178 CHILDREN OF THE CHAPEL AT BLACKFRIARS 
The question of maintaining a company and appareling them, A 
or dressing them out, was, as already noted,’ of first importance )) 
in enabling theatrical and financial success. The expense of 
maintenance was first. But as Elizabethan theatres had little 
scenery, they made up for the lack in appropriate apparel. As 
practically every play of the time represents people of station,— 
kings, queens, courtiers, lords, &c.,—the expense of apparel prob- — 
ably equaled or exceeded the keep of the company. A glance 
through Henslowe’s Diary shows the cost of a pair of silk stock- 
ings from 15 to 20 shillings; a doublet and hose, 3/. to 71.; a 
black satin suit, 5/. A single rich cloak cost 19/.,—almost half 
as much for only part of one costume as Evans was paying for- 
the annual rental of Blackfriars. The total value of a theatrical 
wardrobe probably exceeded the value of the given theatre itself.? 
It is quite certain from all ‘testimony that the Children’s ap- 
parel furnished by the Queen was of superior elegance. 
Since it was generally known who “maintained” the Boys aie 
thus “‘escoted” them, Shakespeare desiring merely to raise the 
notion suggestively above the mental horizon, accomplishes his 
object fully by simply asking the question and not allowing an 
answer other than that which comes at once to the mind of the 
audience. To this he adds the touch of deft diminution by the 
coinage of a word for the occasion which no one of the audience 
could fail to catch by the intonation, a slight gesture, or even the 
very punning nature of the word, indicating these lads were 
audience or some prominent person- 
age. Such local hits did not then 
and do not now appear in the 
printed play. See such a jest in 
the Induction to Cynthia's Revels; 
also the statement of its prevalence 
at Blackfriars made by Sly in the 
Induction to The Malcontent. To 
the same effect see The Guls Horne- 
Book (u. s., 133*). 
This practice grew worse under 
James I. Again and again the 
King was made the target. This 
was one of the chief causes for his 
putting a summary end to the 
Blackfriars Boys in 1608. (See doc- 
uments in later chapters.) 
1 Supra, 128-29. 
*There are no known exact val- 
uations of the wardrobes of public 
theatres. Henslowe’s Diary gives 
by inventories and purchases a gen- 
eral notion. The Diary of Thomas 
Platter (1599) says, “Die Comedien- 
spieler sindt beim  allerkdstlich- 
sten vnndt zierlichsten bekleidet.”— 
(See extracts by Prof. Binz in An- 
glia (1899), XXII, 459.) Even in 
1590 a player is represented by Rob- | 
ert Green as saying “his very share 
in playing apparel would not be sold 
for 2007.” (Quoted in Sidney Lee, 
op. cit., 1899, 198.) In 1608 the 
wardrobe of the Children of the 
King’s Revels at Whitefriars was 
valued at 400/.—apparently in that 
special case, however, too high. 
(See following chapters.) 
292 
lie 
ee 
