6
For a Little While
Observers of plays who recorded explicit stage directions specified what they saw and heard and did not conventionally establish theatrical reasons for their observations: they simply recorded delivered action or inaction. There were moments when personages were observed to be motionless and/or silent. If used with theatrical awareness, these states could be powerful dramatic tools in establishing theatrical significance. In John Rastell’s Calisto and Melebea (1525), a stage direction states: ‘Hic melebea certo tempore non loquitur sed uultu lamentabili respicit’ (Here Melebea shall not speak for a certain amount of time but gazes with a sorrowful face).1 Although this stage direction appears to have been devised by Rastell, it contains qualities of both observed action and authorial purpose. The observed quality may be seen in the recorded action of Melebea not speaking for a certain amount of time. The observation is described in this way because there are no observable reference points to fix the time interval. The description appears to be an observer’s way of describing his observed response. His description of Melebea’s ‘sorrowful face’ appears to have been witnessed as such, although this could equally be a requirement established by Rastell to accompany Melebea’s ‘pensyfe and sore abasshyd’ response on hearing of a disturbing dream from her father. The stage direction requires a thoughtful response from her but does not offer any means of determining how long this interval of time should last. If this stage direction had been directed at a player, then a stronger indication of the proposed time interval might have been desirable or necessary for the player to act upon. In the Chester Wrightes Playe of the Nativity (Play 6), a stage direction records that Mary, Joseph and presumably the two midwives are ‘Tunc paululum acquiescunt’ (Then for a little while they are quiet).2 It is during this period of quiet that Christ is born. Mary breaks the silence with her cry: ‘A, Joseph, tydinges aright!/ I have a sonne, a sweete wight’.3 This description of quietness for a ‘little while’ is exactly how such a non-technical observation was clearly perceived and subsequently written. It does not describe how the players determined, or should determine, the length of a ‘little while’. The same point can be made in respect of another stage direction in the Chester Waterleaders and Drawers of Dee’s Noyes Fludd (Play 3) that records leaving ‘a little space’:
Then Noe shall shutt the windowe of the arke, and for a little space within the bordes hee shalbe scylent; and afterwarde openinge the windowe and lookinge rownde about sayinge4
A stage direction in the N.town play of Noah (Play 4) records: ‘Hic emittat coruum et, parum expectans, iterum dicat’ (Here he lets go a crow and waiting for a small [short] interval is to say).5 Like other stage directions that observe the need for the passing of broadly described intervals of time, this one is meant to didactically represent the time taken for the bird to return from its lengthy journey. The actual length of time of the ‘small [short] interval’ is determined by the created theatrical context and its developing purpose. As an artificial bird it is presumably seen to fly around the stage area, possibly in a pattern, before returning to the ark. Its flight might also be established by an understood convention of the kind found in the little-known, at least in Western Europe, Persian Passion Play where travelling or travelled distance is frequently recorded by ‘Circling the stage several times’ in order ‘to represent the distance between two places, and thus a change of scene, for instance from the plain of Karbalā to Damascus’. The convention of walking around to simulate the time and distance travelled is an overt and accepted practice in Iran where conventions such as ‘Circling the stage several times’ to indicate long trips are mutually understood features of ‘agreed pretence’.6 This practice of ‘Circling the stage several times’ appears to be the same or a similar convention to those used in the Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek, the N.town plays of The Visit to Elizabeth and the Betrayal, Mary Magdalen and the plays of the Cornish Ordinalia.
A similar indeterminate use of time is recorded in the Bewnans Ke: The Life of St Kea when a stage direction states: ‘Recedunt tortores et faciunt pausacionem brevem’7 (the torturers withdraw and make a brief pause). Two identical stage directions in The Castle of Perseverance similarly describe actions of unspecified lengths: ‘Tunc pugnabunt diu’ (Then they shall fight for a long time).8 These stage directions that describe timed action in the broadest of terms do so because the observer does not possess the means or purpose of measuring or comparing the amount of time to be theatrically precise. Recorded lengths of time are described as impressions by the observers. The descriptions do not present contextually informed theatrical awareness. Observations are intended to record action or inaction and are aimed at the viewers of the manuscript and not the players.
