CHAPTER XI

THE SHOW FOLK

Southwark was a city of a various population. It had great Houses for

nobles and for Ecclesiastics: it had fair inns for the reception of

merchants, coming up from Kent and the south country: it had a riverside

people of fishermen and watermen living up stream on the Lambeth bank or

down stream at Bermondsey or Rotherhithe: it had a great number of

residents who worked in the orchards and the gardens which spread over

the whole of the rich low-lying land now embanked, secure from floods

and the highest tides. It contained, besides, a large number of rogues

and vagabonds, fugitives from justice, lying here in so-called

sanctuary, where the officers of the law did not dare to present

themselves. In spite of the powers granted to the City over Southwark,

the place remained a receptacle and a refuge 'down to the end of the

last century, when the so-called Liberties of the Mint'--the last place

of sanctuary--were finally abolished and only a slum remained to mark

the site of a sanctuary.

[Illustration: WINCHESTER PALACE]

Beside all these people Southwark contained the Show Folk of Bankside.

When the Show Folk began to live in Bankside I know not: their

settlement originally was in Westminster outside the King's Palace,

where there was always a great demand for music, dancing, tumbling,

mumming and such recreative performances; they were also, however, in

great request in London by City Church, city company, and city tavern.

Now there was no place for them within the walls: they had no company:

there was neither a Musicians'; nor a Dancers'; nor a Singers'; nor a

Mummers'; nor a Tumblers' Company. There was no company which would

admit them; there was no ward where they could get a street for

themselves: they were gently but firmly pushed out. And not only were

they a class apart but they were a class in contempt. It was always held

contemptible to provide amusement. No one, as yet, had made of music or

of acting a fine art; no gentleman, as yet, and for a long time after,

would take part in the buffoonery which the actor had then to exhibit:

an atmosphere of disrepute attached to the calling, to those who

followed the calling, and to the place where they lived: in the City,

Aldermen had a way of connecting nocturnal disorders with these children

of melody: where they resorted the taverns would carry on their

revelries after curfew, even to midnight: if the street was alarmed by

nocturnal ramblers it would prove to be after an evening with the

dancers and the tumblers: the Church, especially the Church Puritanic,

set her face against those who devised entertainments, on the ground

that the devisers were an ungodly and dissolute crew. Therefore they

crossed the river. On Bankside, in the Liberty of the Clink, where the

City could not interfere, they 'went as they pleased.' They were

dissolute, if they chose--Heaven knows whether they did choose--without

reproach: their taverns kept open house as long as they would stop to

drink: there was singing every day without interference: there was

merriment without the rebuke of the sour face: there was no fear of

being haled before the Lord Mayor, for making people laugh: there was no

terror of pillory, and no man on their side of the river was 'put in

stocks o' Monday, for kissing of his wife o' Sunday.' It was the Bishop

of Winchester's Liberty, but he was content, on the whole, to leave the

residents unmolested and in the possession of their guitars, their

fiddles, their songs and their plays.

[Illustration: THE GLOBE THEATRE

(_From the Crace Collection_)]

