'Good people I have played the beast, 'I was a man, but thus have made Regarding this remarkable, and hitherto unnoticed, incident we are without any further information. We have evidence that the Blackfriars theatre (and probably others) was open in Dec. 1631, but this was considerably posterior to the date of the Privy Seal last quoted. In an account of the expenses of Sir Humphrey Mildmay of Danbury + (which affords some new and rather curious information regarding plays and players at this period, and subsequently), beginning Jan. 1630-1, I find the following items: 'The Spanish Bawd' was, perhaps, not a play which was acted, but a translation from the Spanish, by Thomas Mabbe, of a drama in twenty-one acts, which was printed in 1631, and the price of which might be two shillings and six-pence. If so, there is no entry in this account-book of any playhouse having been visited by Sir H. Mildmay in 1631, between January and * It is fit that I should express my acknowledgments to his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, for an opportunity of inspecting various MSS. in his Library, which were readily placed in my hands by the kindness of the Rev. Dr. D'Oyly. † Harl. MSS., 554. November. Perhaps, during a considerable part of this interval the playhouses were closed. Whether any, and what tragedies and comedies were performed at Court at Christmas 1631-2, A. D. we have no evidence, either from the office- 1632. book of Sir H. Herbert, or other sources. We learn from a letter of John Pory to Sir Thomas Puckering, dated Jan. 12, 1631-2*, that Aurelian Townshend, who had been steward to Lord Salisbury, was the author of the King's Mask, presented on the Sunday after Twelfth-night it was called Albion's Triumph. According to the same authority, Ben Jonson was not employed by reason of the predominant power ' of his antagonist, Inigo Jones, who this time twelvemonth was angry with him, for putting his own name before his in the title-page' of Chloridia. Pory also states that the Queen's Mask (likewise by Townshend, and called Tempe Restored) was suspended in consequence of a soreness that fell into one of her delicate eyes.' It was performed at Shrovetide, and on the 7th Feb. a Privy Seal was issued to Edmund Taverner, Esq., for 600l. to be so applied; but this sum being found insufficient for the purpose, 2001. more were ordered to be paid to him under a Privy Seal, dated 20th February. 6 The cost of the Masks in the next year, Christmas 632-3, considerably exceeded 2000l., independent of that portion of the charge which was borne by the office of the Revels, and which belonged to the ac * Vide Gifford's Ben Jonson, I. clx, counts of that department. On the 23rd Dec. 1632, George Kirk, Esq., Gentleman of the Robes, had a Privy Seal for 450l. for masking attire,' as the instrument expresses it, not only for our own regal person, • but also for such other maskers on whom we are pleased to bestow their said masking attire.' This sum was for the King's Mask on twelfth-day, for the preparations for which Edmund Taverner, Esq. had a warrant for 1000l., dated 31st Dec. 1632. On the 20th Jan. 1632-3, to the same person was granted a Privy Seal for 8001., towards the expense of a Mask, to be presented by our dearest consort, the Queen, at Shrovetide next.' Independent of these Masks, the Queen got up a PasA.D. toral at Somerset-House, at Christmas 1632-3, 1633. and in that piece it should seem that her Majesty herself took a part. About the same date* came out the most learned and notorious work ever published against theatrical performances,-Histriomastix, the * Whitelocke says, that Prynne's Histriomastix was published six weeks before the Pastoral at Somerset-house, in which the Queen played, was performed; and that Laud and others, who had been angered by some of Prynne's books against Arminianism, showed the passage in the Index, "women actors, notorious whores," to the King, ' and informed him, that the book was purposely written against the "Queen and her pastoral.' (Memorials, p. 18.) According to one Harl. MS., Prynne's Histriomastix was published on the day after the performance of the Queen's Pastoral; and according to another, that work had appeared a little before the Queen's acting of her play.' In either case, it would have been just as absurd and unjust for Laud to have taken it to the King, and represented it as directed against that particular performance of the Queen. Players Scourge, by William Prynne, bearing the date of 1633, but published in 1632. Malone contented himself with referring to Whitelocke's Memorials on this interesting and important event*, but the Harleian MSS. in the British Museum contain some curious and contemporary evidence on the subject, in private letters written not long after the publication of Prynne's book, and the consequent arrest of its author. The following extract is from a familiar communication, containing a summary of the current news, from Justinian Pagett, a barrister, dated 28th of January, 1632-3: it is addressed To my much honoured friend, James Harrington, Esq. at Walton upon Trent+: 6 'Mr. Prynne of Lincolnes Inne hath lately set forth a book, intitled Histrio-mastix or the Players Scourge, the sale of which is prohibited, and he to appeare at the High Commission on Thursday next, where, when I have heard what is charged against him, I will (if you desier it) send you a more parti'cular relation. His booke is extraordinarily stuffed ⚫ with quotations of old authors, which (they say) are 'his only arguments. He cites St. Austin, who sayth, 'Si tantummodo boni et honesti viri in civitate essent, 'nec in rebus humanis Ludi Scenici esse debuissent: but I do not conceive this to be the cause why he is 'called in question, but rather some exorbitant passage concerning ecclesiastical government; for, Į * Shakespeare by Boswell, iii. 120. Harl. MSS., No. 1026. 'heare, he compares the playing on the organs, twixt 'the first and second Lesson, to Enterludes in Stageplayes. It is observable, that his booke was pub'lished the next day after the Queenes Pastorall at 'Somersett House.' "The writer of the preceding account, on the 28th of January, had not seen Prynne's book, and only spoke of its contents from rumour; but Mr. George Gresley, in a letter dated from Essex House, 31st of January, 1632-3*, to Sir T. Puckering, quotes the author's words, and gives very exactly the nature of the charge against Prynne. He says: 6 6 Mr. Prinne, an Utter Barrister of Lincolns Inne, ' is brought into the High Commission Court and Star Chamber for publishing a booke (a little before the 'Queene's acting of her Play) of the Unlawfullness of Plaies, wherein in the Table of his Booke, and his • brief Additions thereunto, he hath these words "Wo'men actors notorious whores," and that St. Paul pro'hibits women to speake publiquely in the Churche : • “and dares then (sayth he) any Christian Woman be so more then whoreshly impudent, as to act, to speake publiquely on a Stage (perchaunce in man's apparell ' and cut haire) in presence of sundrie men and women?" ' which wordes, it is thought by some, will cost him ' his eares, or heavily punisht and deepely fined.' The expectations of the writer of this letter were soon more than realised: he thought that Prynne would lose his ears, or be heavily punished and *Harl. MSS., No. 7000. |