V

THE STRANGE-CHAMBERLAIN COMPANY1

(i.e. 2, Lord Strange-4, Earl of Derby-6, Lord Chamberlain's Company.)

THIS Company, which I have called the StrangeChamberlain company, first appeared in 1576-7, at Exeter. It was the second company which Ferdinando Stanley, who was known as Lord Strange from 1572 to Sept. 25, 1593, had taken under his patronage. From 1576-7 to 1588 this company acted frequently in the provinces. There are no records of them in London or at Court during these years. Until 1588 we know nothing of the construction of the company. About October of that year, however, the company was probably thoroughly reorganised. Several of the principal actors of Lord Leicester's company, including Kemp, Bryan, and Pope, seem to have then joined it, and some of its actors been transferred to the old Leicester company. The evidence for this reorganisation is, that when we first hear certainly of the actors of Lord Strange's company in May, 1593, we find among them Will. Kemp, George Bryan, and Thomas Pope. Now, as we have seen,

2

1 This company had many patrons, cf. below, and also the companies of the Earl of Derby, Countess of Derby, and Lord Hunsdon. For other Lord Chamberlain's companies, cf. the Earl of Sussex's, the Lord Admiral's, and Lord Hunsdon's players.

2 Cf. above, 36.

3 Cf. below, 87-88.

these men were most likely members of Lord Leicester's company before and after their trip abroad in 1585-1587. In September, 1588, the Earl of Leicester died, and his company was forced to seek a new patron. This was a matter of utmost importance to the company, for a patron of great influence was necessary to assure their standing and privileges both in London and the provinces.1 In all probability, while the company's affairs were in this uncertain state, Kemp, Bryan, Pope, and possibly others, left the company for Lord Strange's men. This change probably took place about the end of September, 1588, after the Earl of Leicester's men returned to London from the provinces.2

1 J. T. Murray, English Dramatic Companies in the Towns outside of London, 1550-1600, Modern Philology, ii. 541.

2 This account of the change which took place in the Earl of Leicester's company and Lord Strange's company in 1588 differs materially from that of Mr. Fleay. He says 'In 1588, September 4, Leicester died, and immediately after Edward Alleyn formed a company under Lord Strange's patronage. As Strange's men included Pope, Kempe, Bryan, and Shakespeare, I have no doubt that they were, excluding Greene, substantially the same company as Leicester's men' (Stage, 82).

Now, in the first place, the reconstruction of these companies did not take place 'immediately' after Sept. 4. On Sept. 14, the Earl of Leicester's company was acting at Ipswich under their old name. At that time, being on tour, they probably had not heard of their patron's death. As soon as they did, they no doubt returned to London, and before long their reconstruction took place. I have consequently stated that the reconstruction occurred about the end of September, 1588. Secondly, as I have shown in my account of the Earl of Worcester's men (cf. above, 47-48), Edward Alleyn did not form a 'company under Lord Strange's patronage,' or even join such a company in Sept., 1588. Thirdly, Greene was not a member of Lord Leicester's company, and so could not have been transferred from that company to Lord Strange's in Sept., 1588 (cf. above, 34 n.). Finally, it is highly improbable that Leicester's company was transferred wholesale to the patronage of Lord Strange in 1588. Mr. Fleay knows nothing of a Lord Strange's company before 1588 (Stage, 82, 369), and so, upon finding several of Leicester's men before 1588 appearing as Strange's men after that date, he not unnaturally concludes that Leicester's company passed under

If, as is not improbable, Shakespeare had joined the Earl of Leicester's company during their visit to Stratford-on-Avon in 1587,' he was almost certainly one of the men who went over to Lord Strange's company in Sept., 1588, for with this company, under its various patrons, he was connected from 1594, the date of his first certain appearance as a member of any dramatic company, till his retirement from the stage.