When the Show Folk were wanted in the City it was easy for them to go

across: they were ready at a moment's notice to arrange a pageant, or to

take part in one: they could provide the beauteous maidens in white with

long fair tresses who stood on platforms in Chepe and scattered gold

rose nobles made of paste on the heads of the crowd: they found hermits,

and constructed caves for those godly men in the midst of Gracious

Street: they found the music for the dragging of the traitor on a

hurdle: for the march of the rogue to the pillory: for the riding of the

Lord Mayor: for the procession of the Company on its feast day. For a

miracle play they presented the parish church with the Fall of Man: the

Raising of Lazarus: the Pilgrims of Emmaus: David and Goliath: or any

other episode from the Bible--how many excellent players there were

among them whose names have long since been forgotten! They knew how to

present a Masque--not, perhaps, with the same splendour as one by Ben

Jonson and Inigo Jones--who commanded the King's purse--but a neat and

creditable affair, with dresses appropriate, full of surprises, and

furnished with mythological characters, for the Hall of a City Company

on the day of the Annual Feast. For young gentlemen of the more

debauched kind they had another kind of entertainment, with singing,

dancing girls, tumbling and posturing; with rare jests--pity they were

not rarer--and excellent fooling by their clowns. The modern art of

acting did not begin at the Globe Theatre: there has never been any time

when the actor was unknown: the only difference is that he was not

formerly allowed to be anything but a buffoon: that he had little but

buffoonery in his _répertoire_: and now he is an artist and scorns the

tricks of the buffoon. Nor is the art of entertainment of modern

invention. The Company of Parish Clerks, for instance, were great

promoters of sacred plays. Their poets--whose names are entirely

lost--provided the words and arranged the scenes; the members of the

company played the parts: the Show Folk 'mounted' the piece: they

provided the monsters; the red flames for the mouth of Hell; the troops

of angels or of devils, the stage business and the music. Many of the

Parish Churches had their annual play on their Saint's Day. Thus the

Parish Church of St. Margaret, which was taken down when St. Mary

Overies' became St. Saviour's, had its play on St. Margaret's Day (July

20), and often another on the Day of St. Lucy (December 13) as well. We

have already observed that the Londoner of old never made any difference

in the matter of Play or Pageant whether the time was summer or winter.

He was like the Scythian, face all over: he felt no cold: he held his

Riding, or his Coronation Procession, quite as readily in December as in

July.

Another kind of Show Folk, but rougher and more brutal, were the people

who looked after the bears and the dogs. Bull baiting, bear baiting,

sometimes horse baiting, together with badger baiting, duck hunting,

cock throwing, dog fighting and cock fighting, were the chosen and

common sports of the people. Baiting of every kind there was wherever

there were dogs and bulls and badgers, but the centre and headquarters

of the sport was South London, in the place called Paris Gardens. The

popularity of the sport is shown by the simple facts that there was not

only bull and bear baiting in Paris Gardens, but also two rings or

amphitheatres for bull and bear baiting outside the gardens behind

Bankside, and that in the High Street itself, nearly opposite St.

George's Church, there was permanently established the bull ring to

which an animal could be tied whenever one was found fit for the purpose

of affording an hour's sport by the madness of his rage or the agonies

of his death.

The present Blackfriars Bridge Road cuts through the site of Paris

Gardens, leaving a portion on either side. They extended to the distance

of about a quarter of a mile south of the river: sluggish streams and

ditches ran across and round the gardens, which were so thickly planted

with trees as to be dark in the summer. Both in summer and winter the

place was noisome with exhalations from the marshy soil. These gardens

were the chief home of the rough and cruel sports already mentioned:

here were kept under the King's bearward the King's dogs; the Mayor's

dogs; and the bears whom they baited. It does not appear that bulls were

also kept here: for baiting purposes it was generally a young bull that

was chosen, and he was baited to death. The bears were not killed, they

were all known to the people by name, such as Harry Hunks and Sackerson,

and were valued in proportion to the sport they afforded. The dogs, who

with the bears were fed upon the offal and refuse brought over every day

from the Shambles of Newgate, were incredibly fierce and savage. In

these days we hardly know what a savage dog is, even the bull dog has

become peaceful: formerly, the best defender of the house was the dog

who was unloosed at night: they fed him chiefly on meat: he was trained

to fly at the throat of a stranger: he was a terror to wayfarers--remember

the dog in the second part of the 'Pilgrim's Progress:' he was always

biting and rending some one: he had the ferocity of the wolf redeemed

only by affection for his master: we have no such dogs in these days.

Accompanied by one or two such fierce mastiffs or bull dogs who feared

no one but their master, a man might journey from end to end of the

country armed with nothing but a club. Such a dog would fight and would

overcome a man. Kept in the kennels, with insufficient exercise, with

stimulating food, the creatures became fiercer than wolves and stronger

than tigers. The bull they loved to bait: he had horns and hoofs to

dodge: but the bear afforded the best sport both for man and dog: he

presented a nose and ears and a thick fur on which to spring, and to

fasten the canine teeth upon. What joy to hang on to those ears, torn

and bleeding, the whole dog quivering with rapture even though in the

end one stroke of the bear's hind paw dragged out the inside of the dog,

with the heart and the breath of life!

