INTRODUCTION
From 1599 to 1608 or 1609 the Globe playhouse was the home of the Chamberlain-King’s company and the only theater where it publicly presented its plays in London. The Globe was imitated by Henslowe, the theater magnate, and lauded by Dekker, the playwright. Upon its stage Shakespeare’s major tragedies enjoyed their first performances. Located among the stews and marshes of the Bankside, it drew across the Thames its audience, men and women, gentlemen and journeymen, sightseeing foreigners and native playgoers.
Yet for us the playhouse signifies more than a physical structure for the presentation of plays. It has become the symbol of an entire art. Its construction initiated a glorious decade during which the company achieved a level of stability and a quality of productivity rarely matched in the history of the theater. So rich was the achievement that virtually all interest in the Elizabethan drama radiates from the work of these years.
Circumstances attendant on the building of the Globe playhouse were instrumental in developing the distinctiveness of this endeavor. The new playhouse itself was regarded as the last word in theaters. Alleyn and Henslowe modeled the Fortune upon it. Dekker, in a widely known paragraph fromThe Gull’s Hornbook, praised the wonder of it. In the design of the Globe there were significant changes from former playhouses. It was a theater built by actors for actors. To subsidize it a new financial system was instituted which more fully than heretofore interrelated theater and actors.
Furthermore, young men had recently taken over the entire enterprise, playhouse and company. Until 1597 James Burbage had maintained some connection with the Lord Chamberlain’s men. Builder and owner of the Theatre, lessor of Blackfriars, he had exercised a strong influence on the course the company took.In the midst of the uncertainty marking the negotiation for a new lease on the Theatre, James Burbage died, bequeathing to his sons and, by association, to the actors an equivocal inheritance. From his death in 1597 to the building of the Globe in 1599, the company was adrift, playing mainly at the Curtain. How much responsibility and authority the elder Burbage had relinquished to the young men before 1597 is virtually impossible to determine, but the records indicate that he played an active part in the management of theatrical affairs until the end of his life.[1]After his death the erection and success of the Globe devolved upon young, presumably enthusiastic, but not green men of the theater.
At this time Shakespeare, even then the leading playwright of the Lord Chamberlain’s men, was passing into a new phase of dramatic activity. The major tragedies were soon to come from his pen. The romantic comedies, in a style which he had developed earlier, were shortly to reach their perfection inTwelfth Night. The histories were to appear no longer. None of the plays written between 1600 and 1609 was considered a history by the editors of the First Folio. SinceHenry V, dated 1599, probably appeared before the completion of the Globe, Shakespeare wrote no history play for the Globe company. On the other hand,Titus AndronicusandRomeo and Julietare the only plays, written before the opening of the Globe, which were labeled tragedies. Such categorization is somewhat artificial, but it does accentuate the fact that the settlement of the company at the Globe was followed shortly by a shift of emphasis in Shakespeare’s work.
One more significant change occurred at this time. Either a dispute with his fellows or an irrepressible wanderlust led the leading clown, Will Kempe, to break with the company. Apparently before the stage of the Globe was painted and the spectators admitted, he severed his connection with the Lord Chamberlain’s men, though he had been among the original five who had taken a moiety of the lease on the projected playhouse. After his departure, there followed a period of great stability in the acting company. In the entire decade there were only two replacements, owing to the deaths of actors, and three additions with an expansion from nine to twelve members in 1603.
This nexus of events does not necessarily prove that there was a stylistic or artistic change in 1599. Nor does it imply that little in procedure, tradition, and equipment was carried over from the Theatre and the Curtain to the Globe. But it does indicate that circumstance and planning combined to modify the character of the enterprise, to make it not merely a continuation of the past but the start of a new theatrical endeavor. As such, the opening of the Globe serves as an excellent point of departure for a special study of the company sometimes dubbed “Shakespeare’s” but in this book termed “the Globe.”
In 1608–1609 the King’s men, acquiring the private indoor theater of Blackfriars, brought the distinctive period to a close, for with the leasing of Blackfriars, according to Professor Gerald Bentley, came a change of outlook.[2]He emphasizes two major factors which led to this change. First, the audience at the private theater differed markedly from that at the public playhouse: the former audience was sophisticated and exclusive whereas the latter was rude and representative. The contrast has been fully elaborated by Alfred Harbage inShakespeare and the Rival Traditions. Secondly, the indoor theater, relatively intimate, lit by candles, required an alteration in style of acting and provided a subtler control of mood. To substantiate the theory that the King’s men faced these differences squarely, Bentley cites the employment of Jonson, skilled in writing for Blackfriars and the Children of the Queen’s Revels; the appearance of a new type of play from the leading playwright, now writing with Blackfriars in mind; and the engagement of Beaumont and Fletcher, neither of whom had previously written for this company. Altogether the events grouped around the move to Blackfriars indicate that then too a new start was made, and Bentley convincingly demonstrates that within a short time Blackfriars became the leading playhouse for the King’s men in point of prestige and profit.
