PLAYHOUSE. 659 
performers, fat in an upper balcony, over what is now 
called the ftage-box. 
The pc-rfon who fpoke the Prologue was ufhered in by 
trumpets, and ufually wore a long black velvet cloak, 
which was confidered as bell fuited to a fupplicatory 
nddrefs. Of this cuftora, whatever might have been its 
origin, fome traces remained till very lately, a black coat 
having been, till within thefe few years, the conftant 
ftage-habiliment of our modern prologue-fpeakers. The 
drefs of the ancient prologue-fpeaker is (till retained in 
the play that is exhibited in Hamlet before the king and 
court of Denmark. The performers of male-chara&ers 
generally wore periwigs, which in the age of Shakefpeare 
were not in common ufe. It appears, from a paflage in 
Puttenham’s Art of Englifh Poefy, 1589, that vizards 
were on fome occafions ufed by the aftors of thofe days; 
and it may be inferred, from a fcene in one of Shake- 
fpeare’s comedies, that they were fometimes worn in his 
time by thofe who performed female charatters. Some of 
the female part of the audience likewife appeared in 
malks. The ftage-drefies, it is reafonable to fuppofe, 
were much more coftly at fome theatres than at others; 
yet the wardrobe of even the King’s Servants at the Globe 
and Blackfriars, was, we find, but fcantily furnilhed; and 
our author’s dramas derived very little aid from the 
fplendour of exhibition. 
It is well known, that in the time of Shakefpeare, and 
for many years afterwards, female characters were repre- 
fented by boys or young men. Andrew Pennycuike 
played the part of Matilda, in a tragedy of Davenport’s, 
in 1655; 3nd Mr. Kynafton afted feveral female parts 
even alter the Reftoration. Downes, a contemporary of 
his, affures us, “ that, being then very young, he made a 
complete ftage-beauty, performing his parts fo well, par¬ 
ticularly Arthiope and Aglaura, that it has fince been 
difputable among the judicious whether any woman that 
fucceeded him touched the audience fo fenfibly as he.” 
In this refpeft, the Italian theatre had the fuperiority over 
us. Women had already, in Venice and other parts of 
Italy, begun to play female charaflers; and, whether we 
are to attribute this innovation to the greater levity of 
manners which fanftioned it, or to more accurate concep¬ 
tions of dramatic propriety, there can be little difference 
of opinion refpefling the prodigious advantage it muft 
have contributed towards the perfection of the ftage. 
Coryate, the firft author in which we find mention of it, 
hefitates, however, in his approbation, as if doubtful whe¬ 
ther it were poffible that a woman could really play the 
parts of Defdemona and Juliet with as much tendernefs 
and truth as the male performers to whom they had for¬ 
merly been entrufted. “ Here I obferved certain thinges, 
that I never faw before; for I faw women afte, a thing 
that I have heard hath been fometimes ufed in London ; 
and they performed it with as good a grace, aftion, 
gefture, and whatfoever convenience for a player, as ever 
I faw any mafculine aftor.” He however calls the theatres 
of Venice “ beggarly and bafe, in comparifon of our 
(lately playhoufes in England; neither can their aCtors 
compare with us for apparell, (hows, and muficke.” Cory- 
ate’s Crudities, 1608. This facetious fellow died in 1617 ; 
fo that his having “ heard of female performers in Lon¬ 
don” proves that fome attempts of that kind muft have 
been made very early, though it is generally faid, that the 
firft woman who appeared on the Englifh ftage was Mrs. 
Coleman, who reprefented Ianthe in Davenant’s Siege of 
Rhodes, in 1656. 
The prompter (or book-holder, as he was fometimes 
called) and the property-man appear to have been regular 
appendages of our ancient theatres. No writer intimates, 
that in the time of Shakefpeare it was cuftomary to exhibit 
more than a fingle dramatic piece in one day. The 
“YorkfhireTragedy, or All’s One,” indeed, appears to have 
been one of four pieces that were reprefented on the fame 
day ; and Fletcher has alfo a piece called “ Four Plays in 
One;” but probably thefe were either exhibited on fome 
particular occafion, or were ineffectual efforts to introduce 
a newfpecies of amufement; for we do not find any other 
inftances of the fame kind. Had any (horter pieces been 
exhibited after the principal performance, fome of them 
probably would have been printed : but there are none 
extant of an earlier date than the time of the Reftoration. 