It was a Royal sport, a sport offered to ambassadors. In a contemporary

Diary it is related that the French Ambassadors, on May 25, 1559, were

entertained at Court with a dinner, and after dinner with a bull and

bear baiting, the Queen herself looking on from a gallery: the next day

they were taken down the river to see the bull and bear baiting at Paris

Gardens. Forty years later James the First entertained the Spanish

Ambassador after dinner with the bears fighting with greyhounds and with

a bull baiting. About the same time the Duke of Wirtemberg paid a visit

to London and saw the baiting at Paris Gardens:

'On the 1st of September his Highness was shown in London the English

dogs, of which there were about 120, all kept in the same enclosure, but

each in a separate kennel.

'In order to gratify his Highness, and at his desire, two bears and a

bull were baited; at such times you can perceive the breed and mettle of

the dogs, for although they receive serious injuries from the bears,

are caught by the horns of the bull, and tossed into the air so as

frequently to fall down again upon the horns, they do not give in, [but

fasten on the bull so firmly] that one is obliged to pull them back by

the tails, and force open their jaws. Four dogs at once were set on the

bull; they, however, could not gain any advantage over him, for he so

artfully contrived to ward off their attacks that they could not well

get at him; on the contrary, the bull served them very scurvily by

striking and butting at them.'

[Illustration: BEAR GARDEN]

And another contemporary account of a bear baiting is furnished by

Hentzner in 1598:

'There is still another place, built in the form of a Theatre, which

serves for the baiting of bears and bulls: they are fastened behind, and

then worried by those great English dogs (_quos linguâ vernaculâ

"Docken" appellant_), and mastiffs, but not without great risks to the

dogs from the teeth of the one and the horns of the other, and it

sometimes happens they are killed on the spot: fresh ones are

immediately supplied in the places of those that are wounded or tired.

To this entertainment there often follows that of whipping a blinded

bear, which is performed by five or six men, standing in a circle with

whips, which they exercise upon him without any mercy; although he

cannot escape from them because of his chain, he nevertheless defends

himself vigorously, throwing down all who come within his reach and are

not active enough to get out of it, tearing the whips out of their hands

and breaking them. At these spectacles, and everywhere else, the English

are constantly smoking the Nicotian weed, which in America is called

_Tobaca_--others call it _Pœtum_--[i.e. _Petun_, the Brazilian name for

Tobacco, from which the allied beautiful plant 'Petunia' derives its

appellation,] and generally in this manner: they have pipes on purpose

made of clay, into the farther end of which they put the herb, so dry

that it may be rubbed into powder, and lighting it, they draw the smoke

into their mouths, which they puff out again through their nostrils like

funnels, along with it plenty of phlegm and defluxion from the head. In

these Theatres, fruits, such as apples, pears and nuts, according to the

season, are carried about to be sold, as well as wine and ale.'

Bear baiting was so popular that fellows roamed about the country

leading a bear which they offered to be baited for so much an hour at

the inns which they passed. The master of the 'King's Game' had power to

seize upon any mastiff dogs, bears, or bulls for the King's service and

to bait in any place within his dominions. Henslow and Alleyn, both

actors, were also masters of the King's Game: they had licence to

apprehend all vagrants travelling with bears and bulls.

There was another place where the refining influence of the bear baiting

might be enjoyed. Its site is still preserved in the lane called Bear

Garden Alley. In Agas's map of 1560 an amphitheatre is shown called the

'Bear Baiting:' a little to the west another amphitheatre is seen called

the 'Bull Baiting.' Whether these places were the only buildings

erected for this amusement or whether they were put up in addition to

the place in Paris Gardens is a point for the antiquary. It is learnedly

discussed by Mr. Ordish ('Early London Theatres'). The Spanish

Ambassador in 1544 describes a bear baiting--but he does not say exactly

where he saw it. 'On the other side of the town' is vague. I think,

however, that he must mean Paris Gardens:

'On the other side of the town we have seen seven bears, some of them

very large; they are driven into a circus, where they are confined by a

long rope, while large and courageous dogs are let loose upon them as if

to be devoured, and a fight takes place. It is not bad sport to witness

the conflict. The large bears contend with three or four dogs, and

sometimes one is victorious and sometimes the other; the bears are

ferocious and of great strength, and not only defend themselves with

their teeth, but hug the dogs so closely with their forelegs, that, if

they were not rescued by their masters, they would be suffocated. At the

same place a pony is baited, with a monkey on its back, defending itself

against the dogs by kicking them; and the shrieks of the monkey, when he

sees the dogs hanging from the ears and neck of the pony, render the

scene very laughable.'