Until now I have alluded rather generally to the building of the Globe in 1599 and to the acquisition of Blackfriars in 1608–1609. Since the assignment of several plays depends upon a more exact dating, there is a need to arrive at more precise limits.
Shortly after the 26th of February, 1599, construction of the Globe commenced under the supervision of Peter Streete, theman with whom Philip Henslowe and Edward Alleyn contracted a year later to erect the Fortune theater along the same lines. From Streete’s building schedule for the Fortune, we can estimate that the Globe took twenty-eight to thirty weeks to complete, and thus the earliest opening date would have been in late August or early September, 1599.[3]
At the Blackfriars playing by the King’s men began sometime between June 24, 1608, when the company took a lease of the premises, and the autumn of 1609, when the decline of a severe plague permitted a resumption of playing. In January, 1609, the players received a reward from His Majesty “for their private practise in the time of infeccon.” Testimony by Richard Burbage and John Heminges in 1612 indicates that playing commenced some time during the winter of 1608–1609. A temporary reduction of plague deaths in February and March, 1609, makes this the likely period during which Shakespeare and his fellows first played at Blackfriars and so terminated the Globe years.[4]
In the main the canon of Shakespeare’s plays produced between 1599 and 1609 is set. Several plays are in dispute, but on the whole, considering the nature of much of the evidence, the degree of unanimity among scholars is amazing.[5]
Of about nine of the plays sufficient external evidence exists to verify their placement between 1599 and 1608. There is general agreement that Platter is referring to Shakespeare’sJulius Caesarwhen he describes a performance on September 21, 1599. Its absence from Meres’ list places it after September 7, 1598, and Chambers dates the play 1599–1600.Twelfth Night, first mentioned in connection with a performance at the Middle Temple, February 2, 1602, is variously dated 1599 to 1601. Suggestions of an initial performance at the Middle Temple by Wilson and at Whitehall by Hotson do not affect the assignment of date and need not be discussed here.[6]Despite several attempts to force back the date of the first draft ofHamletto 1583, the year 1601 is still the accepted date for the play as we know it. In an essay in 1944 Chambers confirmed his dating which appeared inWilliam Shakespeare(1930). Wilson supports this date, and Gray and Kirschbaum have argued against the use of Harvey’s marginalia as evidence of an earlier date.[7]
Troilus and Cressidawas written before February 7, 1603, when it is listed in the Stationers’ Register “as yt is acted by my lo: Chamblens men.” The implication is of a recent appearance, but Hotson has made an attempt to set the date back before 1598. The nub of his argument is that the enigmatic title “Love’s Labour’s Won,” which appears under Shakespeare’s name in Meres’ list, really means “Love’s Pains Are Gained,” thus fitting the subject ofTroilus and Cressida.[8]This line of reasoning has yet to win support.
The upper limits ofOthello,Measure for Measure, andKing Learare set by their performances at Court on November 1, 1604, December 26, 1604, and December 26, 1606, respectively. The lower limits are unknown, but no responsible authority has suggested dating any of these plays before 1602.[9]
The limits forAntony and Cleopatraare set at the upper end by the listing in the Stationers’ Register of May 20, 1608, and at the lower by Daniel’s corrections to hisCleopatrain the new edition ofCertain Small Workes(1607). On the same day on which the entry forAntony and Cleopatrawas inserted,Pericleswas registered. This play, however, had been witnessed by the Venetian ambassador sometime between January 5, 1606, and November 23, 1608.[10]
Stylistic evidence or contemporary allusion serves to date four plays in this period.All’s Well That Ends Wellis dated in 1602–1603 by Chambers, in 1602 by Kittredge and Harbage; all do so on stylistic evidence. Allusions to the doctrine of equivocation (II, iii, 9-13) placeMacbethin 1606, and this date is widely accepted.[11]Stylistic evidence leads most scholars to placeTimon of Athensin 1607–1608, and this type of evidence, combined with allusions of a tenuous nature, leads them to assignCoriolanusto 1608.
Several plays are on the borderline at either end of the period.As You Like It,Much Ado About Nothing, andHenry Vwere “staid” from printing according to the Stationers’ Register entry of August 4, 1600. Since none of them appears in Meres’ listing in 1598, they all fall within the two-year intervening period. In datingAs You Like ItandMuch Ado About Nothingthere is very little evidence for narrowing the period. The appearanceof Kemp’s name in speech prefixes inMuch Ado(IV, ii) places it before the opening of the Globe. O. J. Campbell points out thatAs You Like Itmust have been written after the edict against satire on July 1, 1599. These facts, together with the general consensus, lead me to includeAs You Like Itin the 1599–1608 repertory and to excludeMuch Ado.