Silence and Stillness
In the Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi of the Cornish Ordinalia, where Jesus is interrogated by Herod, two stage directions record the theatrically powerful use of silence: ‘et jhc [Jesus Christi] semper tacebat [tacebit]’ (And Jesus shall still remain silent) and ‘et semper ihc tacebat [tacebit] et non respondebat [respondebit] ei nullum uerbum’ (And he shall still be silent, and shall answer him not a word).9 This response from Jesus is contained in Luke 23:9 and used here to provoke anger from Herod. A stage direction in the N.town play of The Death of Judas; The Trials Before Pilate and Herod (Play 30) records the same technique from Jesus in respect of Herod: ‘And here Jesus xal not speke no word to þe Herowde’.10 The same silent approach is used by Jesus when he is brought before Cayphas and Pilate, respectively, in the Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi of the Cornish Ordinalia. When Jesus is brought before Cayphas by the First Executioner, he says in exasperation: ‘He will not, by God’s faith,/Notwithstanding all we do to him,/ Speak to us’, and a stage direction records ‘et tunc ducent Jhesum in angulo s.[scilicet] in platea inter eos’ (And then he shall lead Jesus into a corner, viz. in the place between them).11 What constitutes ‘a corner’ within a performance in the round is unclear, although the sense suggests that Jesus is taken aside to be addressed by Cayphas.12 Similarly, when Pilate attempts to exercise his power over Jesus, another stage direction records:
et tunc pilatus magis timet et iet iterum cum eo in pretorio et dicit ei unde es tu et ihc [Jhesus Christus] tacebit et dicit ei pilatus iterum
[And then Pilate fears the more, and he shall go again with him into the hall, and he says to him, ‘Whence art thou?’ and Jesus shall be silent; and Pilate says to him again]13
In addition to the descriptions of passing periods of time and silence, there are occasions where the need for stillness is recorded, leaving other personages to create focus through their contrasting behaviour. In the N.town play The Entry into Jerusalem (Play 26), a stage direction states: ‘Here Cryst rydyth out of þe place and he wyl, and Petyr and Johan abydyn stylle; and at þe last, whan þei haue don þer prechyng, þei mete with Jesu’.14 Although the requirement for Petyr and Johan to ‘abyden stylle’ seems clear, the stage direction as a whole presents some confusion. The stage direction occurs in the N.town MS within an interpolated leaf (fol. 143) enclosed in an existing quire. According to Peter Meredith, ‘The scribe for some reason thought that it was wrong for the Entry into Jerusalem to occur without the previous episode of the fetching of the ass and foal’. Meredith questions the record, ‘here cryst rydyth out of þe place And he wyl’, as a potential option and concludes that this phrase does not refer to an option because of John’s lines at ll. 276–77 where he says ‘to þe cete-ward fast drawyth he/me semyth he is ny at þe gate’. Clearly, Christ does not have the option of being at ‘þe gate’. Meredith argues that this apparent option is a botched scribal attempt to conceal the unnecessary presence of ‘Christ in the acting-area some sixty lines or so before he needed him there’. If Meredith is correct in this assessment, then the stage direction is a scribal intervention in order to maintain sense of the Biblical narrative. Even so, there is clearly some scribal understanding of the observation or practice of waiting or ‘abydyn stylle’. The practice of remaining still presumably consisted of some sort of theatrically active stillness that was not simply a form of inert stillness. Such a distinction is a traditional feature of Kabuki theatre in Japan. Stillness may be exhibited through poses, held for a moment or two, in which facial and bodily positions are fixed by customary practice. The positions are intended as a physical means of expressing a personage’s inner emotional states. The strongest of these characteristic poses is referred to as the mie:
These poses are taken at moments of intense emotion and the moments at which they occur are more or less fixed by tradition. Anger is often a good excuse for a mie, but many less dramatic moments may lead to such posing, including surprise, curiosity, resolution and the like.15
What appears to be the principal difference between the Japanese custom and medieval English theatre practice is concerned with the nature of the stillness. The Japanese forms of stillness are deliberately projected towards the audience. There is neither evidence of the English use of stillness as a projected practice nor a contained version kept within the narrative or the player’s reality. Even so, there is evidence of the visible presence of personages, who are not currently involved in the action of the scene, waiting for their cues to action.
Relative stillness is also recorded in the Chester Blacksmythes Playe of the Purification (Play 11), where a stage direction records: ‘Tunc Simeon sedebit expectans consolationem; de alio loco [procull] [procul] a templo [dicet Maria]:’ (Then Simeon shall sit, looking for consolation; from another location far from the temple Mary shall speak).16 The phrase ‘another location far from the temple’ presumably refers to the other end of the pageant carriage, with Simeon possibly gazing outwards.17 The same still posture might be applied to Saulus in The Conversion of St. Paul, where a stage direction observes: ‘Her Saule ys in contemplacyon’.18 Another example of this sort of condition may be seen in the Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi of the Cornish Ordinalia where a stage direction records: ‘tunc recedit ab eis et orabit ihc [Jhesus Christi] [et ipsi dormient]’ (Then Jesus withdraws from them, and he shall pray; [and they shall sleep]).19 Jesus retains the focus of the scene as he prays while James, Thomas and John sleep. The act of sleeping as recorded by this stage direction is by a later hand. However, accuracy of this added condition is supported by an original stage direction that states: ‘et tunc veniet ad discipulos tres et inveniet eos dormientes et dixit eis’ (And then he shall come to the three disciples, and shall find them sleeping; and he said to them).20
Waiting
Related to the representation of time passing and the manipulation of silence and stillness are the practice and convention of ‘waiting’, a convention of which I have written elsewhere.21 In the Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek, the convention of waiting is prominently described in explicit stage directions where they record the need for the outgoing speaker to wait in the same place from which he last spoke. Even though these stage directions are written in a later hand, their content is still determined by observation of earlier performance. The stage directions do not always identify named locations within the playing space. This appears to be the case because the observer who determined the content of the stage direction did not necessarily know the name of the location—if, indeed, there was one. This being the case, what means did the observer have at his disposal of identifying a specific location within the playing place? He could only identify such places relative to the known positions of personages or other fixtures, and the place from which he last spoke was one such method of recording the action.
