness of allowing players to perform 'for honest recreation sake,' and in order that they might attain to the more perfection and dexterity' when they should be called upon to act before the Queen. This, it will be remembered, was the argument used by, and for, the players in 1575. At the same time the Lords of the Privy Council admitted the propriety of looking into the comedies, that those ⚫ which do contain matter that may breed corruption

6