2

4

3

In November, 1589, we hear of the new Lord Strange company in connection with the inhibition of players in the city and liberties of London on account of the anger of the authorities at the introduction of Martin Marprelate on the stage. There is no evidence that Lord Strange's men had represented Martin on the stage, as the Queen's men and Paul's boys seem to have done, or that they had directly offended either City or Court by acting matters of state and religion.' Nevertheless, on November 5, they were summoned before the Mayor and ordered to stop playing till further order. Probably relying on their innocence and the influence of their patron Lord Strange, they treated the Mayor's orders with contempt, and wente to the Crosse Keys, and played that afternoone.' Such

6

Lord Strange in 1588. But, as a matter of fact, there had been a company under the patronage of Ferdinando Stanley, Lord Strange, since 1576-7. Such being the case, it seems highly improbable that Lord Strange would in 1588 transfer his patronage from his own company to that of Lord Leicester. It is much more probable that both companies were reconstructed, some of Leicester's men joining Lord Strange's company, and the discards of this company going to the old Leicester company, which then sought a new patron.

1 Cf. above, 36.

2 Cf. below, lists of Strange-Chamberlain and King's players.

3 Cf. above, 13.

4 Cf. below, 326-327.

defiance was not tolerated, however, and they were again summoned before the Mayor, forbidden to play, and two of their number committed to the Counter.1

In order to make it impossible for players to introduce matters of state and religion' on the stage in future, the Privy Council, on November 12, wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Mayor, and the Master of the Revels, ordering that all future plays be licensed by a body of three persons, one nominated by the Archbishop, one by the Lord Mayor, and one by the Master of the Revels. They were to strike out all matter which might give offence.2

Lord Strange's company was also, no doubt, affected by the order of the Privy Council to the Lord Mayor on July 25, 1591, which directed that all plays on Sundays and Thursdays be suppressed. Plays were prohibited on Thursdays because they interfered with the bear-baitings, 'which are maintained for her Majesty's pleasure,' and were usually held on Thursday.3

The Lord Mayor's letter of Nov. 6, 1589, states that Lord Strange's men acted the day before at the Crosse Keys. Whether or not this was the usual playing-place of the company in London at this time we cannot be sure. Apart from this reference there is no definite evidence of where they played till they appeared at the Rose in 1592.*

1 Collier, i. 264-267.

3 Chalmers, Apology, 379-380.

2 Collier, i. 268-269.

On this evidence, i.e. the Lord Mayor's letter of Nov. 6, 1589, Fleay conjectures that Lord Strange's men played at the Cross Keys, 1589-91, and Lord Leicester's men 1586-8 (Stage, 88). His reason for supposing

Among the papers of Edward Alleyn at Dulwich College, Malone discovered a plot of the second part of Tarleton's Seven Deadly Sins.' It is necessary to discuss this plot somewhat in detail, because it contains a list of Lord Strange's players. This play was probably in imitation of the Italian Comedie al improviso, in which the actors made up the dialogue extempore, the story being outlined for them.2 The plot in this case consists of an Induction and three distinct stories or plays, each representing the effect of indulgence in one of the Deadly Sins, Envy, Sloth, and Lechery. The first part of the Seven Deadly Sins, which is lost, no doubt represented the effects of the remaining four Deadly Sins, Pride, Gluttony, Wrath, and Covetousness by similarly arranged appropriate stories or plays.

It has been conjectured that the two plays entitled Five Plays in One and Three Plays in One, prepared for Court performance at Christmas, 1584-5, that Lord Leicester's men played at the Cross Keys is, of course, because he supposed that company to have become Lord Strange's men in 1588 (cf. above, 74 n.). But as we have shown that before 1588 there existed a Lord Strange's as well as a Lord Leicester's company, and that the new Lord Strange's company of 1588 was made up from both companies, it is quite impossible to use this evidence to show which company occupied the Cross Keys before 1588. In his Drama (ii. 126) Mr. Fleay has changed his mind about Lord Strange's acting at the Cross Keys in 1590. In speaking of some stage references in An Almond for a Parrot, or Cuthbert's Curryknave's Alms, attributed to Nash, and conjecturally published in 1590, he says 'In p. 3 (Petheram's reprint) it is dedicated to "Cavalier Monsieur du Kempe, Jestmonger and Vicegerent-General to the Ghost of Dick Tarleton," the "curtain" of whose countenance is mentioned. This, I now think, indicates that Kempe, and therefore L. Strange's men were in 1590 acting at the Curtain, not at the Cross Keys, as I guessed in my History of the Stage, 86.'

1 Malone by Boswell, iii. 348-355; Collier, iii. 197-202.

It was only natural that Tarleton, who was famous for extemporal versifying, should contrive such a play.