Page:The Elizabethan stage (Volume 2).pdf/27

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

of a third company made up of his own and Worcester's servants. Even more dangerous, perhaps, to the monopoly was the revival of the boy companies, Paul's in 1599 and the Chapel in 1600. The imps not only took by their novelty in the eyes of a younger generation of playgoers. They began a warfare of satire, in which they 'berattled the common stages' with a vigour and dexterity that betray the malice of the poets against the players which had been a motive in their rehabilitation.[1]

No material change took place at the coming of James. The three adult companies, the Chamberlain's, the Admiral's, Worcester's, passed respectively under the patronage of James, Prince Henry, and Queen Anne.[2] On the death of Prince Henry in 1612 his place was taken by the Elector Palatine. The Children of the Chapel also received the patronage of Queen Anne, as Children of the Queen's Revels. The competition for popular favour continued severe. Dekker refers to it in 1608 and the preacher Crashaw in 1610.[3] It is to be noticed, however, that Dekker speaks only of 'a deadly war' between 'three houses', presumably regarding the boy companies as negligible. And in fact these companies were on the wane. By 1609 the Queen's Revels, though still in existence, had suffered from the wearing off of novelty, from the tendency of boys to grow older, from the plague-seasons of 1603-4 and 1608-9, which they were less well equipped than the better financed adults to withstand, from the indiscretions and quarrels of their managers, and from the loss of the Blackfriars, of which the King's men had secured possession.[4] The Paul's boys had been bought off by the payment of a 'dead rent' or blackmail to the Master. A third company, the King's Revels, had been started, but had failed to establish itself.[5] The three houses were not, indeed, left

  1. Cf. ch. xi.
  2. G. Dugdale, Time Triumphant (1604), sig. B, 'Nay, see the beauty of our all kinde soveraigne! not onely to the indifferent of worth, and the worthy of honor, did he freely deale about thiese causes, but to the meane gave grace, as taking to him the late Lord Chamberlaines servants, now the Kings acters; the Queene taking to her the Earle of Worsters servants, that are now her acters; and the Prince, their sonne, Henry, Prince of Wales full of hope, tooke to him the Earle of Nottingham his servants, who are now his acters.'
  3. Cf. ch. xvi, introd., and App. C, No. lviii.
  4. Flecknoe (App. I) perhaps exaggerates the share of moral sentiment in bringing to an end the formal connexion of the choirs with plays (cf. p. 52).
  5. De la Boderie, in 1608 (cf. vol. i, p. 327), speaks of five companies in London. These would be the King's, Queen's, Prince's, Revels, and King's Revels.