In the year 1550 Crowley, the author of certain 'Epigrams' against

abuses, mentions Paris Gardens (see Stow and Strype, 1758, vol. ii. p.

8).

Every Sunday they will spend

One penny or two, the bearward's living to mend.

At Paris Gardens each Sunday, a man shall not fail

To find two or three hundred for the bearward's vale.

Later on there was certainly an amphitheatre in Paris Gardens, because

an accident happened there.

'The same 13th day of Januarie, being Sunday about foure of the clock in

the afternoon, the old and under-propped scaffolds round about the Beare

Garden, commonly called Paris Garden, on the south side of the great

river Thames over against the citie of London, over-deluged with people,

fell suddenly downe, whereby to number of eight persons, men and women,

were slaine and many others sore hurt and bruised to the shortening of

their lives. A friendly warning to all that delight themselves in the

cruelties of beastes than in the workes of mercy, the fruits of a true,

professed faith, which ought to be the Sabbath dayes exercise.' (Stow's

'Annals,' continued by Hawes.)

The amphitheatre would hold a thousand people.

The sport had other dangers: the bear, for instance, might get loose.

Once the blind bear got loose: it was on December 9, 1554, and on the

Bankside, probably at the amphitheatre outside Paris Gardens. He caught

a serving man by the leg 'and bytt a grate pesse away, and after by the

hokyll bone, that within iii days after he ded' (Machyn).

Wherever such sports were carried on there must needs spring up a rabble

rout who made their living by them: the bearward, the serving man who

kept the kennels, fed the dogs, exercised the dogs, fed the bears,

looked after the amphitheatre, took the money, and above all provided

the drink. In the little lane now called the Bear Garden, there is a

small square place which I take to be the survival of an open court in

front of the circus. There is here a small tavern: the house itself is

not ancient, but I believe that it stands on the site of the house which

provided wine and beer for the spectators of the bear baiting. These

sports, with others such as wrestling and fighting: these great crowds

of people gathering together: the music which accompanied everything:

caused the creation of taverns and drinking-places. Another attraction

to the place may be only hinted at in these pages. Suffice it to say

that all the profligate, all the debauched, all the rowdy, all the

lovers of sport among the citizens of London crossed over to Bankside

every evening in the summer and every Sunday in the winter, and there

they frolicked, drank, sang, quarrelled, fought, and tortured animals to

their hearts' content.

It is pleasant to think of Bankside and the fields beyond it--the

pleasure garden of London. It was easy to get into the open country on

every side of the City walls, but there was no place so pleasant as the

Lambeth Marsh and the Bankside: none that offered so many and such

various attractions. The flag flying over the Theatre proclaimed that a

play was forward: the number of those who loved the play more than the

baiting increased daily: there was never a time when the citizens did

not love the green fields and the woods: and these lay behind Paris

Gardens and the Bank, beyond the barking of the dogs and the roar of the

crowd and the blare of the music and the stink of the kennels. Every

summer evening the river was crowded with the boats taking the people

across to the stairs upon the Bank between St. Mary Overies and Old

Barge House Stairs: innumerable were the boats. As for the watermen,

John Taylor, the water poet, says that there were 40,000 of them plying

between Windsor and Gravesend, while the number of people who were

carried over every day to the plays on Bankside was three or four

thousand. Forty thousand seems an enormous number, but we must remember

that there were no docks: that ships were laden and unladen in mid

stream by barges and boats: that the Thames was the highway between

London and all riverside places; between London and Westminster; between

London and Southwark, because even if one lived close to the bridge it

was easier and quicker to be taken across by a boat than to walk over

the bridge. The conveyance of three or four thousand people across the

river every day would not want more than a thousand boats or two

thousand watermen: at the same time the loss of their custom, which

happened when the people went to Blackfriars instead of the Bank for

their play, would be felt by the whole fraternity of watermen.