Henry Vis more narrowly limited by the allusions to Essex’s campaign in Ireland (Chorus, V, 30-34). The commencement of the campaign was on March 27, 1599, the sad conclusion on September 28, 1599. Since the Globe did not open until the end of August or early September, the weight of the evidence excludesHenry V. It also excludesCymbelineat the end of the decade. Mentioned first by Simon Forman, who saw a performance between April 20th and 30th, 1611, the play is variously dated in 1609 or 1610. The earliest date suggested by Chambers is the spring of 1609.
One play,The Merry Wives of Windsor, remains in dispute. Despite the conflict with testimony from Meres, Hotson places the first performance ofMerry Wiveson April 23, 1597, when it was supposedly performed for the Knights of the Garter at Windsor. Alexander accepts this date.[12]Chambers, Kittredge, and Harbage date the play in 1600–1601, and Chambers points out the appearance of a line fromHamlet, “What is the reason that you use me thus?” (V, i, 312) in scene xiii of the bad quarto ofMerry Wives(1602). On this basis and in the absence of any appropriate time when the play could have been performed before the Queen at a Garter installation, Chambers dates the play in 1600–1601. McManaway admits that many questions about the play are unanswerable at present, although he grants that there may have been revisions over a period of years beginning as early as 1597. Nevertheless, as he notes, its absence from Meres’ list still remains a bar to an early dating. Consequently, we may treat it as part of the list of new plays written for the Globe playhouse.[13]
For supplementary evidence about the staging of Shakespeare’s plays at the Globe, we turn to the pieces of his less gifted colleagues who supplied the Globe company with scripts. Twelve plays are extant which we know or have reason to believe wereperformedonlyby the Chamberlain’s or King’s men between 1599 and 1609. Of these, three were written by Jonson:Every Man Out of His Humour,Sejanus, andVolpone. The first was written “in the yeere 1599” according to the 1616 Folio, and the revised epilogue refers to presentation at the Globe.Sejanus, according to Jonson, was “acted, in the yeere 1603. By the K. Maiesties Servants.”Volpone, again according to Jonson, was acted “in the yeere 1605. By the K. Maiesties Servants.”
Barnes, Wilkins, and possibly Tourneur each contributed one play to the King’s men’s repertory now extant. Barnes providedThe Devil’s Charter, played before the King “by his Maiesties Servants” on February 2, 1607.[14]Wilkins suppliedMiseries of Enforced Marriage. Q. 1607 contains the advertisement “As it is now played by his Maiesties Servants.”The Revenger’s Tragedy, uncertainly linked with Tourneur’s name, appeared in quarto with the inscription: “As it hath beene sundry times Acted, by the Kings Maiesties Servants.” Chambers dates the play 1606–1607.
The remaining six plays are all anonymous and all ascribe production to the Chamberlain’s or King’s men on the title pages of their quartos.A Larum for Londonwas registered on May 27, 1600, and printed in 1602.Thomas Lord Cromwellwas registered August 11, 1602, “as it was lately acted.”[15]Fair Maid of Bristow, entered in the Stationers’ Register February 8, 1605, is dated 1604 by Chambers.The London Prodigalappeared in quarto in 1605 and was probably produced in 1603–1605.The Merry Devil of Edmonton, although registered on October 22, 1607, is mentioned in T. M.’sBlack Bookin 1604. Chambers dates the play about 1603. Lastly,A Yorkshire Tragedy, entered May 2, 1608, may have been written a year or two earlier.[16]
The final additions to the 1599–1608 repertory consist of two plays which were presented by the Chamberlain-King’s men as well as by another company. The first, Dekker’sSatiromastix, presented between the production ofPoetasterin the spring of 1601 and its entry in the Stationers’ Register on November 11th of that year, contains on the Q. 1602 title page the information that it had been “presented publikely by the ... Lord Chambelaine his Servants; and privately, by the Children of Paules.”Certainly this was unusual procedure and must be taken into consideration in applying the play to Globe stage conditions. The second, Marston’sThe Malcontent, dated 1604, was “found” and played by the King’s men, presumably in retaliation for the theft of one of their plays by the Children of the Queen’s Revels. The title page and induction of Q. 1604 refer to additions by Marston and Webster in order to accommodate the play to an adult company. About the status ofThe First Part of Jeronimo, the stolen play, it is difficult to be exact. Boas dates the play after 1600.[17]Since the extant Q. 1605 may reflect the copy of the Revels’ production,Jeronimohas been cited for supplementary evidence only.
Thus, the final list of extant works first produced at the Globe playhouse between 1599 and 1609—the Globe plays—consists of fifteen Shakespearean and fourteen non-Shakespearean plays. Upon the evidence of these scripts, the bulk of this study is based.