|
A LEISURELY examination as
to the progress of music and drama in the Scots capital is full of
interesting results. That those entrancing arts were looked upon as part
of the amenities, as well as the duties of life, is abundantly proved by
the rich harvest of material one can gather from a very casual gleaning
in the regions of historical survey. And what is perhaps the most
curious part of the study is to witness the constant struggle between
the natural instinct of the people to seek out their own forms of
pleasure, and the religious fanaticism which (what then stood for the
Nonconformist conscience) sought to stifle the popular aspiration in
that regard. In following out this study, the ethnographer will confirm
his experience of a similar process of evolution in the drama of the
other European races. Ever and anon he will discover the Church arising
in jealous zeal, protesting in no uncertain manner against the
popularity of its secular rival. Its beginnings may be traced to a
religious source, which, in its further period of development, cuts
adrift from ecclesiastical guidance, searching out a path native to its
fullest desires. One has only to regard the beginnings of French drama,
to find that what was once Scotland's ally pursued an almost similar
course in the exploitation of its dramatic art.
The early period of Scots history will
never, at any time, be found barren in evidence of the existence of the
drama in its primary form. We have already traced songs and ballads back
to the thirteenth century. James I. was not only a poet, but was also
well accomplished in the art of music, besides being no mean performer
on the harp. His Peblis to the Play (printed Edinburgh, 1548)
describes many quaint dances.
Wedderburne in his Cornplaynt of Scotland
(1549) speaks of a ring dance where "evyrie aid scheipyrd led his vyfe
and evyrie zong scheiperd led her quhomc he luffit best." Thirty
different dances are mentioned. " It was ane celest recreation to behold
the licht lopene, galmonding, stendling, backwart and fordwart, dansand
base dancis, panuans, galzardis, tardions, braulis and branglis, buffons,
vitht mony uthir lycht dancis, the quhilk are ower prolixit to be
rehersit." Amongst
the earliest records, we find that in the year 1456, James the Second
granted, under his great seal, to the Magistrates and community of the
city of Edinburgh and their successors for ever, the valley and low
ground lying betwixt the rock called Craigingalt in the cast, and the
commonway and passage on the west (known as Greenside) for all manner of
sports, a privilege which was fully taken advantage of in the years to
follow. The records as to the Town Pipers date as far back as August,
1487. They were supported by the wealthier classes, who each gave them "
one day's meat." In
the Acts of the Lord High Treasurer (Sir William Knowles, afterwards
slain at Flodden), according to the testimony of Tytler, we have many
quaint entries relating to payments made to various Scots harpers,
fiddlers, and English pipers who performed before the court of James the
Sixth. Here is one:
"July July Jo,
1489.—Item, to Inglish pyparis that came to the Castel yet, and playit
to the king xiij lib xiij s."
Another records (1488) a
payment
"to Patrick Johnson and
his fellows that playt a play to the King in Lithgow."
King James IV. was no
mean musician, if one may judge from the fact that on the occasion of
his first marriage he played on the "clavycordes and after on the lute."
When he met his bride (8th August, 1503),
the Princess Margaret, daughter of Henry the Seventh, who had come from
Dalkeith Castle, the citizens enhanced the welcome with a grand pageant.
In this were represented Paris and the three rival goddesses; Mercury,
the Virgin, and the angel Gabriel; the four Virtues; Justice treading on
Nero; Force bearing a pillar with Holfooernes beneath her, armed;
Temperance holding a horse's bit and treading on Epicurus, and Prudence
trampling over Sardanaplus. The tarbret players performed in the
procession as it moved from West Bow to Holyrood. At the marriage, in
the same year, the famous minstrels of Aberdeen had the honour of
singing, and were provided with silver badges bearing the arms of their
city. A company of English comedians (supposed to have been in the
service of Henry the Seventh), headed by John English, played "a
moralitie " before the King and Queen. Masques and tournaments followed,
in which the King appeared, entering the lists as the savage knight.
Indeed, His Majesty seems to have been quite dilettante in his tastes.
