CHAPTER XVII

ROSSETER'S BLACKFRIARS, OR PORTER'S HALL

Philip Rosseter, the poet and musician, first appears as a theatrical

manager in 1610, when he secured a royal patent for the Children of

the Queen's Revels to act at Whitefriars. This company performed there

successfully under his management until March, 1613, when, for some

unknown reason, he formed a partnership with Philip Henslowe, who was

managing the Lady Elizabeth's Men at the Swan. The two companies were

combined, and the new organization, under the name of "The Lady

Elizabeth's Men," made use of both playhouses, the Swan as a summer

and the Whitefriars as a winter home.

As already explained in the preceding chapters, Rosseter's lease on

the Whitefriars Playhouse was to expire in 1614, and apparently he was

unable to renew the lease.[568] Naturally he and his partner Henslowe

were anxious to secure a private playhouse in the city to serve as a

winter home for their troupe, especially since the Swan was poorly

situated for winter patronage. This may explain the following entry in

Sir George Buc's Office-Book: "July 13, 1613, for a license to erect a

new playhouse in Whitefriars &c. L20."[569] The new playhouse,

however, was not built. Probably the opposition of the inhabitants of

the district led to its prohibition.

[Footnote 568: Nathaniel Field, the leading actor at Whitefriars,

published _A Woman is a Weathercock_ in 1612, with the statement to

the reader: "If thou hast anything to say to me, thou know'st where to

hear of me for a year or two, and no more, I assure thee." Possibly

this reflects the failure of the managers to renew the lease; after

1614 Field did not know where he would be acting. But editors have

generally regarded it as meaning that Field intended to withdraw from

acting.]

[Footnote 569: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 52.]

At the expiration of one year, in March, 1614, Rosseter withdrew from

his partnership with Henslowe, and on the old patent of the Children

of the Queen's Revels (which he had retained) organized a new company

to travel in the country.

In the following year, 1615, he and certain others, Philip Kingman,

Robert Jones, and Ralph Reeve, secured a lease of "diverse buildings,

cellars, sollars, chambers, and yards for the building of a playhouse

thereupon for the better practising and exercise of the said Children

of the Revels; all which premises are situate and being within the

precinct of the Blackfriars, near Puddlewharf, in the suburbs of

London, called by the name of the Lady Saunders's House, or otherwise

Porter's Hall."[570] It was their purpose to convert this hall into a

playhouse to rival the near-by Blackfriars; and in accordance with

this purpose, on June 3, 1615, Rosseter secured a royal license under

the Great Seal of England "to erect, build, and set up in and upon the

said premises before mentioned one convenient playhouse for the said

Children of the Revels, the same playhouse to be used by the Children

of the Revels for the time being of the Queene's Majesty, and for the

Prince's Players, and for the Lady Elizabeth's Players."[571]

[Footnote 570: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 277. For the

location of Puddlewharf see the map of the Blackfriars precinct on

page 94.]

[Footnote 571: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 277.]

The work of converting Porter's Hall into a playhouse seems to have

begun at once. On September 26, 1615, the Privy Council records "that

one Rosseter, and others, having obtained license under the Great Seal

of England for the building of a playhouse, have pulled down [i.e.,

stripped the interior of] a great messuage in Puddlewharf, which was

sometimes the house of the Lady Saunders, within the precinct of the

Blackfriars, and are now erecting a new playhouse in that place."[572]

[Footnote 572: _Ibid._, p. 373.]

The city authorities, always hostile to the actors and jealous of any

new theatres, made so vigorous a complaint to the Privy Council that

the Lords of the Council "thought fit to send for Rosseter." He came,

bringing his royal license. This document was carefully "perused by

the Lord Chief Justice of England," who succeeded in discovering in

the wording of one of its clauses a trivial flaw that would enable the

Privy Council, on a technicality, to prohibit the building: "The Lord

Chief Justice did deliver to their Lordships that the license granted

to the said Rosseter did extend to the building of a playhouse without

the liberties of London, and not within the city."[573] Now, in 1608

the liberty of Blackfriars had by a special royal grant been placed

within the jurisdiction of the city. Rosseter's license unluckily had

described the Lady Saunders's house as being "in the suburbs," though,

of course, the description was otherwise specific enough: "all which

premises are situate and being within the precinct of the Blackfriars,

near Puddlewharf, in the suburbs of London, called by the name of the

Lady Saunders's House, or otherwise Porter's Hall."

