The mediaeval stage, volume 2 (of 2)Chambers, E. K. (Edmund Kerchever)
History
The mediaeval stage, volume 2 (of 2)
Chambers, E. K. (Edmund Kerchever)
Drama, Medieval -- History and criticism; Theater -- History -- Medieval, 500-1500
there was still pride and interest taken in many of the municipal plays,
signs were not wanting that they were an institution which had almost
outlived its day. A reason for this need hardly be sought beyond the
_Zeitgeist_. No doubt the plays were a financial burden upon the poorer
crafts and the poorer members of crafts. There was much grumbling at
Beverley in 1411 because certain well-to-do persons (_generosi_), who did
not practise any trade or handicraft, had hitherto escaped the payment
of contributions to the civic function; and municipal authorities were
constantly called upon to adjust and readjust the responsibility for this
and that pageant with the fluctuations of prosperity amongst the various
occupations. But on the other hand, the plays, were the cause of much
and profitable resort to those fortunate towns which possessed them. The
mercers’ guild at Shrewsbury found it necessary to impose a special fine
upon those of its members whose business avocations required them ‘to
ride or goe to Coventrie Faire’ at Corpus Christi tide, and so to miss
the procession of guilds at home[365]. And although the mayor of Coventry
wrote to Thomas Cromwell, in 1539, that the poor commoners were put to
such expense with their plays and pageants that they fared the worse all
the year after, yet against this may be set the statement made to Dugdale
by ‘some old people who had in their younger days been eye-witnesses of
these pageants’ that ‘the confluence of people from farr and neare to
see that shew was extraordinary great, and yeilded noe small advantage
to this cittye.’ Moreover the levy upon individuals was a trifling one;
the whole of the company of smiths at Coventry only paid 3_s._ 4_d._
amongst them for ‘pagent pencys’ in 1552. A _leitourgia_ is always an
unpopular institution, and these complaints resemble nothing so much as
the groans of an opulent London tradesman in the twentieth century over
an extra penny on the education rate. In the smaller places it is clear
that plays, far from being a source of expense, were a recognized method
of raising funds for public purposes. Even in 1220 the _emolumentum
actionum_ from the chapelries of Shipton went to swell the purses of the
Salisbury prebendaries. In 1505 the churchwardens of Kingston-on-Thames
made £4 towards their new steeple by getting up a play for which they
secured the patronage of royalty. At Braintree, in Essex, funds were
similarly raised by Nicholas Udall and others, between 1523 and 1534,
for the repair of the church. I have little doubt that when the mayor
of Coventry said economy he meant Protestantism, just as when, under
Elizabeth, the corporation of London wished to make a Puritanic attack
upon the theatres, they were always smitten with a terrible dread of the
infection of the plague[366].
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