Playing in a theatre-in-the-round inevitably makes for both the mutable creation and dispersal of narrative locations and the fluid passage between them. There are four such stage directions in Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek: ‘Expectat episcopus poly ibidem’ (The Bishop of Pola waits in the same place); ‘comes rohani trancit domum et meriadocus expectat ibidem’ (The Earl of Rohan passes home and Meriasek waits in the same place); ‘ascendit et expectat ibidem’ (He [the Dean] goes up and waits in the same place); ‘tranceat ad eclesiam beate marie. genuflectit et expectat ibidem’ (Let her [the Woman] pass to the church of the Blessed Mary. She kneels and waits in the same place).22 Additionally, in the Chester Taylors Playe of the Ascension (Play 20), a similar stage direction records: ‘Jesus autem pausans eodem loco dicat’ (Then Jesus, pausing in the same place, is to say).23 Two stage directions in the Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi of the Cornish Ordinalia record similar action: ‘judas scar. expectat ibi’ (Judas Iscariot waits there) and ‘Judas stans expectat cum principe Anna’ (Judas standing, waits with Prince Annas).24 There are other stage directions in Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek that explicitly require personages to wait in the open: ‘[trancit calo et tortores expectant in placea’ (The drudge servant goes off and the torturers wait in the place) and ‘expectant in placea’ (They [the Outlaws] wait in the place).25
In each of the stage directions cited above from Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek and the Cornish Ordinalia, personages are observed to wait in positions that are visible to the audience. But how is the spectator expected to regard or relate to the waiting personage? Clearly, he is seen and known to be outside the current action conducted by others. Karl Hase, in his Miracle Plays and Sacred Dramas: A Historical Survey, refers to the waiting German player by acknowledging: ‘Each actor was supposed to be invisible, till he received his cue and stood forth’.26 If the player is out of action, why is it permissible for him to be seen? Why has he not left the playing space altogether or disappeared from view of the audience? Answers to these questions relate to the proscenium-arch-conditioned presumption that personages not involved in the action should not be seen. It is clearly not a problematic issue in the medieval English theatre for spectators to witness a personage who remains in the playing space and yet is not involved in the action. Rather than this being considered a negative, ‘second-best’ condition, it seems more likely that this is a deliberate arrangement organised as a known staging convention. However, it does seem that a clear visual distinction needs to be made between playing and waiting. Most of these stage directions not only record the need for players to ‘wait’ but they also stipulate that the personage waits in ‘the same place’. These observations of waiting ‘in the same place’ are the means by which the observer records stage moves that are relative to others. The observer does not have more defined or technical means of describing stage movement or its location in the playing place. Descriptions of ‘waiting in the same place’ establish fixed points in the staging that are only relevant to him and those who witnessed the same performance. And yet, the observer has completed the formality of recording what he has seen.
In staging convention terms, the action of ‘waiting’ does not seem conceptually dissimilar to the practice of being ‘at home’, where the personage may also be deemed to be out of action even though he may be visible to the audience (see Chapter 5). The requirement of ‘waiting’ may take place as determined by (a) the narrative or (b) a staging convention. ‘Waiting’ as determined by the narrative does not make reference to playing conditions, whereas ‘waiting’ as conditioned by staging conventions consciously locates the action in the playing space. An example of narrative-determined waiting is contained in the N.town play of The Parliament of Heaven; The Salutation and Conception (Play 11): ‘Here þe aungel makyth a lytyl restynge and Mary beholdyth hym, and þe aungel seyth’.27 Another such example is contained in Candlemes Day and the Kyllyng of þe Children of Israelle where a stage direction states: ‘Here the knyghtes shalle departe from Herowdes to Israelle, and Watkyn shalle abyde, seyng thus to Herodes’.28 ‘Waiting’, as determined by a staging convention, is recorded in the Gwreans An Bys: The Creacon of the World where a stage direction records: ‘Let the serpent wait in the plain’.29
Observation of Emotion
The range of emotional characteristics played by players as recorded by observers is heavily weighted towards weeping, mourning, expressions of sorrow, sobbing and wailing. There are other stage directions that widen this scope into observations of ‘wonderment’, ‘smiling’, ‘groaning’, ‘anger’, ‘laughter’ and ‘astonishment’.30 Simple but critical ways that players are required ‘to look’ are recorded by three stage directions in the Gwreans An Bys: The Creation of the World. These stage directions may be regarded as transitional ones in that they both record action and direct it:
