PRICE THREEPENCE. 
 
 "702 
 
 Recount 
 
 ELIZABETHAN STAGE SOCIETY, 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM P O E L, 
 director. 
 
 k 
 
 June , /<?<?(?. 
 

 
 
Recount 
 
 OF THE 
 
 ELIZABETHAN STAGE SOCIETY, 
 
 BY 
 
 WILLIAM POLL, 
 
 Bircctor. 
 
 June, 1898. 
 
Jforih Jonbon Colkgiate School for tols, 
 
 Sandall Road, Camden Road, N.W. 
 
 3 rd June, 1898. 
 
 Dear Mr. Poel 
 
 I believe the work you are doing in connection 
 with the Elizabethan Stage Society is very valuable as well 
 as most interesting to students. Our pupils have, on several 
 occasions, been present at your revivals of Shakespearian plays, 
 and have found them most useful in helping them to realize the 
 meaning of the dramatist. Our Cambridge Candidates have 
 reason to be specially grateful for this help. 
 
 Believe me, 
 
 Yours sincerely , 
 
 SOPHIE BRYANT, 
 
 ( Principal). 
 
, 15 Y\ ‘o 5 y ^ 
 
 THE 
 
 yfz 
 
 ft 1*. 
 
 ELIZABETHAN STAGE SOCIETY. 
 
 This Society is now completing its third season of revivals of 
 sixteenth and seventeenth century plays. Although the actual 
 life of the Society began three years ago, it may be said to 
 have had its origin in 1881, when a performance of the first The origin of 
 
 quarto of Hamlet was given in St. George’s Hall, London, in perforaanceof 
 
 Elizabethan costumes and without scenery. This first quarto ^ a ”^ c ^[ art ° 
 had recently been made accessible to the world by a facsimile 
 in photo-lithography, and notwithstanding the garbled passages, 
 the great value of the first version towards a proper under¬ 
 standing of Shakespeare’s masterpiece, was the immediate object 
 of the representation. The play was given under the auspices 
 of the New Shakespeare Society, who afterwards reported in 
 their transactions, “ the seeing of the First Sketch actually 
 played on the boards was necessary to enable any student to 
 
 form a real judgment on its relation to the complete play, and 
 
 was of the highest importance to that end.” The play was 
 acted continuously, and lasted two hours. - ] Here then, probably 
 for the first time since Shakespeare’s day, was reality given to 
 Shakespeare’s words, “ the two hours traffic of our stage.” But 
 what was of more vital importance to the future existence 
 of the Society was the opinion, expressed by a large part of 
 the audience, that there was nothing to be urged against 
 the adopting of Elizabethan costume and the dispensing with 
 scenery. 
 
 Since that performance, the principle advocated of repre¬ 
 senting Shakespeare’s plays without scenery began to develop 
 
 steadily among a few students. A Society formed in 1875 for Public Read- 
 . ings hy the 
 
 reading aloud the plays of Shakespeare had many capable and Shakespeare 
 
 intelligent readers among its members, and in 1887 it decided gaiety 5 
 
 to enlarge the scope ot its labours. The Merchant of Venice 
 
 was given as a first Annual Reading in the Botanical Theatre 
 
 of University College. This was followed by Romeo and Juliet , 
 
4 
 
 Twelfth Night, Much Ado, Henry V., Richard 11 ., and Julius 
 Ccesar, given at the London Institution and at Steinway Hall. 
 The preparation for each Annual Reading extended over three 
 months, with sometimes as many as three or four rehearsals in 
 the week. Ladies and gentlemen, in modern costume, recited 
 Shakespeare, from a platform of draped curtains, with but little 
 loss of dramatic effect, for the interest of the audience was 
 sustained by giving prominence to the story of the play, 
 together with careful characterization and intelligent delivery 
 of the text, while frequent rehearsals enabled the readers to 
 acquire ease and uniformity in the management of the blank 
 A Criticism of verse. Of one of these Annual Readings a leading dramatic 
 them ’ critic said, in a morning paper : “ From these simple recitals 
 
 without acts, waits or scenery, and therefore without those 
 departures from the conditions contemplated by the poet, 
 which are inevitable in a modern theatre, I learn a good deal 
 about the plays which I can learn in no other way.” 
 
