licence to the Mayor and his court of Aldermen, in order to obtain permission to play. Naturally a note of this application, its result, and some details of the applicants were usually kept by the clerk of the court. Also any dispute which arose involving the players was brought before this court and duly recorded. Then, after a company had received permission to act, it was customary in many towns for them to give a free performance before the Mayor and Aldermen, and such citizens as chose to attend. For this performance they received a reward' out of the town coffers. A record of such payments was, of course, made in the town account books, and often, if the entering clerk loved to ply his quill, some details about the company were also noted. Sometimes when the town authorities refused to allow the players to perform, the latter referred them to their patron, to the Privy Council, or to the Master of the Revels, maintaining that no corporation could deny them the right to play if they were properly licensed. Such a situation often led to much correspondence between the various parties concerned, which has occasionally been preserved in the town letter-books.

Of the town records thus examined the most profitable were at Norwich, where the clerk of the Mayor's Court often noted the names of the actors who applied for leave to play, the dates of their licences, and other interesting details. Barnstaple, Bristol, Dover, Coventry, Exeter, Gloucester, Marlborough, Shrewsbury, Southampton, and York also

yielded much new information. As the materials thus collected increased it became evident that my original intention of dealing only with the provincial companies would have to be abandoned, and both the London and the provincial companies would have to be treated. In the case of the London companies this involved a complete reworking of the existing knowledge on the subject in the light of the new materials.

So far as the London sources are concerned, I can lay claim to no new find of importance except the Inner Temple MS., given in vol. ii. as Appendix F. This document Collier mentions, but neither he nor Mr. Fleay seems to have examined it carefully. At any rate they did not transcribe it into their works nor use the details in it. As these details are important this document is worth special notice.

The new material collected from the provincial records has considerably modified the history of almost every known dramatic company of the Elizabethan period, has brought to light a large number of new companies and many hitherto unknown actors, has given much new information about the methods of licensing companies, the relations of the London and provincial companies, the plays acted in the provinces, the places of acting, the attitude of the people toward the players, their earnings and their relation to their patrons. Of these details it has been impossible in this book to treat fully those referring more especially to the customs of the companies. This, I hope to do in a

subsequent work. However, undoubtedly to the general student of the Elizabethan drama and the literary historian of the period, who so far have had to account for the brilliant national drama which culminated in the supreme work of Shakespeare, by the demand of a few theatres and their supporters in London for plays, the fact of importance will be that not only London but most of the towns and villages of England were enthusiastic admirers of the drama and constantly demanding dramatic performances. How truly and how deeply national was the dramatic outburst of the Elizabethan period and why it was so national can only be fully understood when we consider how universally England was interested in the drama.

Incidentally, much of interest to genealogists will be found in these volumes, for concerning many of the patrons of the players, men of title and importance in their day, no word is to be found in the usual sources of genealogical information.

My method of arrangement in this work has been to treat the London companies in vol. i. and the provincial companies in vol. ii. In some cases it has been necessary for the sake of clearness to consider some of the provincial companies in vol. i. Under such circumstances I have endeavoured to avoid all possibility of confusion by cross references. When it was imperative to discuss at length, with elaborate show of evidence, some particular point in the history of a company I have thought it advisable to relegate such a discussion to the Appendices,

rather than to seriously interrupt the course of the narrative.

To the history of each company I have added lists of their Court and provincial performances. In the latter lists I have given in addition to the dates of the companies' visits to the towns, the names under which they appeared. Conjectural matter in these lists, as indeed throughout the book, is placed in square brackets.

In the Appendices will be found many of the documents I have collected for this study, the discussions of the special points already mentioned, and an essay on the relation of the plague to the closing of the London theatres. To this essay I wish to call special attention, as on the theory there advanced are based several of my conclusions about the history of the companies. Also, because appended to it are the London and provincial mortality tables of the plague from 1563 to 1642.

This work was originally begun several years ago as a college thesis at the suggestion of Professor George Pierce Baker of Harvard, to whom I am under great obligation not only for suggesting the subject to me, but for his most generous assistance and encouragement throughout its rather protracted course. To Professor George Lyman Kittredge of Harvard I am also deeply indebted for many kindnesses and much helpful advice at critical stages of my researches. To the Faculty and Corporation of Harvard, who, by appointing me Edward William Hooper Fellow, enabled me to devote an unfettered

year to the examination of the English town records, I wish to express my gratitude. From English scholars I have received many courtesies. Mr. Sidney Lee has been especially helpful, and his suggestions and those of Mr. Hubert Hall saved me from many pitfalls at the beginning of my work among the English records. To the officials in charge of the records of the various towns I have visited I am much in debt for their unfailing consideration and the way in which, often at considerable inconvenience to themselves, they assisted my investigations. Especially kind was Mr. J. C. Tingey, who gave much of his valuable time that my work in Norwich might be facilitated. The authorities of the British Museum, the Public Record Office, and the Inner Temple Library have placed me under deep obligation for privileges of research. I cannot omit from this mention of my indebtedness the name of Professor Archibald MacMechan of Dalhousie College, who, though he has had no direct share in this book, by his enthusiasm and insight first excited my interest in the Elizabethan drama.

In conclusion, may I ask those who use these volumes to bear with any errors they may come upon, for though I have striven for accuracy I fear that in such multiplicity of detail some slips have occurred.

BALLARDS SHAW, LIMPSFIELD,

SURREY, March 30, 1910.