Eva loketh upon Adam very strangly and speketh [not] eny thing;
when ye father speakethe to Cayme tell hem looke downe;
Let not cayme looke in the father is face but look down & quake.31
Of these three stage directions, the first one is clearly based on an observation and is recorded as such. The description of Eve looking ‘strangly’ (strangely) is based on an observed interpretation that approximates to her response. It does not state with any precision how she looks or what constitutes the ‘look’. Nor does the record that Eva should look upon Adam ‘very strangely’ amount to the kind of instruction that might be delivered to a player. The second and third stage directions are clearly ones to determine player action, although they are not addressed to the player. They are addressed to someone who has some influence upon the player. The second direction is clearly addressed to someone with influence on the player who plays ‘Caym’ to ‘tell hem looke downe’. ‘Looking down’ is intended to signify fear and humility. A stage direction in the N.town play of The Betrayal (Play 28) may also record a ‘looking down’ action when it describes: ‘Here Jesus goth to Betany-ward, and his dyscipulys folwyng with sad contenawns, Jesus seyng’.32 In Mary Magdalen, a stage direction records: ‘Here xal þe mament tremyll and quake’.33 Similar responses to the quaking Mahound are recorded in the Bewnans Ke: The Life of St Kea, where a stage direction records that an advisor to Teudar ‘trembles’ when he talks frankly to the tyrant Teudar.34 Another stage direction explains something of the nature of Teudar and why the advisor behaves as he does: ‘Hic Teutharus ascendit ad modum tyranni’ (Here Teudar goes up in the manner of a tyrant).35 In the same collection, a stage direction records that the legates fall to their knees in terror: ‘Hic sedebit Arthurus. Omnes famili stabunt. Tunc legati cadunt ad genua perterriti’ (Here Arthur will sit down. All his household will remain standing. Then the legates fall to their knees in terror).36 The reason for this behaviour from the legates relates to the characteristics outlined in another stage direction that states ‘ARTHURUS stando ad modum tyranni’ (ARTHUR standing in the manner of a tyrant).37 These stage directions that describe the manner in which Teudar and Arthur stand make it clear that the role of a tyrant was clearly known to the audience.
In the Chester Drapers Playe of Adam Cain (Play 2), three stage directions describe the ways in which Adam and Cain are required to demonstrate their emotions: ‘Then Adam shall take the fruite and eate therof, and in weepinge manner shall saye’; ‘Adam shall speake mourninglye’; ‘Cayne speaketh mornefullye’.38 It should be remembered, of course, that the principal Chester MSS are dated from 1591 to 1607 and, thus, are subject to the changed orientation of intended recipients of stage directions. There are several occasions when players at Chester are recorded as having performed in a ‘weepinge manner’. Perhaps unsurprisingly, ‘weeping’ is the most frequently recorded demonstration of emotion expressed in all medieval English stage directions. Again, at Chester, in the Glovers Playe of The Blind Man and Lazarus (Play 13), a stage direction records: ‘Tunc pariter juxta sepulchrum sedebunt plorantes, et Jesus procul sit’ (Then they [Maria and Martha] shall sit side by side beside the sepulchre weeping, and Jesus is to be far off).39 In the Chester Irenmongers Playe of the Passion (Play 16A), a stage direction records: ‘Tunc venit Maria lachrimans’ (Then Mary comes in weeping).40 Further, in the Chester Skynners Playe of the Resurrection (Play 18), the three Marys weep: ‘Tunc tradet eis pecuniam, ac discedunt; et venient [mulieres] plorantes ac Jesum querentes’ (Then he shall give them money, and they go. And the women shall come weeping and seeking Jesus).41
In a non-theatrical context, the act of weeping might be regarded as a relatively private and low-key response, whereas theatrical weeping, particularly in a representationally didactic and outdoor context, requires expansiveness of the kind developed by the use of sound through sobbing, lamentation or wailing. Such is the implied development in a stage direction in Christ’s Resurrection upon Peter’s arrival: ‘Tunc exeunt hee tres Marie. Petrus intrat, flens amare’ (Then the three Marys go out. Peter enters, weeping bitterly).42 Further development of crying through the dimension of sound is contained in a stage direction in the N.town play of The Nativity (Play 15): ‘Hic tangit Salomee Mari[am] et, cum arescerit manus eius, vlulando et quasi flendo dicit’ (Here Salome touches Mary and when her hand will have dried up wailing and almost crying she says).43 In Christ’s Burial, the sound of ‘off’-stage lamentation is heard by Joseph: ‘Peace! Now harkyn, I pray you, stand stille!/ Me think I here lamentation’, and a stage direction records: ‘Off the wepinge of the thre Maries’.44 At the point of this stage direction, the three Marys are heard but not seen. Thus, this is a most important stage direction, not only in consideration of the evolution of the stage direction, but also in the instigation of the related theatrical concept of being ‘off stage’.45 At this point in the MS, two further cancelled lines record: ‘Man, harkyn how Mavdleyn with þe Maris ijo/ Wepis and wringes thair handes os thay goo’.46 The ‘wringing of hands’ is not only a cultural symbol of mourning but is also a purposeful theatrical symbol and gesture for the same response. After Adam and Eve have been driven out of Paradise in The Norwich Grocers’ Play, a stage direction observes: ‘And so thei xall syng, walkyng together about the place, wryngyng [mournful] ther handes’.47 In the N.town play of Satan and Pilate’s Wife; The Second Trial Before Pilate (Play 31), further hand-wringing is recorded:
