THE CHESTER MYSTERIES. 199 
feelings. At the Reformation the Puritan party openly 
denounced the ‘‘ Popish Plays,” as they usually called them, as 
altogether abominable—a profanation of the sacred Scriptures 
themselves. For, to the Puritans, every kind of dramatic 
representation partook of the nature of sin, and, as religious 
feeling in England became increasingly Puritan in character, 
we find traces of a constant and persevering endeavour to get 
rid of them altogether. 
Archdeacon Rogers concludes his account of them by saying: — 
ect “These Whitson Playes were played in Chester 
Anno Domini 1574, S" John Savage, Kt» being Mayor of 
Chester, . . . . and (he continues) we have all cause to 
power out our prayers before God, that neither wee, nor our 
posterities after us, may never see the like Abomination of Deso- 
lation, with such a Clowde of Ignorance to defyle with so highe 
a hand the sacred Scriptures of God, But of the mercy of God 
for the tyme of our Ignorance he regardes it not: and thus 
much in brief of the Whitsun Playes.”’ : 
“For,” he says, elsewhere, ‘‘ if I should here recite the whole 
storye of these playes it would be too tedious for this breviary ; 
as, also, they being nothing profitable to any use, except tt be to shew 
the Ignorance of our Forefathers, and to make us, their offspring, 
inexcusable before God, that have the true and sincere words of 
the Gospell, if we apprehende not the same in our life and 
practice to the eternal glorie of our God, and the salvation and 
comforte of our own soules.” 
But the “‘ Popish Plays” died hard. It would seem, from a 
list of the Mayors and Sheriffs of Chester, published by Daniel 
King, in 1656, that they were actually played again in 1575, but 
on the first Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, after Midsum- 
mer Day, instead of at Whitsuntide, and that Sir John Savage, 
who was still Mayor, caused them to be played in defiance of 
an inhibition from the Archbishop of York, and was, therefore, 
served by a ‘‘pursevant ”’ from York, the very same day that a 
new Mayor was elected, just as a Mr. Hankey had been, for the 
like contempt, when fe was Mayor in 1572. And ‘“‘ divers 
others of the Citizens and Players,’ says Daniel King, “ were 
troubled for the same matter.” 
It is clear that they were again acted in 1600, for we have a 
copy of the Banes, specially prepared for that occasion, in 
which it is admitted that the Plays do indeed contain 
‘* Some things not warranted by Holy Writ,” . . . 
but, 
‘** As all that see them shall most welcome be, 
So all that hear them wee most humbly praye 
Not to compare this matter or storye 
With the age or tyme wherein we presently staye, 
But in the tyme of ignorance, wherin we did stray. 
If the same be liking to the commons all, 
Then our desier is to satisfy, for that is all our games 