The poet, William Dunbar, author of The
Thistle and The Rose, written for this marriage, was the literary
Master of the Revels, and composed many plays which were performed
before the King and his courtiers, the company being sometimes
supplemented with many noble foreign guests. Dunbar was awarded the post
of Poet-Laureate. His work seems to have fallen into disfavour, for, in
1513, we find him complaining in one of his short pieces that, although
he still enjoyed the Royal favour, the King seemed to prefer the company
of jesters and light women. Perhaps the change was consequent upon the
fact that in his later works the Rev. William Dunbar devoted his
attention to religious subjects such as Divine and earthly love, and the
character of our Lord.
About this period the Robin Hood plays came
into vogue. An order, dated 1518, by the Earl of Arran, the Provost of
Edinburgh, refers to the making of sports and jocosities, and excuses
one Francis Bothwell from taking the part of Little John. The actors in
these plays were chosen from the most respected of the citizens, and
they could only be excused on payment of a fine.
Passion plays were a popular form of
entertainment at the pre-Reformation time, and upon the eve of the
Reformation they were supplemented by plays satirising the vices of the
ecclesiastics. In regard to this latter, there is a record of a summary
form of censorship having been employed. Kyllor, a monk of the
Blackfriars Monastery, was burned at the stake on Castle Hill for
certain free expressions employed in a play performed before the Court.
In the accounts of the Treasurer to James
the Fifth, under date 1530, appears an item that sounds somewhat
Scriptural: --
"Item, to the Egyptianis
that dansit before the King in Holyrud House, 40s."
Returning to the
Greenside, where the Robin Hood sports took place, Sir David Lyndsay's
Pleasant Satire of the Three Estates was presented, but, as it exposed
the lives of the Scottish clergy, by a Council of the Church, held at
the Black Priory in March, 1558, Sir David's books were ordered to be
burned by the public executioner.
Its first performance is said to have taken
place at Cupar in 1535, but of this no particulars have been preserved.
According to Wilson, the "Pleasant Satire was played in 1544 before the
Queen Regent, as is mentioned by Henry Charteris, the bookseller, who
sat patiently nine hours on the bank to witness the play. It so far
surpasses any efforts of contemporary English dramatists that it renders
the barrenness of the Scottish muse in this department afterwards the
more apparent." To the modern playgoer, the spectacle of a nine-hour
auditor must be that of a veritable hero, when so few nowadays can stand
the stress of a three-hour ordeal. In his Essay on The Drama, Scott
differs materially from Wilson with regard to date and place of
production of Lyndsay's Satire.
"The difference between
the Catholic and Reformed religion was fiercely disputed in some of
these dramas, and in Scotland a mortal blow was aimed at the
superstitions of the Roman Catholic Church by Sir David Lyndsay in a
Morality acted in 1539 and entitled The Satire of the Three Estaitis. In
a letter to Lord Priory Seal of England, 26th Jany., 1540, Sir William
Eurc (Envoy from Henry the Eighth) gives the following account of the
play. 'In the feast Epiphane at Lightgowe before the King Queene and the
whole connsaile, spirituall and temporall. In the first entres conies in
Solare (whose part was but to make mery, sing ballets with his fellowes,
and drink at the interluydes of the play) whoe showed firste to all the
audience the play to be played. Next came in a King, who passed to his
throne, having nae speche to the ende of the play, and then to ratify
and approve, as in Parliament, all things done by the rest of the
players, which represented The Three Estates. With him came his cortiers,
Placebo, Piethank, and Flatterye, and sic alike gard: One swering he was
the lustiest, starkeste, best proportionit, and most valeyant man that
ever was; and ane other swore he was the best with. long-bowe, cross
bowe and culvern and so fourth. Thairafter there came a man armed in
harness, with a swerde drawn in his hande, a Bishop, a Burges-Man and
Experience, cled like a Doctor, who set them all down on the deis under
the King. After them comes a Poor Man, who did go up and down the
scaffolde, making a hevie complainte that he was hereyet, throw the
courtiers taking his fcwe in one place, and his tackes in another;
wherethrough he had sceylcd his house, his wyfe and childrenc begging
thair bredc, and so of many thousands in Scotland; saying thair was no
remedy to be gotten, as he was neither acquainted with controulle nor
treasurer. And then ha looked to the King and said he was not King in
Scotland, fore there was ane other King in Scotland that hanged Johne
Armstrang, with his fellowes, Sym the Laird, and mony other mai, but he
had left ane thing undone. Then he made a long narracione of the
oppression of the poor, by the taking of the corsepresaunte beists, and
of the herrying of poor men by the consistoryc lave, and of many other
abusions of the Spiritualitie and Church. Then the Bishop raise and
rebuked him. Then the Man of Armes alledged the contraire and commanded
the poore man to go on. The poor man proceeds with a long list of the
Bishop's evil practices, the vices of the cloisters, etc: —This proved
by Experience who, from a New Testament, shows the office of a Bishop.