We have arrived at the time when the bear baiting attracted less than

the play acting: when the amphitheatres were turned into theatres: and

when Bankside became the residence of the poets and the players. They

came; unfortunately the other people did not go away. There remained the

tribe of them who made the music and found the dancers and the tumblers,

the mummers and the conjurers: there remained the men--a rough and

brutal lot--who looked after the bears and the dogs: the men who wielded

quarterstaff and showed sword play, a swaggering and bullying company:

there remained the young bloods who came over from their peaceful shops

and warehouses to enjoy the sport and the conversation and talk of the

place: there remained the ribald crew of men and women who naturally

belong to such gatherings. There was another population at Westminster

outside the King's House like unto this at Southwark: these, too,

existed for the amusement of the King's courtiers and men-at-arms. The

Southwark folk existed for the amusements of not the highest class of

London City. The poets came, therefore, to this place in order to be

near these theatres: they brought no improvement in example, in morals,

or in manners: they lived among the people, and their lives were mostly

as disorderly and their morals as loose as the company among whom they

walked and talked.

Southwark in the early sixteenth century, it may be noted, consisted of

two parts, the one wholly distinct from the other. The first part was

the High Street with its four churches of St. George's, St. Margaret's,

St. Olave's, and St. Mary Overies: in the High Street were the two

Debtors' Prisons: in the High Street was the ancient hospital: there

also was the long succession of inns, stately, ample, frequented by

merchants and capable of stabling an immense number of packhorses, and

of receiving as many waggons as could fill the courtyard. The Palaces

were mostly gone, turned into inns or tenements. The whole place was a

great House of Call. It had no industries, it had no crafts: it had no

civic or corporate existence. But it was respectable.

The other part lay on the west of the High Street, stretching along the

river nearly as far as Lambeth. This was the disreputable quarter, the

place of amusement: the people who lived there, one and all, made the

providing of amusement, pleasure and excitement their means of

livelihood. It was like a never-ending fair where nothing was sold, and

there were no booths except those of Ursula, with roast sucking pig,

black puddings, custards, and gingerbread. From every tavern all day

long came the tinkling of the guitar and the trolling of some lusty

voice and the silvery notes of a girl who sang like the wood pigeon

because nature taught her. Here marched along the bear rolling his head

from side to side, a monkey chattering on his back, the tabor and pipe

going before him. After him came the dogs straining at the chain which

held them, barking madly in anticipation of the fight. Or it was a young

bull who was led by two men to the ring where he would defend his life

as long as the dogs allowed; or it was the arrival at Falcon Stairs of

boats by the dozen, each turning out its complement of citizens and

their wives, who made for the theatre where the flag was flying. On the

open bank were placed tables for those who drank: the balladmonger sang

his songs and sold them afterwards: the posturer spread his carpet and

went through his performance: the boys cried nuts and apples: the drawer

ran about and filled his cans. In no other part of London was there a

scene of greater animation and cheerfulness than on Bankside, on an

afternoon or evening in the summer. And then to go home again across the

broad and peaceful river at full tide, when the sun was set, and the

river, like the sky, was aglow, and the people sang softly in the boats,

and still from Bankside came the dying snatches of music, the soft

breath of the cornet, and the tingling touch of the harp, and the

voices of those who sang, and the baying of the hounds from Paris

Gardens.

The early history of the playhouses on the Bank involves many questions,

and may be safely left to the antiquarian historian. The reader will

find most of these questions raised and settled in a book, already

quoted here, by Mr. T. Fairman Ordish ('Early London Theatres'). It

appears, however, that there were players, if not playhouses, here as

early as 1547. After the death of Henry VIII. Gardiner proposed to have

a solemn dirge in memory of the King, but, he complained to the Council,

the players of Southwark say that they also will have a 'solemn playe to

trye who shall have most resorts, they in game, or I in earnest.'