 In 1891 it was decided to make a more ambitious venture 
 with Measure for Measure, given in costume but without 
 scenery, at Lad broke Hall, Notting Hill. In 1892 the Society 
 gave a recital of the Two Gentlemen of Verona in the St. 
 James’s Banqueting Hall, and repeated it in costume before 
 the members of the Albany Club at Kingston. In the autumn 
 of that year, at the instigation of the same body of Readers, 
 and with the aid of the Independent Theatre Society, Webster’s 
 The Duchess of tragedy, The Duchess of Malfi was revived at the Opera 
 Independent Comique Theatre with a professional cast. Of this perform- 
 Theatre. ance the “ Athenaeum ” said : “ In bringing practically for the 
 first time, before the public of this generation, a piece of this 
 class, the Independent Theatre is rendering a genuine and an 
 uncontested service.” Love's Labour's Lost was the Annual 
 Reading of 1893, given in the spring of the year, and in the 
 following autumn, with the assistance of Mr. Arthur Dillon, 
 who was a member of Committee of the Shakespeare Reading 
 Society, there was carried out a long cherished scheme of 
 building a stage after the Elizabethan model, and the Royalty 
 Theatre, in Soho, was converted into as near a resemblance of 
 of the old Fortune Playhouse as a roofed theatre would adm 
 
5 
 
 of. Measure for Measure was the play chosen, which was Measurt for 
 acted by the students who recited it at Ladbroke Hall in ^odd^Stage* 
 1891, and the audience immediately adjoining the stage wore of the Old ^ 
 Elizabethan costume. Of this performance the “ Times ” said : house! 16 ^ 
 “ The experiment proved at least that scenic accessories are 
 by no means as indispensable to the enjoyment of a play as 
 the manager supposes,” and a professor of literature at one of 
 our London colleges wrote : “ I don’t think I was ever more 
 interested—nay, fascinated—by a play upon the stage, and 
 now I shall ever think the cutting up into scenes and acts a 
 useless cruelty, and an utter spoiling of the story.” 
 
 It was after this last performance that Mr. Dillon decided The Society 
 to found a Society that might become a permanent audience, supporters, 
 whose subscriptions would enable two or more plays to be 
 given annually after the manner of the recent revival/ The 
 idea was warmly supported by Mr. and Mrs. Edmund Gosse. 
 
 Sir Walter Besant, Rev. Stopford A. Brooke, Walter Crane, Esq., 
 
 Israel Gollancz, Esq., Prof. Hales, Sidney Lee, Esq., “ Maarten 
 Maartens,” Hamo Thornycroft, Esq., R.A.„ Mrs. Thackeray 
 Ritchie, Miss Swanwick, and the Hon. Mrs. Lionel Tollemache, 
 were numbered among the first subscribers. The services of 
 Mr. Arnold Dolmetsch with his old instruments were secured 
 for the music, and Captain Hutton, F.S.A. kindly volunteered 
 his advice upon the sword-play, while Miss Jennie Moore 
 gave her valuable help in designing the Elizabethan costumes. 
 
 The plays given in 1895-96 were Twelfth Night and the 
 Comedy of Errors , which were acted in the dining-hall of 
 Gray’s Inn, and Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus acted in St. George’s 
 Hall ; for this last Mr. Swinburne kindly wrote a prologue. 
 
 In the second season 1896-97 was acted the Two Gentlemen 
 of Verona in the Merchant Taylors’ Hall* and repeated at 
 the Charterhouse, and Twelfth Night at the Middle Temple 
 Hall on which occasion the Prince of Wales as a Bencher of 
 the Inn was present. A portion of Arden of Fever sham 
 together with an episode in the play of Edward III\ were 
 
 * It was after this last performance that an article on the Society’s 
 Revivals appeared in La Nouvelle R£vue entitled Shakespeare sans 
 decors. 
 