The Man of Armes and the Burges approve of all that was said against the
clergy, and alledge the expediency of a reform, with the consent of
Parliament. The Bishop dissents. The Man of Armes and Burges said they
were two and he but one, wherefore should have most effect. Thereafter
the King in the play,, ratified approved and confirmed all that was
rehearsed."
The following is one of
the speeches by the character, Correction:----
"Na realm, nor land, but
my support may stand
For I gar kings live into royalty.
To rich and poor I bear an equal hand
That they may live into their own degree.
Quhare I am not, is no tranquility.
By me traitors and tyrants are put down,
Quha thinks no shame of their iniquity
Till they be punished by me, Correction.
Quhat is ane King? Naught but ane officer
To cause his lieges live in equity
And under God, to be ane punisher
Of trespassours against His majesty."
At the Tennis Court,
Holyrood (situate on the opposite side of the Water Gate), in the year
1541 there was supposed to have been enacted a "litill farsche and play
maid be William Lauder," which was produced before the Queen Regent,
Mary of Guise, on which occasion the author was presented with two
silver cups. But
the good men of Parliament, ever solicitous of the morals of their
people, saw in the Robin Hood plays and May Queen games an increasing
menace to national righteousness, and so in 1555 we find them passing an
Act of the following tenor: —
"Item. It is statute and ordanit that in all
times cumrning na maner of persoun be chosin Robert Hude nor Lytill
Johne Abbot Unressoun Quenis of Maij, nor utherwyse nouther in Burgh nor
to landwart in ony tyme to cum. And gif ony Provest Baillies counsall
and communitie chosis sic ane Personage as Robert Hude Lytill John
Abbotis of unressoun or Quenis of Maij within Burgh the chefaris of fic
sail tyne thair fredom-e for the space of fyve yeiris and utherwyse
salbe punist at the Quenis grace will and the acceptar of sicklyke
office salbe banist furth of the Realme. And gif ony sic persounis sic
as Robert Hude Little Johne Abbotis of Unressoun Quenis of Maij beis
chosin outwith Burgh and uthers landwart townis the chefaris sail pay to
our Soverane Lady x pundis and thair persounis put in waird thair to
remaine during the Quenis grace plesoure. And gif ony wemen or uthers
about simmer treis singand maids perturbation to the Quenis lieges in
the passage throw Burrowis and uthers landwart townis the wemen
perturbatouris for skafric of money or utherwyse salbe takin handellit
and put upon the Cukstulis of everie Burgh or towne."
