FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223  
224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   >>   >|  
ntil March, 1613. On that date Rosseter agreed with Henslowe to join the Revels with the Lady Elizabeth's Men then acting at the Swan. The new organization, following the example of the King's Men, used Whitefriars as a winter, and the Swan as a summer, house. Thus for a time at least Whitefriars came under the management of Henslowe. Rosseter's lease of the building was to expire in the following year. He seems to have made plans--possibly with the assistance of Henslowe--to erect in Whitefriars a more suitable playhouse for the newly organized company; at least that is a plausible interpretation of the following curious entry in Sir George Buc's Office Book: "July 13, 1613, for a license to erect a new playhouse in Whitefriars, &c. L20."[537] But the new playhouse thus projected never was built, doubtless because of strong local opposition. Instead, Henslowe erected for the company a public playhouse on the Bankside, known as "The Hope." [Footnote 537: Malone, _Variorum_, III, 52.] In March, 1614, at the expiration of one year, Rosseter withdrew from his partnership with Henslowe. On December 25, 1614, his lease of the Whitefriars expired, and he was apparently unable to renew it. Thereupon he attempted to fit up a private playhouse in the district of Blackfriars, and on June 3, 1615, he actually secured a royal license to do so. But in this effort, too, he was foiled.[538] [Footnote 538: See the chapter on "Rosseter's Blackfriars." The documents concerned in this venture are printed in The Malone Society's _Collections_, I, 277.] After this we hear little or nothing of the Whitefriars Playhouse. Yet the building may occasionally have been used for dramatic purposes. Cunningham says: "The case of Trevill _v._ Woodford, in the Court of Requests, informs us that plays were performed at the Whitefriars Theatre as late as 1621; Sir Anthony Ashley, the then landlord of the house, entering the theatre in that year, and turning the players out of doors, on pretense that half a year's rent was yet unpaid to him."[539] I have not been able to examine this document. Neither Fleay nor Murray has found any trace of a company at Whitefriars after Rosseter's departure; hence for all practical purposes we may regard the Whitefriars Playhouse as having come to the end of its career in 1614. [Footnote 539: _The Shakespeare Society's Papers_, IV, 90. The document printed by Collier in _New Facts Regarding the Life of Sha
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223  
224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Whitefriars

 

Rosseter

 

playhouse

 

Henslowe

 

Footnote

 

company

 

building

 

license

 
Malone
 
document

purposes

 

Playhouse

 
Blackfriars
 

Society

 

printed

 

Theatre

 

performed

 
informs
 

Requests

 
Woodford

Collections

 
venture
 

concerned

 

chapter

 

documents

 

Cunningham

 

dramatic

 

occasionally

 

Trevill

 

regard


practical
 

departure

 
career
 

Shakespeare

 

Regarding

 

Collier

 

Papers

 

pretense

 

players

 

turning


Ashley

 

landlord

 

entering

 

theatre

 

Murray

 

Neither

 
unpaid
 

examine

 

Anthony

 

expired