Whether these players had a regular theatre, or whether they acted in

the courtyard of an inn, or whether they had a moveable stage, I do not

know. It is, however, quite certain that before the end of the sixteenth

century there were four theatres in Bankside--the _Rose_, whose site was

somewhere in Rose Alley: the _Hope_ in Bear Garden Lane: the _Swan_ in

Paris Gardens--that is, on the west side of the Blackfriars Road, not

far from the Bridge: and the _Globe_. The site of the Globe is generally

allowed to have been at a spot 150 feet south of Park Street, close to

the Southwark Bridge Road, and on the east of it. For twenty years, more

or less, the stream of playgoers was turned steadily and continuously to

the Theatres in Bankside, and poet and player lived beside the theatre,

and the place was the pleasure resort of the people, and the haunt of

sporting men, and the school of the citizens, in history at least: and

the pride and glory of London for its dramatists, if the people knew:

and the sink and shame of London for the iniquities and villanies

practised there: the debauchery and the shamelessness of those who lived

upon the Bank.

The Plague, not only of 1603 and of 1625, but those milder attacks

which threatened from time to time were a deadly enemy to the players,

for then the theatre must be closed and the Bear Garden too, for in

crowds there was infection. Think what it meant to close these places of

resort. The Elizabethan theatres maintained almost as many persons as

our own: there were the players proper--the Company: there were the

servants 'in the front' and the servants behind, the 'supers,' the money

takers, the boys who went round selling nuts and cakes, wine and ale,

new books and tobacco: there were the watermen required to carry the

audience to and fro. Why, the shutting of the Theatres must have thrown

out of employ many hundreds of men, and, if we consider their wives and

families, many thousands of people. Can we wonder if the players, one

and all, were Cavaliers, and were ready to fight for the side which

allowed them their daily bread?

[Illustration: The Bear Garden and Hope Theatre, 1616]

But Fortune was against them. The Puritanic spirit prevailed. When the

Parliament conquered, the theatres were doomed. And in 1655, by command

of Thomas Pride, High Sheriff of Surrey, the seven bears of Paris

Gardens were shot by a company of soldiers. In the same year it is

mentioned that the Hope Theatre had been destroyed to make room for

tenements.

The profession of actor in a time when the Puritanic spirit was rapidly

growing stronger could not possibly be held in good repute. There was

dancing in it: music: mockery: merriment: satire: low comedy: all these

things the misguided flock enjoyed and the shepherd deplored. The Mayor,

long before the Theatres were suppressed, would never allow a theatre to

be set up within his jurisdiction: had that jurisdiction extended beyond

the various Bars: had there not, fortunately, happened to exist certain

illogical and absurd Liberties and Precincts, in which the Mayor had no

authority, there would have been no theatres in the neighbourhood of

London, and therefore no Elizabethan drama, no Shakespeare, no Ben

Jonson, no Massinger, no Fletcher. As things happened, we have to note

the very remarkable fact that while the popular love for the theatre

increased year by year; while the theatre became the teacher of history,

the satirist of manners, the home of music and of poetry; the ministers

and preachers thundered perpetually against it, yet prevailed not at

all, until the Civil War broke out, and the power fell into the hands of

the Puritans. For instance, one John Field, the father of one of the

most famous players, Nathan Field, wrote to the Earl of Leicester as

early as 1585 reviling him for having interfered 'on the behalf of evil

men as of late you did for players, to the great griefe of all the

godly,' and adjuring him not to encourage their wickedness, and 'the

abuses that are wont to be nourished by those impure interludes and

plays.' And the same divine, two years later, wrote an attack upon the

theatre in consequence of the accident at Paris Gardens which has been

already mentioned. The theatre was forcibly suppressed in the Civil War,

but it was never forgotten, and the moment that the Restoration allowed

it was opened again. But to our day the old Puritanism continues, in a

now feeble and impotent way, to consider the Theatre as the chosen home

of the Devil.

[Illustration: INTERIOR OF THE OLD SWAN THEATRE]

Nathan Field, though the son of such a father, was ready to meet all

comers in defence of the stage. In 1616 one Sutton, Preacher at St. Mary

Overies, denounced the Theatre and all connected with it. Field answered

him manfully, telling him plainly that he, the preacher, is disloyal, in

preaching from his pulpit against people who are licensed and

patronised by the King. The players were at all times equal to the task

of covering the preacher with derision; but derision seldom convinces or

converts.