6 
 
 Some Press 
 criticisms on 
 the Society’s 
 Revivals. 
 
 Electric light 
 for the stage. 
 
 Boys in 
 
 women’s 
 
 parts. 
 
 revived at St. George's Hall in July of last year and brought 
 the second season to a close. The performances during the 
 current season have been The Tempest revived at the Mansion 
 House and repeated at the Goldsmiths’ Hall, Beaumont and 
 Fletcher’s Comedy The Coxcomb given at the Inner Temple, 
 and Middleton and Rowley’s Comedy The Spanish Gipsy 
 acted at St. George’s Hall, for which last Mr. Swinburne 
 again wrote a prologue. Nor must it be forgotten how 
 invaluable has been the help of Mr. Dolmetsch’s music in 
 giving completeness to the Revivals of The Tempest and The 
 Spanish Gipsy . John Ford’s tragedy The Broken Heart will 
 be revived on the nth of this month at St. George’s Hall, 
 and Ben Jonson’s pastoral The Sad Shepherd , a fragment, 
 will be acted, for the first time, in the garden of Fulham 
 Palace, by invitation of the Right Rev. The Bishop of 
 London. 
 
 Since the Elizabethan Stage Society has come into existence 
 its performances have been often reported in the newspapers, 
 and special acknowledgment is due to the Press for the pub¬ 
 licity given to the Society’s Revivals. It may be necessary, 
 however, to comment shortly on one or two of the criticisms. 
 It has been asserted that our performances have not been 
 archaeologically consistent, that we have used footlights of 
 the electric light, and that the women’s parts have not been 
 played by boys. With regard to the lighting of our stage, 
 it must be remembered that the Elizabethan playhouse was 
 open to the sky, and that the performance began at three 
 o’clock. On winter afternoons, when the play was acted in 
 the palace or in the private theatre, candles were used as 
 footlights, or torches were held by servants. In the Society’s 
 Revivals, the object has been to give a diffused and subdued 
 light, somewhat equivalent to the candle power light of the 
 olden time, and thus to avoid that glare and distortion of 
 feature that comes from the modern method of illumination. 
 Whether this be done by candle or electric light is not much 
 to the moment, if the visible effect is the same. So also in 
 regard to the acting of the women’s parts by boys. The boy 
 who in Shakespeare’s time acted Desdemona wore the farthin. 
 
7 
 
 gale; in appearance he was a girl. His voice was like the 
 “ maiden’s organ shrill and sound ” and all was “ semblative 
 a woman’s part.”* That the boys were successful in the 
 delineation of female characters we learn from the Puritan, 
 
 Stephen Gosson, who complained that these youths put on 
 “ not only the apparel, but the gait, gestures, voices, passions 
 of woman,” and Ben Jonson has left on record that one of 
 these boys could dress better than forty women, and could 
 pass himself off unrecognised at a supper party as a lawyer’s 
 wife. However this may be, the fact remains that boy-actors 
 are no longer available for our stage because neither the 
 schoolmaster nor the choirmaster will give the necessary 
 permission. 
 
 The stage “ business,” as it is called, is naturally open to The limita- 
 criticism in the present revivals. A modern Shakespearian be than 
 
 representation can hardly have anything Elizabethan about it. stage. 
 
 Few stage movements now in vogue would be possible on a 
 platform limited to two entrances situated at the back of the stage, 
 while gallants, seated on stools, almost surrounded the actors. 
 