And quan he is skorgyd þei put upon hym a cloth of sylk, and settyn hym on a stol, and puttyn a kroune of þornys on hese hed with forkys; and þe Jewys knelyng to Cryst, takyng hym a septer, and skornyng hym; and þan þei xul pullyn of þe purpyl cloth and don on ageyn his owyn clothis, and leyn þe crosse in hese necke to beryn’t, and drawyn hym forth with ropys. And þan xal come to women wepyng and with here handys wryngyn, seying þus.48
In Caxton’s translation of the Foure Sonnes of Aymon (1490), it is recorded that ‘There had you seen many a gowne torne and broken/ many a hande wrongen, and many heres of the hede pulled, soo that it was pyte & wonder for to see’.49 The same frantic action is recorded in a stage direction in the Cornish Gwreans An Bys: The Creacon of the World when Eve despairs over the death of Abel: ‘Eva is sorrowfulle tereth her haire & falleth downe vpon adam. he comforteth her’.50 In the Chester Corvisors Playe of Mary Magdalene; To Jerusalem; Judas (Play 14), a stage direction records: ‘Tunc Jesus sedebat, et omnes cum eo, et veniet Maria Magdalena cum alabastro unguenti, et lamentando dicat’ (Then Jesus shall sit, and all the rest with him; and Mary Magdalen shall come with a box of ointment and is to say in a sorrowing fashion).51 Similarly, in the Chester Skynners Playe of the Resurrection (Play 18), Peter speaks in the same manner: ‘Tunc Petrus lamentando dicat:’ (Then Peter shall speak in a sorrowing fashion).52
Observed Vocal Range
There are some simple observations of the ways in which personages speak that identify ‘low’ voices, as recorded in the Chester Paynters Playe of The Shepherds (Play 7): ‘Secundus Pastor vocat submissa voce’ (The second Shepherd calls in a low voice).53 An elaborate stage direction in the Ordinalia de Origine Mundi of the Cornish Ordinalia records:
Et tunc orent murmurabunt quasi dicendo orationes et veniet maximilla in templo et sedet super stuppam et vestes ejus concremantur a stuppa et ipsa clamat dicens.
[And then they shall pray, and speak low as if saying prayers; and Maximilla shall come into the temple, and she sits upon some tinder; and her clothes are set on fire by the tinder; and she cries out, saying.]54
It is the Bishop and others who speak low in the temple, and Maximilla who is set on fire by sitting on ‘the wood of Christ’. She is later stoned to death. Although these descriptions of personages speaking in ‘low voices’ may be accurate in describing the effect, they do not refer to the theatrical purpose of their enactment. In the case of the Chester Paynters Playe of The Shepherds, the low voice is humorously used at the expense of one of the shepherds, who is ‘deaf and may not well hear us’. Again, it is the effect of the low voices that are described ‘as if saying prayers’.
The theatrical power of personages speaking in unison, or chorus, is recorded in some stage directions, although the term ‘chorus’ does not occur. The Greek tragic function of the chorus commenting on the action is not involved here, nor is the late sixteenth-century function of the chorus as prologue. The medieval use of speaking in chorus occurs as a theatrical means of emphasising and reinforcing some aspect of the narrative. In the Chester Fishmongers Playe of Pentecost (Play 21), the apostles demonstrate their unanimity when a stage direction states ‘Tunc respondent omnes (all speake together): [Then all answer together]’.55 They say together: ‘Wee assenten us theretyll,/ for this ys the beste waye’. By this statement they each agree to take on responsibility for one article of faith in the creation of the Creed. Their agreement in chorus strengthens the dramatic and theatrical force of their action. A stage direction in The playe of this tretye. or meditation off the buryall of criste and mowrnyng þerat [Christ’s Burial], records: ‘Thre Mariye sais all togider in a voce’.56 What they say is: ‘O most dolorose day! O tym of gretist sorowe!’. The choric value is to strengthen the power of their sorrow. A similar treatment is recorded in Her Begynnes His Resurrection on Pas[c]he daye at Morn [Christ’s Resurrection], where a stage direction states: ‘Three Maryes togider sais’.57 This is the point at which the angel asks the three Marys, ‘Whom seke ye, women sanctifiede?’, and the Marys reply in chorus ‘Jhesus of Nazareth crucified,/ The redemer of mankind’. The three Marys are again organised to deliver a choric response by a stage direction when they encounter Christ on the cross in Mary Magdalen: ‘Al þe Maryys wyth on [one] woyce sey þis folowyng’.58 Their response is: ‘Heylle, gloryows crosse! þou baryst þat Lord on hye’.