[Footnote 573: The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 373.]

Since "the inconveniences urged by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen were

many," the Lords of the Privy Council decided to take advantage of the

flaw discovered by the Lord Chief Justice, and prohibit the erection

of the playhouse. Their order, issued September 26, 1615, reads as

follows:

It was this day ordered by their Lordships that there shall

be no playhouse erected in that place, and that the Lord

Mayor of London shall straightly prohibit the said Rosseter

and the rest of the patentees, and their workmen to proceed

in the making and converting the said building into a

playhouse. And if any of the patentees or their workmen

shall proceed in their intended building contrary to this

their Lordships' inhibition, that then the Lord Mayor shall

commit him or them so offending unto prison and certify

their Lordships of their contempt in that behalf.[574]

[Footnote 574: _Ibid._]

This order, for the time being, halted work on the new playhouse. The

Children of the Revels were forced to spend the next year traveling in

the provinces; and the Lady Elizabeth's Men and Prince Charles's Men

had to remain on the Bankside and endure the oppressions of Henslowe

and later of Meade. Possibly their sufferings at the hands of Meade

led them to urge Rosseter to complete at once the much desired house

in the city. At any rate, in the winter of 1616, Rosseter, believing

himself strongly enough entrenched behind his royal patent, resumed

work on converting Porter's Hall into a theatre. The city authorities

issued "diverse commandments and prohibitions," but he paid no

attention to these, and pushed the work to completion. The building

seems to have been ready for the actors about the first of January,

1617. Thereupon the company which had been occupying the Hope deserted

that playhouse and "came over" to Rosseter's Blackfriars.[575] In the

new playhouse they presented Nathaniel Field's comedy, _Amends for

Ladies_, which was printed the following year "as it was acted at the

Blackfriars both by the Prince's Servants and the Lady Elizabeth's."

[Footnote 575: See the chapter on "The Hope."]

The actors, however, were not allowed to enjoy their new home very

long. On January 27, 1617, the Privy Council dispatched the following

letter to the Lord Mayor:

Whereas His Majesty is informed that notwithstanding diverse

commandments and prohibitions to the contrary, there be

certain persons that go about to set up a playhouse in the

Blackfriars near unto His Majesty's Wardrobe, and for that

purpose have lately erected and made fit a building, which

is almost if not fully finished. You shall understand that

His Majesty hath this day expressly signified his pleasure

that the same shall be pulled down, so as it be made unfit

for any such use; whereof we require your Lordship to take

notice and to cause it to be performed accordingly, with all

speed, and thereupon to certify us of your proceeding.

There can be no doubt that an order so peremptory, carrying the

authority both of the Privy Council and of the King, and requiring an

immediate report, was performed "with all speed." After this we hear

nothing more of the playhouse in Puddlewharf.[576]

[Footnote 576: I can find no further reference to the Puddlewharf

Theatre either in the _Records_ of the Privy Council or in the

_Remembrancia_ of the City. Collier, however, in his _History of

English Dramatic Poetry_ (1879), I, 384, says: "The city authorities

proceeded immediately to the work, and before three days had elapsed,

the Privy Council was duly and formally made acquainted with the fact

that Rosseter's theatre had been 'made unfit for any such use' as that

for which it had been constructed." Collier fails to cite his

authority for the statement; the passage he quotes may be found in the

order of the Privy Council printed above.]

Shakespearean Playhouses A History of English Theatres from the Beginnings to the Restoration · 第 17 / 21 章