History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 2 of 2)Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Philosophy
History of European Morals From Augustus to Charlemagne (Vol. 2 of 2)
Lecky, William Edward Hartpole
Ethics; Europe -- Moral conditions
383 The decline of these amusements in England began with the great
development of the theatre under Elizabeth. An order of the Privy
Council in July, 1591, prohibits the exhibition of plays on
Thursday, because on Thursdays bear-baiting and suchlike pastimes
had been usually practised, and an injunction to the same effect was
sent to the Lord Mayor, wherein it was stated that, “in divers
places the players do use to recite their plays, to the great hurt
and destruction of the game of bear-baiting and like pastimes, which
are maintained for Her Majesty’s pleasure.”—Nichols, _Progresses of
Queen Elizabeth_ (ed. 1823), vol. i. p. 438. The reader will
remember the picture in _Kenilworth_ of the Earl of Sussex
petitioning Elizabeth against Shakespeare, on the ground of his
plays distracting men from bear-baiting. Elizabeth (see Nichols) was
extremely fond of bear-baiting. James I. especially delighted in
cock-fighting, and in 1610 was present at a great fight between a
lion and a bear. (Hone, _Every Day Book_, vol. i. pp. 255-299.) The
theatres, however, rapidly multiplied, and a writer who lived about
1629 said, “that no less than seventeen playhouses had been built in
or about London within threescore years.” (Seymour’s _Survey_, vol.
i. p. 229.) The Rebellion suppressed all public amusements, and when
they were re-established after the Restoration, it was found that
the tastes of the better classes no longer sympathised with the
bear-garden. Pepys (_Diary_, August 14, 1666) speaks of bull-baiting
as “a very rude and nasty pleasure,” and says he had not been in the
bear-garden for many years. Evelyn (_Diary_, June 16, 1670), having
been present at these shows, describes them as “butcherly sports, or
rather barbarous cruelties,” and says he had not visited them before
for twenty years. A paper in the _Spectator_ (No. 141, written in
1711) talks of those who “seek their diversion at the bear-garden,
... where reason and good manners have no right to disturb them.” In
1751, however, Lord Kames was able to say, “The bear garden, which
is one of the chief entertainments of the English, is held in
abhorrence by the French and other polite nations.”—_Essay on
Morals_ (1st ed.), p. 7; and he warmly defends (p. 30) the English
taste. During the latter half of the last century there was constant
controversy on the subject (which may be traced in the pages of the
_Annual Register_), and several forgotten clergymen published
sermons upon it, and the frequent riots resulting from the fact that
the bear-gardens had become the resort of the worst classes assisted
the movement. The London magistrates took measures to suppress
cock-throwing in 1769 (Hampson’s _Med. Æv. Kalend._ p. 160); but
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account