A theatrical advancement on the organised and strategic use of choric responses may be seen in the deliberate use of a group of voices recorded in a stage direction in the N.town play of The Death of Judas; The Trials Before Pilate and Herod (Play 30), where Annas attempts to convince Pilate of Jesus’s malign influence, and all the Jews and Doctors agree with him by shouting: ‘Et clamabunt “Ȝa! Ȝa! Ȝa!” ’ (And all cry ‘Yea, yea, yea’).59 A similar group response occurs in the N.town play of Satan and Pilate’s Wife; The Second Trial Before Pilate (Play 31), where Pilate seeks to absolve himself of the proposed death of Jesus and is warned by the Primus Doctor that, if he does not accept responsibility for Jesus’s crucifixion, ‘þe blod of hym mut ben on vs,/ And on oure chyldyr aftyr vs’. All are in agreement with the Primus Doctor’s statement as recorded by a stage direction: ‘Et clamabunt, Ȝa! Ȝa! Ȝa! Þan Pylat goth aȝen to Jesu and bryng[yth] hym, þus seyng’.60 Later in the same play, in response to Pilate’s question ‘And what sey ȝe of Jesu of Nazareth?’, the Secundus Doctor replies ‘Sere, we wyl all þat he xal be put upon þe crosse’, and a stage direction records: ‘Et clamabunt omnes voce magna, dicentes, “Ȝa! Ȝa! Ȝa!” ’ (And they shall all cry with a loud voice saying: ‘Yea, yea, yea!’).61 These three stage directions create the appearance of having been established by the same observer of the plays in earlier action. The attempts to capture and describe the action of the assembled personages is common to each stage direction and reflective of the plays in production. The contents of the stage directions imply understanding of the theatrical value of group clamour. In the case of these N.town stage directions, it seems that the observer is not a civic official but an individual connected with the players who is able to recognise the importance of these group responses to produce vibrant theatre. These actions demonstrate knowledge of constructional and presentational theatrical criteria that is to be found throughout stage directions in the N.town plays.
Simultaneous Action
More complicated observed action may be seen in stage directions that record the use of simultaneous action. In the Candlemes Day and the Kyllyng of þe Children of Israelle, a stage direction records the use of concurrent action: ‘Here shal Symeon bere Jhesu in his armys, goyng a procession rounde aboute þe tempille, and al þis wyle þe virgynis synge “Nunc dimittis” and whan þat is don, Symeon seyth’.62 In this instance, the time taken to process around the temple is determined by the length of time taken to sing ‘Nunc Dimittis’. The purpose of the procession is to worship the newly born Jesus. Further simultaneous action is recorded in the Candlemes Day and the Kyllyng of þe Children of Israelle: ‘Here the knyghtes and Watkyn walke abought the place tylle Mary and Joseph be conveid into Egipt’.63 This example is typical of those stage directions that determine simultaneous action through the description of one recorded activity and its relationship to another.64 Frequently, the two activities exist in transition; one activity is programmed to take over from the other during a timed sequence. Whether the theatrical value of this kind of dramatic/production device is understood by the observer is not confirmed, but it is clearly understood by the author. John Skelton demonstrates such understanding in a stage direction in his Magnyfycence: ‘Hic intrat Good Hope, fugientibus Dyspare and Myschefe; repente Good Hope surripiat illi gladium, et dicat’ (Here enters Good Hope while Despair and Mischief are running away. Let Good Hope suddenly snatch the sword from him and say).65 Similar authorial understanding of the theatrical value of simultaneous action is confirmed by a stage direction in the N.town play of The Purification (Play 19): ‘Nunc dimittis seruum tuum, Domine, et cetera The psalme songyn every vers, and þerqwyl Symeon pleyth with þe child; and qwhan þe psalme is endyd he seyth’.66
Some of the most theatrically authoritative stage directions in the medieval English canon occur in the N.town plays. By ‘theatrically authoritative’ I mean the demonstration of understanding of the way that theatre works, can work or should work in its given context. Whether this knowledge and experience come about from the observer’s witness, the author’s pen or someone practised in production is unclear, although the last possibility appears to be the most likely one, given the authority of the writer’s theatrical insight. It is also unclear as to whether the observer and the author are the same person. However, it is clear that more than one observer/author was responsible for creating stage directions in the N.town plays. Most of the theatrically knowledgeable stage directions occur in the groups of plays known as Passion Play I (Plays 26–28) and Passion Play II (Plays 29–37).