The general opinion of players remains that they have at all times been

a penniless tribe, eating the 'corn in the green;' borrowing; spending

their money in riotous living. This opinion is not by any means always

true. The musician, the mummer, the dancer, and the tumbler were all

regarded much in the same light; they were despised; they did not fight

like the soldier; they did not produce like the craftsman; they did not,

like the priest, say mass and forgive sins; they did not heal the sick;

they knew no law; their only function in the world was to amuse; to make

men laugh. It is very remarkable that directly the players ceased to be

dependent on noble lords, as soon as they appealed to the public and

received money from those who came to see them perform, they became

prudent men of business. They may have been a cheerful tribe; they were,

however, well to do, and, so far as can be learned, a thrifty tribe.

They made money, not by writing plays, nor by acting them, but by being

shareholders in the company with which they played. Burbage, Alleyn,

Heminge, Sly, Field, Schanke, not to speak of Shakespeare, all appear to

have lived in comfort, and to have died possessed of moderate fortunes.

The poets, certainly, continued, as poets have always been, penniless

and in debt. By the end of the sixteenth century the earliest of the

dramatic poets, Marlowe, Peele, Nash, Greene--that turbulent roystering

profligate band whom everybody loved while everybody reproved--had

passed away. The early extravagance vanished. The later poets, Ben

Jonson, Beaumont, Fletcher, Massinger, led more godly lives. Yet they

were often harassed for want of money. Three of them, Massinger, Field

and Daborne, write to Henslow asking for an advance of 5_l._ on the

security of a play which is worth ten pounds in addition to what they

have had. All those, in fact, were poor, and remained poor, who

attempted to live by poetic literature alone.

The poets have had enough attention paid to them: let us consider the

Company of Actors who played at the Globe and the Rose, the Hope and the

Lion, and lived on and near the Bankside. The books of St. Saviour's

(see Rendle's 'Southwark,' App. p. 26) are full of references to the

actors who died and were buried here, whose children were baptised here

or buried here. The name of William Shakespeare, unfortunately, does not

occur. Among the actors, and first and chief, was Richard Burbage--like

Shakespeare, a Warwickshire man. In person he was under the middle

stature, and grew fat and scant of breath. But no actor of the time had

so great a power over his audience. It was his father who built the very

first permanent theatre--called The Theatre at Shoreditch. In

consequence of a dispute with the landlord, he pulled down the house,

carried the timbers across the river to Bankside, and set up the Globe.

There was Kempe, the low comedian, who succeeded Tarlton in that line.

He was a great dancer: on one occasion he danced all the way from

Norwich to London, taking nine days for the work: he was accompanied by

one Thomas Sly, who played the tabor and the pipe for him. As he passed

through the villages the girls came running out to dance with him along

the road till he tired them out. He was a fellow of infinite drollery,

with jokes and acting such as pleased the 'groundlings' well. There was

a kind of entertainment popular at the time called a jig. It was a

monologue for the most part, but might be played by two or more, in

which the words were interrupted by songs and dances: the jig was like

the farce which used to be played after the tragedy. This worthy lived

in Bankside, but I believe there is no record of his death.

Another excellent player was John Lowin or Lewin. He also lived in the

Liberty of the Clink. But he lived too long. He survived the

suppression of Theatres, and in his old age had no craft or art or

mastery by which to earn his bread save that which was proscribed. He

wrote for assistance to a patron, and he quoted the lover's words

applied to the beggar:

Silence in love betrays more woe

Than words, though ne'er so witty;

The beggar that is dumb, you know,

Deserves a double pity.

Among the low comedians Robert Armin must not be forgotten. He attracted

Tarlton's attention when a mere boy. The veteran comedian adopted him

and taught him. I know not whether he, or Kempe, was the true successor

to that unrivalled buffoon. He is described by some rhymester as--

Honest gamesome Robert Armin,

That tickles the spleen like a harmless vermin.

