FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182  
183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   >>   >|  
very much handsomer building. As Howes, the continuer of Stow's _Annals_, writes, "it was new builded in far fairer manner than before"; or as John Taylor, the Water-Poet, puts it: As gold is better that's in fire tried, So is the Bankside _Globe_ that late was burn'd.[414] [Footnote 413: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 60.] [Footnote 414: _Works_ (1630), p. 31; The Spenser Society reprint, p. 515.] Naturally the cost of rebuilding exceeded the original estimate. Heminges tells us that on one share, or one-fourteenth, he was required to pay for "the re-edifying about the sum of L120."[415] This would indicate a total cost of "about" L1680. Heminges should know, for he was the business manager of the organization; and his truthfulness cannot be questioned. Since, however, the adjective "about," especially when multiplied by fourteen, leaves a generous margin of uncertainty, it is gratifying to have a specific statement from one of the sharers in 1635 that the owners had "been at the charge of L1400 in building of the said house upon the burning down of the former."[416] Heminges tells us that "he found that the re-edifying of the said playhouse would be a very great charge," and that he so "doubted what benefit would arise thereby" that he actually gave away half of one share "to Henry Condell, _gratis_."[417] But his fears were unfounded. We learn from Witter that after the rebuilding of the Globe the "yearly value" of a share was greater "by much" than it had been before.[418] [Footnote 415: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 61.] [Footnote 416: Halliwell-Phillipps, _Outlines_, I, 316. This evidence seems to me unimpeachable. I should add, however, that Mr. Wallace considers the estimate "excessive," and says that he has "other contemporary documents showing the cost was far less than L1400." (The London _Times_, October 2, 1909.)] [Footnote 417: Wallace, _Shakespeare and his London Associates_, p. 61. There is, I think, no truth in the statement made by the inaccurate annotator of the Phillipps copy of Stow's _Annals_, that the Globe was built "at the great charge of King James and many noblemen and others." (See _The Academy_, October 28, 1882, p. 314.) The Witter-Heminges documents sufficiently disprove that. We may well believe, however, that the King and his noblemen were interested in the new building, and encouraged the actors in many ways.] [
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182  
183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 

London

 

Wallace

 

Heminges

 
building
 

Associates

 

Shakespeare

 
charge
 

edifying

 
estimate

rebuilding

 
documents
 

statement

 

Witter

 
Phillipps
 

Annals

 

noblemen

 

October

 

unfounded

 

greater


Academy

 

yearly

 

gratis

 
Condell
 

disprove

 

sufficiently

 
Halliwell
 

contemporary

 

actors

 

showing


benefit

 

encouraged

 

evidence

 

Outlines

 
unimpeachable
 

annotator

 
inaccurate
 

excessive

 

interested

 
considers

multiplied

 

Spenser

 
Society
 

fourteenth

 
required
 

original

 
exceeded
 
reprint
 

Naturally

 
Bankside