In the Meantime
In the N.town play of The Conspiracy (Play 26), clear understanding of the theatrical value of simultaneous action is demonstrated through use of the phrase ‘in þe menetyme’ in a stage direction that states:
Here goth þe masangere forth; and in þe menetyme Cayphas shewyth himself in his skafhald arayd lych to Annas, savyng his tabbard xal be red furryd with white; ij doctorys with hym arayd with pellys aftyr þe old gyse and furryd cappys on here hedys; Cayphas þus seyng’.67
Shortly after this stage direction comes another that states: ‘Here comyth be masangere to Cayphas; and in þe menetyme Rewfyn and Lyon schewyn hem in þe place in ray tabardys furryd, and ray hodys abouth here neckys furryd; þe masangere seyng’.68 Further, in the same play, another stage direction states: ‘Here Annas goth down to mete with Cayphas, and in þe menetyme þus seyng’.69 In The Last Supper; The Conspiracy with Judas (Play 27), a stage direction states:
Here Cryst enteryth into þe hous with his disciplis and ete þe paschal lomb; and in þe menetyme þe cownsel hous befornseyd xal sodeynly onclose schewyng þe buschopys, prestys and jewgys syttyng in here astat lych as it were a convocacyon; Annas seyng þus.70
Again, in the N.town play of The Betrayal (Play 28), a stage direction states:
Here þe Jewys lede Cryst outh of þe place with gret cry and noyse, some drawyng Cryst forward, and some bakward, and so ledyng forth with here weponys alofte and lytys brennyng. And in þe menetyme, Marye Magdalene xal rennyn to oure Lady and telle here of oure Lordys takyng, þus seyng.71
A stage direction in the N.town play of Herod; The Trial Before Annas and Cayphas (Play 29) outlines the timing of simultaneous actions:
What tyme þat processyon is enteryd into þe place and þe Herowdys takyn his schaffalde, and Pylat, and Annas and Cayphas here schaffaldys also, þan [xal] come þer an exposytour in doctorys wede, þus seyng.72
In the N. town play of Satan and Pilate’s Wife; The Second Trial Before Pilate (Play 31), a stage direction describes the timed sequence from Satan’s entrance through the dressing of Jesus to the completion of a speech by Pylat’s wife:
Here enteryth Satan into þe place in þe most orryble wyse. And qwyl þat he pleyth, þei xal don on Jesus clothis and ouyrest a whyte clothe, and ledyn hym abowth þe place, and þan to Pylat be þe tyme þat hese wyf hath pleyd.73
In the N.town play of The Procession to Calvary; The Crucifixion (Play 32), simultaneous action of the setting up of the crosses, the Jews casting dice and the arrival of the Marys is recorded in a stage direction:
Here þe sympyl men xul settyn up þese ij crossys and hangyn up þe thevys be þe armys. And þerwhylys xal þe Jewys cast dyce for his clothis, and fytyn and stryvyn. And in þe menetyme xal oure Lady come with iij Maryes with here and Sen Johan with hem, settyng hem down asyde afore þe cros, oure Lady swuonyng and mornyng, and [be] leysere seyng.74
All these N.town stage directions record the use of simultaneous action as determined by the terms and phrases ‘in þe menetyme’, ‘What tyme þat processyon is enteryd’, ‘qwyl þat he pleyth’, ‘þerqwyl’ and ‘be þe tyme þat hese wyf hath pleyd’. Not only do the phrases synthesise transition, but they also establish evidence of audience capacity to respond to different points of focus at the same time.75 Recognition of this audience ability to contend with split focus is supported by the convention of ‘waiting’, as discussed earlier, where both the action and the waiting occur simultaneously. The same point may be made in relation to action in the place witnessed at the same time as any action from a personage ‘at home’. In addition, these stage directions demonstrate the appropriate theatrical awareness of the observer. He recognises the importance of simultaneous action as a means of converting scenes or focus without loss of impetus or pace.
Suddenness
The action of something happening ‘suddenly’ is an inherently dramatic characteristic of theatre. The impact of the occurrence can be organised to be witnessed by any or all of the players, personages or spectators. The eventful moment generally happens unexpectedly and is contrived in such a way as to condition immediate after-effects. Such consequence may be seen in the preamble to the death of Syrus in Mary Magdalen when a stage direction records: ‘her avoydyt Syrus sodenly, and than sayyng Lazarus’.76 Although ‘avoydyng’ clearly refers to a withdrawal from focus (see Chapter 5) without a necessary removal from the playing place, the effect of ‘suddenness’ in qualifying the ‘avoydyng’ does, in this case, appear to refer to a withdrawal from the playing place and, possibly, to an unseen position. Syrus is given two stanzas to build up to his removal from the place where he then ‘takyt hys deth’. In the N.town play of The Last Supper; The Conspiracy with Judas (Play 27), recorded ‘suddenness’ is stipulated in order to make an impact with an appearance created by drawing a curtain:
Here the buschopys partyn in þe place, and eche of hem takyn here leve be contenawns, resortyng eche man to his place with here meny, to make redy to take Cryst. And þan xal þe place þer Cryst is in sodeynly vnclose rownd abowtyn shewyng Cryst syttyng at þe table and hese dyscypulis ech in ere degrẻ; Cryst þus seyng.77
A similar sudden action created by drawing a curtain occurs in the N.town play of Satan and Pilate’s Wife; The Second Trial Before Pilate (Play 31):
Here xal þe devyl gon to Pylatys wyf, þe corteyn drawyn as she lyth in bedde; and he xal no dene make, but she xal sone after þat he is come in makyn a rewly noyse, comyng and rennyng of þe schaffald, and here shert and here kyrtyl in here hand. And sche xal come beforn Pylat leke a mad woman, seyng þus.78