 Had we persisted in retaining all the original conditions, 
 our representations could have been little more than costume 
 recitals. In fact, Elizabethan acting must have begun with 
 the dialogue and ended with the dialogue, since there was 
 nothing of moment to the spectator but the story of the play, 
 which it was the duty of the dramatist to make complete in 
 every way by means of the dialogue. Were Burbage alive 
 to-day he would be not a little surprised to see the amount 
 of attention paid by the modern actor to stage “ business ” 
 to the neglect of the elocution that should give point to the 
 dialogue. 
 
 “ I’ll change my voice into a thousand tones The elocution. 
 
 To chain attention : ” 
 
 says Pretiosa in The Spanish Gipsy. This was the secret of 
 the actor’s power in the sixteenth century. 
 
 Passing on to notice the criticisms upon the Society’s 
 choice of plays, exception has been taken to Beaumont and 
 
 Twelfth Nighty Act i. Scene 4. 
 
The Coxcomb. Fletcher’s comedy The Coxcomb on account of the queer 
 casuistry of the main plot. But the underplot of the play, 
 which forms by far the larger portion of it, is pure besides 
 being interesting and poetical. Dr. Ward has pointed out, 
 that the story of the girl’s pathetic pilgrimage is contrived with 
 much dramatic skill, while the heroine is drawn with no less 
 beauty and delicacy than Shakespeare’s own Viola. The dra¬ 
 matist shews us the rude awakening of a young girl’s mind to 
 the selfishness of men, who make solemn promises of affection 
 one moment and forget them over their cups the next, who 
 marry rich old women and tempt the virtue of young ones. 
 These scenes, which are delineated with a firm touch of unerr¬ 
 ing sincerity, with a poet’s eye and a philosopher’s conviction, 
 bear, we can scarcely doubt, the stamp of Beaumont’s genius. 
 From the prologue written after his death, we may gather he 
 was justly proud of his share in this comedy, and it was con¬ 
 sidered worthy of revival in the Hall of the Inn, of which he 
 had been a member.* It was, therefore, a disappointment to 
 those responsible for the choice of this play to find that what 
 had been suppressed in the representation was dragged before 
 the public in the papers, while the poetical scenes were passed 
 over in silence ; one journal going so far as to say, that 
 the sentiment of the Viola episode was “ mawkish.” If so, 
 then virtue itself is mawkish, and the taste of the day on the 
 London stage has become similar to that of the Restoration 
 period, when our comic dramatists were guilty of a systematic 
 attempt to disparage purity in men and women. It was not 
 thus that Burbage viewed the dramatist’s calling, when in the 
 words of Webster he said : “ Shall we protest to the ladies 
 
 that their painting makes them angels ? or to my young gallant 
 that his expense in the brothel shall gain him reputation ? 
 No, Sir ; such vices as stand not accountable to law should be 
 cured as men heal tetters, by casting ink upon them.”+ Not 
 that unpleasant subjects, however moral in their aim, should 
 form the staple food of the playgoer. But a theatre at its 
 best must be comprehensive and deal with all phases of life. 
 Measure for Measure , All's Well , Troilus atid Cressida , are the 
 
 The Inner Temple. 
 
 f Induction to the Malcontent . 
 
9 
 
 work of the same master poet who wrote As You Like It , and 
 Twelfth Night . 
 
 It was often found, in these revivals of old plays, not merely 
 
 that omissions were necessary, but also some re-construction 
 
 of the play. The Elizabethan dramatists, with the exception Elizabethan 
 . Dramatists 
 