The practice, therefore, of exhibiting twedramas fucceflive- 
ly in the fame evening, we may be afl'ured was not efta- 
blifhed before that period. But, though the aud iences in 
the time of our author were not gratified by the reprefenta- 
tion of more than one drama in the fame day, the entertain¬ 
ment was diverfified, and the populace diverted, by vault¬ 
ing, tumbling, flight of hand, and morris-dancing, a mix¬ 
ture not much more heterogeneous than that with which 
we are daily prefented, a tragedy and a farce. 
The amufements of our anceftors, before the com¬ 
mencement of the play, were of various kinds, luch as 
reading, playing at cards, drinking ale, or fmoking to¬ 
bacco. It was a common practice to carry table-books to 
the theatre, and, either from curiofity, or enmity to the 
author, or fome other motive, to write down palfages of 
the play that was reprefented: and there is reafon to 
believe that the imperfeCt and mutilated copies of fome of 
Shakefpeare’s dramas, which are yet extant, were taken 
down in (hort-hand during the exhibition. At the end 
of the piece, the aCtors, in nobleman’s boufes and in 
taverns, where plays were frequently performed, prayed 
for the health and profperity of their patrons ; and in the 
public theatres for the king and queen. This prayer 
fometimes made part of the epilogue. Hence, probably, 
as Mr. Steevens has obferved, the addition of Vivant rex 
et regina to the modern play-bills. 
It is uncertain at what time the ufage of giving au¬ 
thors a benefit on the third day of the exhibition of their 
pieces commenced. Mr. Oldys, in one of his manufcripts, 
intimates that dramatic poets had anciently their benefit 
on the firft dag that a new play was reprefented ; a regu¬ 
lation which would have been very favourable to fome of 
the ephemeral productions of modern times. But for 
this there is not any fufficient authority. From Davenant, 
indeed, we learn, that in the latter part of the reign of 
queen Elizabeth, the poet had his benefit on the J'econd 
day. As it was a general practice in the time of Shake¬ 
fpeare to fell the copy of the play to the theatre; in fuch 
cafes an author probably derived no other advantage 
from his piece than what arofe from the fale of it. Some¬ 
times, however, he found it more beneficial to retain the 
copyright in his own hands; and, when he did fo, we 
may fuppofe he had a benefit. It is certain that the giv¬ 
ing authors the profit of the third exhibition of their 
play, which feems to have been the ufual mode during 
almoft the whole of the laft century, was an eftabliftied 
ciiftom in the year 1612 ; for Decker, in the Prologue to 
one of his comedies printed in that year, fpeaks of the 
“ poet’s third day.” The unfortunate Otway had no 
more than one benefit on the production of a new play; 
and this too, it feems, he was fometimes forced to mort¬ 
gage before the piece was aCted. Southerne was the firft 
dramatic writer who obtained the emoluments arifing 
from two reprefentations; and to Farquhar, in the year 
1700, the benefit of a third was granted. When an au¬ 
thor fold his piece to the (liarers or proprietors of a thea¬ 
tre, it remained for feveral years unpublifiied ; but, when 
that was not the cafe, he printed it for fale, to which many 
feem to have been induced, from an apprehenlion that an 
imperfeCt copy might be iifued from the prefs without 
their confent. The cuftomary price of the copy of a play 
in the time of Shakefpeare appears to have been twenty 
nobles, or 61 . 13s. 4-d. The play, when printed, was fold 
for fix pence ; and the ufual prefent from a patron in re¬ 
turn for a dedication was forty (hillings. On the firft 
day of exhibiting a new play, the prices of admifiion ap¬ 
pear to have been railed; and this feems to have been oc- 
cafionally praCtifed on the benefit-nights of authors to 
the end of the 17th century. The cuftom of palling a 
2 final 