I have already mentioned Nathan Field the player: he was also Nathan

Field the dramatist. He brought into the latter profession the

carelessness about money that belonged to the former. There are

indications--only indications, it is true--that there was in him

something of the temperament of a Micawber, or a Harold Skimpole, a

constitutional inability to understand the meaning of addition and

subtraction or the translation of money into its equivalent in eating

and drinking. He took a wife when he was no longer quite young, and he

became jealous. Hence the epigram, 'De Agello et Othello:'

Field is, in sooth, an actor: all men know it;

And is the true Othello of the poet:

I wonder if 'tis true, as people tell us,

That like the character he is most jealous.

If it be so, and many living sweare it,

It takes not little from the actor's merit,

Since, as the Moor is jealous of his wife,

Field can display the passion to the life.

Who remembers John Schanke? He, like Kempe and Armin, carried on the

traditions of low comedy. He was great in the invention of 'jigs.' A

notable 'jig' was that called 'Schanke's Ordinary,' in which several

performers took part. There is an odd story told by Collier of a

'Schanke, a player.' It was in the year 1642. There came galloping to

London three of the Lord General's officers with the news that there had

been a great battle in which the London Companies had been cut to

pieces, and 20,000 men had fallen on both sides. They spread their news

as they rode through the villages: they spread it abroad in the city. It

was ascertained on inquiry that there had not been any battle at all,

but that those three men--Captain Wilson, Lieutenant Whitney, and one

Schanke, a player--were simply runaways. Therefore they were all clapped

in the Gatehouse, and brought to undergo punishment according to martial

law 'for their base cowardliness.'

One remarks that the race of comic actors or low comedians never becomes

extinct. That power of always seizing on the comic side in everything,

of always being able to make an audience laugh throughout a whole piece,

is never, happily, taken away from a world which would be too sad

without it. Great poets do not occur more than once in a century: great

novelists not more than twice: but the low comedian, the comic man,

whose face, whose voice, whose carriage, are as humorous as his words,

never fails us. Tarlton is followed by Kempe, Kempe by Armin, Armin by

Schanke. So Robson follows Liston, and Toole follows Robson, with lesser

lights besides.

There are many other actors. The painstaking Collier finds out what

parts they played and where they lived. Alas! He tells us no more.

Perhaps there is no more to tell. The rank and file of the theatrical

company are never a very interesting collection. Underwood, Toovey,

Eccleston, Cowley, Cooke, Sly, Argan--they are shadows that have long

since passed out, made an exit, and so an end. They were forgotten by

the audience the day after they were dead. Why seek to revive their

memory when there is not a single solitary fact to go upon? A bone would

be something: out of the skull of Yorick we might perhaps reconstruct

his life, with all the adventures, love-making, disappointments,

distresses and triumphs.

We know the place where they all lived; the place of a continual Fair

without any booths, yet everything offered for sale: the music to cheer

your heart--you could command it had you money in purse; the wine to

raise your courage--you could call for it; the dancing to charm your

eye--any girl would dance for you if you paid her; the new play to fill

you with lofty thoughts--but you must pay for your seat; the jig to

bring you back to the level of earth--or perhaps a little lower--you

could buy it; the eyes of Dalilah at the sign of the Swan in the Hoope

were directed to your purse; the ruffians belonging to the kennels and

the bear garden; the drawers of the taverns and the sack and the

tobacco, the boats and the boatmen, were all at your service. The

players lived in this riot and racket, themselves a part: we catch

glimpses of them, we can discern them amid the crowd: sometimes one of

their women is ducked for a shrew; one of them is clapped in the Clink

Prison: some are haled before the Bishop for acting in Lent--these

unreasonable people really object to starving in Lent! And the place and

the people and their manners and customs are deplorable but delightful;

they are picturesque to the highest degree, but they are equally

reprehensible. I wish we could go back four hundred years and see and

listen for ourselves: but with all our admiration for the Elizabethan

drama, I do not think that I should like to be one of the Show Folk or

to live with them in that jovial colony on the Bankside in the days of

the Globe and the Rose, the Hope and the Swan.

South London · 第 11 / 17 章