 of Shakespeare, were bad constructors of plots. 1 hey could i, a d construc- 
 
 conceive fine dramatic situations and write powerful scenes, tors l ' lots * 
 but there is often no method, no sequence, no directness of pur¬ 
 pose in the arrangement of the scenes, so that, interest aroused 
 in one scene is often dissipated in the next. This was no 
 great fault in times when the spectators were accustomed to 
 representations of Miracles , Moralities , and Histories devoid 
 of sequel in the narrative. But the effect of such drama 
 upon a modern audience is wearying and disappointing, nor 
 can actors be found of sufficient ability to sustain the specta¬ 
 tor’s attention in scenes that have no connection with the 
 main issue. But where re-arrangement of scenes is necessary, 
 the utmost precaution must be taken. “ To read a play,” 
 says Robert Louis Stevenson, “ is a knack, the fruit of much 
 knowledge and some imagination, comparable to that of 
 reading score the reader is apt to miss the proper point 
 of view. To guard against a mishap of this kind, it has 
 always been a rule of the Society to rehearse the whole play 
 as it was originally written, and only when the author’s point 
 of view is realised to make such omissions and revisions as 
 are absolutely essential. To give more perfect form to a 
 play is to increase its vitality ; and every work the Society 
 revives is given in the hope of its becoming part of a reper¬ 
 tory for future use. 
 
 In order to ensure a good cast for the Society s Revivals The Actors in 
 .... . . Revivals ; no 
 
 all restrictions are removed as to the choice of performers, restriction as 
 
 Professional help, when volunteered, is gratefully accepted, but tot h eirc h° ice - 
 is seldom available ; or the actors may belong to any Amateur 
 Club or Society ; no fee is demanded, and whenever possible, 
 the out of pocket expenses are paid. If the actors are be¬ 
 ginners they get free instruction in elocution to prepare the 
 voice for the platform. In return, it is expected that the 
 
10 
 
 Shakespearian 
 Revivals 
 repeated to 
 Students of the 
 High Schools. 
 
 actor shall uphold the principle of loyalty to the author, in so 
 far that no part shall be acted in any way detrimental to the 
 other parts, and that each actor shall feel individually re¬ 
 sponsible for keeping the proper balance of the play. This 
 was undoubtedly the spirit in which plays were acted in 
 Shakespeare’s time. It was necessary for the actor’s respon¬ 
 sibilities to reach beyond his own part, since even those who 
 took prominent parts used the cloak and beard to imper¬ 
 sonate other characters in the same play. The disguise must 
 have been very superficial ; but here again the imagination 
 of the audience supplied the deficiency. It has been the 
 work of some years to accustom a body of amateurs to think 
 more of a play than of their parts in it, but the task has 
 been facilitated by the nature of the work. Most of the plays 
 revived by the Society have never been seen by the present 
 generation. There have been no actor’s traditions to discuss. 
 It was only from a careful study of the play itself that any 
 idea of its interpretation could be formed. A difficult situa¬ 
 tion would be talked over generally to ensure that action 
 being used which was best for the play, not that which was 
 most convenient for any particular actor. By encouraging an 
 equal share in responsibility it has become possible to get an 
 even performance. 
 
 Although the Society has so far revived only nine plays, five 
 of which have been Shakespeare’s, it has given in all twenty-seven 
 representations. Twelfth Night, the Comedy of Errors, and The 
 Tempest were repeated at St. George’s Hall to students of the 
 High Schools, who assembled there to the number of six or 
 seven hundred, when the play was one they had prepared 
 for the Cambridge Local Examination. Text-books are not 
 sufficient for the study of Shakespeare. Much that is obscure 
 in the dialogue becomes intelligible when action is added. At 
 the revival of Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus, the appearance of 
 Lucifer with the seven Deadly Sins proved the most impressive 
 episode in the play, while on the printed page its significance 
 was never apparent. And it was the same in The Spanish Gipsy , 
 notably in the play scene, in which Clara becomes the central 
 figure of interest, although there is not a single allusion in 
 
the scene to indicate that she is even on the stage. Students 
 have therefore a practical advantage in seeing Shakespeare’s 
 plays given without mutilation. But unfortunately the price of Not remunera- 
 admission that is adequate to the means of a school girl does not tUC * 
 cover the cost of representation. 
 
 In this country there is a popular belief that everything Popular 
 
 connected with the playhouse should be self-supporting, an the^rama 3 
 
 opinion that is not shared by Mr. Ruskin. nor perhaps upheld sh ° uld be . 
 r J . . self-supporting 
 
 by any other country except our own, unless it be America. 
 