Despite the passing of this Act, which the
public seemed to respect in a mild way, as subsequent events proved, the
Parliament had scotched the snake, not killed it. In the month of May,
1561, an Edinburgh mob became so enraged at the disappointment they had
received in " making a Robin Hood " on the Greenside, that they rose in
mutiny, seized the City gates, committed various robberies upon
strangers, and, upon one of the ringleaders being condemned by the
Magistrates to be hung, they forced open the jail, set at liberty the
condemned man, and broke up the gibbet which had been erected for him at
the Cross. The culprit was one, James Dillon, a cordiner's servant, who
had committed the heinous crime of being chosen Robin Hood and Lord of
Inobedience. Following upon this action, the crowd assaulted the
Magistrates as they sat in the Council Chamber, compelling them to seek
the refuge of the Tolbooth, where they renewed their attack, battering
the doors down and pouring in stones through the windows. An appeal was
made to the Deacons of the Corporation to appease the mob, but they
refused to intervene, making the laconic answer, " They will be
Magistrates alone, let them rule the multitudes alone." That to the
Constable of the Castle was also in vain, for the Magistrates were "held
in strict confinement until they had issued the following proclamation
idemnifying the rioters, all of which is set forth by the old city
chronicler:---
"That the said provost
and baillies sail remit to the said craftschilder all actioun, cryme and
offens that thai had committit aganes thame in any tyme bygane and band
and oblast thame never to pursue thame thairfor, and als commandit thair
masters to resave thame agane in thair services as thai did befoir. And
this being proclamit at the Mercat Croce, thai scailit, and the said
provest and baillies come furth of the same tolbouyth."
When Queen Mary landed at
Leith on 19th August, 1561, she was welcomed by a grand pageant. Along
the road from Leith to Restalrig, and thence to Holyrood, banners and
bands of music lined the route. It scarcely met with the entire
approbation of the Queen, for, according to the old chronicler, she
sighed and remarked to one of her attendants, "They mean well and we
must be content." The ceremony which followed in the evening met with
just as little approval, according to the. story of one of her French
servants: "There came under her windows five or six hundreds citizens
who gave her a concert of the vilest fiddles and little rebecs, which
are as bad as they can be in that country, and accompanied them with
singing psalms, but so wretchedly out of tune and concord that nothing
can be worse. Ah! what melody it was. What a lullaby for the nightI"
On the 1st September, the City gave a
banquet in her honour, for which the sum of 4,000 merks (£225 5s. 6d.)
was raised by means of a tax upon the citizens. Amongst the masques
which were performed was one shewing the doom of Korah, Dathan and
Abiram, set forth by some of the more zealous Reformers as a picture
lesson for the Queen's instruction and guidance in the paths of virtue.
The efforts of the Reformers were by no
means confined to such measures. In 1563 the Assembly took the press
under its direction, prohibiting all books concerning religion to be
published till the printers had obtained, not only a license from the
Magistrates, but also the approbation of the Kirk. The King's printer,
too, had to receive assistance in the matter of a salary of £5o a year
from the Church.
Stringent as the measures were that had been taken for the moral health
of the people, the Court hardly believed in the maxim that what was
sauce for the goose was equally suitable for the other members of the
family, for we read of a Latin masque entitled The Pomp of the Gods
being performed in July, 1567. Birrell, in his Diary, under date 17th
January, 1568, also speaks of "a play maid by Robert Sempill " which was
played before the Lord Regent and the nobility, and the author paid £66
13s. 4d. It is conjectured that the play was a comedy entitled Philotus,
a copy of which has been reprinted by the Bannatyne Club. The entire
story was said to have been borrowed from a work of Barnaby Rich,
published under the title of Riche, his Farewell to Militarie
profession: containing very pleasant Discourses fit for a peacable time.
This tale is the second in the series.
