CHAPTER IV

THE COMEDIES

IN studying the drama in the sixteenth century, we are hampered by our pre-conceptions. We view it as a finished product, not as a newly-devised instrument perfected of many parts. Nor is it easy to place ourselves at the point of view of the Elizabethan and realise the appeal and the effect of a Shakespeare play at the time of its original production. This can only be achieved by patient critical study, and although the materials have accumulated, and have been turned over and over again, the attempts at actual interpretation have been few.

In the case of so vast a subject, all depends upon whether we lay hold of the matter by the right handle. It is useless to take the printed play and pore upon it, and weave from the text imaginary theories to answer our questionings. The right handle is at the other end, in the conditions precedent to the evolution of the perfect work of art which the stage-play became

K

in the hands of Shakespeare, and in the circumstances of the time when the plays were first given to the world.

In the days of the miracle-play, secular interest tended to encroach upon the Bible-story, and any by-play and allusion glancing at the life of the people was keenly relished. The actors, thus encouraged, exerted their histrionic powers till the seemliness befitting the sacred subject was sometimes abandoned, and this abuse was one of the causes of the suppression of the religious play. Then came the Morality-play, in which various qualities of virtue and of vice were represented by actors with appropriate dialogue. Here there was considerable scope for histrionic skill, and obnoxious persons became represented in the character of the vice for which they were detested, while favourite personages, or those to whom a compliment was intended, were simulated by the actors under the name of the virtue or excellence to which it was desired to do honour.

Another element which largely contributed to the making of the Elizabethan drama was the Revel which lasted during the twelve days, in celebration of Christmas and the advent of another cycle of time with its seasons. Rooted in Pagan or pre-Christian

custom and observance, the Christmas Revel ruled alike in the palaces of the king, the Bishop, and the Baron; literally ruled, because the actual heads or governors alike of these palaces and of the universities abdicated for this period every year in favour of an elected Lord of Misrule. This inversion of position was in itself humorous and provocative of satirical mirth, like the "topsy-turveydom" of Mr W. S. Gilbert. How many a satirical sketch and laughable caricature were made by these Revellers in the incipiency of our drama!

The revival of learning and the approach of the Reformation had a refining influence upon the Revel, and an organised representation, called the Masque, took the place of the more impromptu entertainment which had formerly accompanied the reign of the Lord of Misrule. The idea of the Masque was simply disguise. It was sometimes termed an Invention, or an Antique. dress, and there was disguise by covering the facewhence the mask and half-mask worn by revellers. The "Invention" was usually a presentation of some classical legend, story or incident-hence its alternative name of " Antique "under which some allegorical meaning or compliment was suggested;

There was disguise by

such meaning or intention appearing beneath the Masque," under the cover of the device.

66

This travesty of the actual sometimes gave offence. Two instances will suffice to demonstrate the way in which the Masque glanced at personages and events. Hall recorded, in his Chronicle, that in 1525 a "goodly disguising was played at Gray's Inn, which was compiled by John Roo, Serjeant at the Law.” This play, says Hall, was so set forth with rich and costly apparel, and with strange devices of masks and morrishes, that it was highly praised of all men, saving of the Cardinal, which imagined that the play had been devised of him. In a great fury he [Wolsey] sent for the said Master Roo, and took from him his Coif, and sent him to the Fleet, and after he sent for the young gentlemen that played in the play, and them highly rebuked and threatened, and sent one of them, called Thomas Moyle, of Kent, to the Fleet; but, by the means of friends, Master Roo and he were delivered at last." Another instance: in 1547, Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, addressed an appeal to the privy council, to the effect that he intended to have a solemn dirge and Mass for the late king, Henry VIII. (in Saviour's Church presumably), but as the players in South