 If the Stage is capable, as Bacon says, “ of no small influence 
 
 both of discipline and corruption,”* then those who have at heart 
 
 the highest welfare of their country, must wish to see the drama 
 
 have a tendency that is educational and ethical. But in the 
 
 opinion of Mr. Frederic Harrison “ An intellectual theatre can Frederic 
 
 never be maintained by the money taken at the doors, till the t h e Drama. 
 
 culture and habits of our people are entirely transformed. 
 
 And the only way in which it can be maintained is by the 
 
 munificence of some citizen of great wealth, high culture, and 
 
 ardent public spirit.”f The talented author of John Inglesant, Op in ^ n 
 
 writing some years ago to the “Pall Mall Gazette,” said, “ If Shorthouse. 
 
 you ask to what I attribute the decadence of the English stage, 
 
 1 answer Vast theatres and mechanical apparatus. I have 
 
 sometimes thought that could there be maintained in London a 
 
 very small theatre in which all the 4 pit seats are stalls,’ and there 
 
 was no gallery or a very small high-price one, and in which no 
 
 mechanical apparatus was allowed excepting scene-shifting—and 
 
 that very seldom and occasional—that such a theatre might 
 
 become the school for a class of English actors who would 
 
 recall the past, and might perchance attract the highest genius to 
 
 write for the stage.” On these lines, to a great extent, the work 
 
 of the Elizabethan Stage Society is carried out, and without 
 
 assuming that it has accomplished, in an histrionic way, more than 
 
 the level of honest endeavour, yet at least it has revived upon the 
 
 stage plays of literary merit which could not have been seen 
 
 under any other circumstances. But there is much good work Much good 
 
 . . work yet to be 
 
 remaining to be done. Only five of Shakespeare’s plays have done. 
 
 De Augmentis , book II , chapter xiii. 
 
 t The “Forum,” October, 1893. 
 
I 2 
 
 at present been revived after the manner of his own time, 
 while none of Ben Jonson’s comedies have yet been attempted, 
 Beaumont and Fletcher’s Philaster and the latter dramatist’s 
 comedy The Loyal Subject , and The Two Noble Kinsmen , are 
 plays that our commentators pronounce to have exceptional 
 literary and dramatic qualities. And, while keeping alive past 
 models and traditions of excellence, the Society might also 
 endeavour to keep the past in touch with the present by the 
 representation of some modern English play of acknowledged 
 merit. 
 
 The Balance 
 Sheet. 
 
 ^■300 needed 
 as a reserve 
 fund against 
 future losses. 
 
 With regard to the finances, the Society may, I think, be 
 shown to have done its work economically. There have been, 
 including the initiatory performance of Measure for Measure 
 at the Royalty Theatre in 1893, nine plays revived of which five 
 were Shakespeare’s, making with the repetitions twenty-seven 
 representations ; and the total receipts have amounted to ^1,500, 
 while the expenditure has exceeded this amount by ^1,100. 
 But all of this is not actual loss, as we retain property in the 
 shape of costumes, valued at half that amount, and probably 
 worth more ; since each costume is historically accurate. 
 Then there was a loss of ^300 over the six performances 
 of Measure for Measure, so that the actual loss during the 
 remaining twenty-one performances is less than ^300. The 
 Society is most anxious to continue its labours for a fourth 
 season, and to do so must have at its disposal funds to meet the 
 inevitable deficiency. To raise the rate of subscription to the 
 members would not be prudent as it is already higher than many 
 of our literary supporters can afford to pay. If a sum of jfz°o 
 can be raised it will be placed in the hands of the Treasurer, 
 who will account to the donors for the way in which it is 
 used. 
 
 WILLIAM POEL. 
 
 Treasurer — Cecil F. J. Jennings, Esq., 
 
 27, Walbrook, E.C. 
 
 Secretary —Miss Brown, 
 
 32, Melrose Gardens, Hammersmith, W.