Philotus, a very rich and very old man, is enamoured of Emelia, the
beauteous daughter of Alberto, but is unsuccessful in winning her
regard. The old suitor makes an appeal to her father, who gives his
consent, but is unable to command that of his daughter. To this enter
FIavius, Emelia's lover. Disguised as a young main, Emelia Ieaves her
father's house. Meantime Philerno, her brother, returns after a long
absence, and is mistaken for his sister. Falling in with his sister's
plan, he consents to marry Philotus, who commits his bride to the care
of his daughter, Brisilla. This couple find each other's company so
agreeable that, after certain invocations, Philerno pretends to be
metamorphosed into a man. The marriage of Philotus is celebrated, and
Philerno, "fearing to be discovered, maketh a brawling that same night
with Philotus, abuseth him vyllie and to colour the matter the better
agreeth with" a courtesan to go to bed with Philotus. Flavius, secretly
married to Emelia, becoming suspicious as to her real identity,
dismisses her as an evil spirit who had assumed an earthly shape. She
returns to her father's house and is there met by Philotus: the one
complains of her husband, the other of his wife, and a comic situation
is thus produced. The mystery being explained, Emelia returns to Flavius
and Brisilla is married to Philerno. The play is not divided into acts
or scenes, but follows out the easy style of eight-lined verse. [As
Batnaby Rich's book was not published till 1581, the fact of this being
the play produced is flatly contradicted. The first edition of P4ilotur
was not printed in Edinburgh till 1603. It was upon this story that
Shakespeare founded his Twelth Night, which rust have been produced late
in the year 1600, or early in the following year.]
In the department of itinerant performers,
Calderwood mentions that, in 1571, one named Kircaldy danced before the
cock of the steeple at St. Giles. Against such, Parliament levelled
their Act, dated 1574 (James VI., 873).
"It is declared that all
ydill pfonis gazing about in ony countre of this realme using subtile
crafty and unlauchfull playis, As juglecrie fast and loose and sic
utheris. And all minstrallis sangstaris and taill tellaris not avowit in
speciall suice be sum of the lordis of Pliament or greit barronis or be
the heid burrowis and cities for comoun menstrallis . . . salbe takin
adjugeit demed and puneist as strang beggaris and vagaboundis."
In the same year, the
question arose before the General Assembly on August i ith, when a
Commission was appointed to enquire into the violation of the Sabbath
day by profane plays. The following year they prohibited all dramas
founded upon Scripture. The censors were the Kirk Session, before which
body the piece was first read. One stipulation was that "Nae swearing,
banning, nor nae scurrility shall be spoken, which would be a scandal to
our religion, and for an evil example to others." An interesting sequel
to this decree will be found in the Assembly's proceedings for 23rd
October, 1576.
"Anent the supplicatioun
given in be the toun of Dumferling for liberty to be granted them to
play upon a Sunday aftcrnoone a certain play which is not made upon the
Canonical parts of the Scriptures. The Assemblic refuses to give
libertie to the Bailzie of Dunfermling to play upon a Sunday afternoone
a certain play quhilk is not made upon the Canonicall parts of the
Scripture, in respect of the act of the Assemblies past in the contrair,
exhorting the Bailzie of Dunfermling presenter of the bill to request-
to keep the ordinance of the Assemblie."
A further attempt upon
the liberty of the subject was tried in 1578, when the General Assembly,
by an Act, of April 24th, concluded
"That an Universall Fast
shall be keeped, thro' all the Kirks of this realm . . . and that this
Act be intimat to the King his Majestic and Counsell, and his Grace and
Counsell be humbly required to discharge be proclamation all kinds of
insolent playes as Robin Hood, King of May, and such like in all persons
as well scholers (bairns at the schools) as others, under such paines as
they shall think good."
The punishment for
vagabonds and beggars was detention in the stocks. The culprit was tried
at the Assizes six days afterwards, and, if found guilty, scourged and
burned through the gristle of the right ear with "ane het Irne of the
Compasse of ane inche about": all this being done "to the greit pleasure
of almichtie God and commoun weill of the realme." If discovered a
second time within sixty days, the miscreant was to be hung as a thief
(Act 1579 James VI.). There is a cheerful tone about this law that must
have afforded infinite comfort to the soul of the judge whose duty it
was to pronounce sentence.
That the Kirk had some difficulty in
persuading its own officials to obey their commands with regard to
plays, is suggested by a question which arose at the July session of the
Assembly, 1579.
"Q. What aught to be done
to sick persons, that, after admonition, will passe to May playis; and
speciallie elders and deacons and uthers quha beares office in the Kirk?
"Responsis. They aught not to be admittit to
the sacrament without satisfaction: in speciall elders and deacons."
|