Another stage direction in the N.town play of The Assumption of Mary (Play 41) records the sudden appearance of St John: ‘Hic subito apparet Sanctus Johannes Euangelista ante portam Marie’ (Here St John the Evangelist suddenly appears before the door of Mary).79 Whether this ‘door’ is a physical door or a door space is unclear, although the latter possibility seems more likely. A similar interpretation may be applied to a slightly later stage direction in the same play when it says: ‘Hic subito omnes apostoli congregentur ante port[a]m mira[n]tes’ (Here suddenly all the apostles are gathered before the door astonished).80 The thrust of these two stage directions suggests a hidden position for St John and the Apostles from which they can suddenly appear. Further sudden action is recorded in a stage direction in the N.town play of The Betrayal (Play 28): ‘Here all þe Jewys falle sodeynly to þe erde whan þei here Cryst speke; and quan [he] byddyth hem rysyn, þei rysyn aȝen, Cryst þus seyng’.81
The instantaneousness of requirements for ‘suddenness’ is also to be seen in stage directions that require personages to ‘vanish’. In the Chester Glovers play of The Blind Man and Lazarus (Play 13), a stage direction records: ‘Tunc colligunt lapides et statim evanescit Jesus’ (Then they gather stones, and Jesus suddenly vanishes).82 The purpose of gathering stones was to enable the Jews to stone Jesus to death. His disappearance was therefore his escape.83 Two further stage directions in the Chester Saddlers Play of Emmaus (Play 19) record the act of Jesus vanishing: ‘Tunc Jesus evanescit’ (Then Jesus vanishes) and ‘Tunc evanescit Jesus, et ibunt discipuli Bethaniae; et obviantes Thomas [Thome] dicat Petrus:’ (Then Jesus vanishes, and the disciples shall go to Bethany; and, meeting Thomas, Peter is to say).84 Yet another play in the N.town plays, Cleophas and Luke; The Appearance to Thomas (Play 38), records the sudden disappearance of Jesus: ‘Hic subito discedat Christus ab oculis eorum’ (Here suddenly Christ disappears from before their eyes).85 This stage direction is quite specific in determining that the disappearance is from the eyes of Cleophas and Luke. Although not stated, each of the above stage directions may be seen to record Jesus’s disappearance from other personages. In The Conversion of St. Paul, a stage direction records a recognised disappearance from personages and spectators: ‘Here þei shal vanyshe away wyth a fyrye flame, and a tempest’.86
Transitions
The majority of stage directions to which reference is made throughout this work have been ones identified as records provided by observers of earlier performances. Not only have these observers been largely anonymous, but so too have the authors. Occasionally, a scribe’s identity is known.87 However, it is unlikely that the scribe performed the role of the observer. After 1560, stage directions take on the purpose, function, nature and theatrical orientation of more contemporary stage directions of the kind that we easily recognise in plays of today. Such changes as these did not take place instantly after 1560. Indeed, some subtle changes may be seen to have taken place before 1560. In the anonymously written Welth and Helth (1558), three stage directions refer to the stage movement of Helth, Libertie and Ilwyll: ‘Helth turneth hym’, ‘Liberty turneth him’ and ‘will turneth’.88 It is not clear whether these stage directions are intended as records from observations or instructions to the players, although interpretation may be weighted towards the former possibility. They certainly refer to stage responses from the personages that may have been previously witnessed. The ambiguity presented by these stage directions appears to mark a transitional development in their purpose and function. Other stage directions that may be considered as transitional ones appeared as early as 1515–23, in John Skelton’s Magnyfycence. Robert Lee Ramsay, in his edition of Skelton’s play, regards it as one that belongs ‘to that essentially intermediate form of the drama known as the morality; the form which dominated the period of transition from the medieval religious to the modern secular drama’.89 In categorising this play, Ramsay does not do so with reference to its stage directions. This is understandable, given that he considers
No part of the play has suffered more at the hands of the printers than the stage directions. Those which are given are about half in English, half in Latin, the latter barbarously transcribed and frequently defying emendation; and a great many of the most necessary directions have been omitted.90
When an editor such as Ramsay declares that ‘a great many of the most necessary directions have been omitted’, he clearly refers to the kind that I have designated here as post-1560 stage directions that are intended to direct directors and players. He does not refer to the function of the pre-1560 stage direction that simply records previous action as prescribed in this work. There are strong impulses from later editors of texts to implant their own stage directions as (a) a means of understanding the text, (b) misguided attempts to direct subsequent performances of the text or (c) inherent criticism of the lack of theatrical skill or the ineptitude of earlier writers. These imposed stage directions are often additions based on unacknowledged assumptions related to modern theatrical criteria and practice. Richard Southern also considers the printers are at fault:
but what is worth noting is that Skelton was a pretty accomplished Latinist and anything he had to say by means of a relatively unusual Latin phrase is possibly of significance and worth translating […] if Skelton was a good Latinist then we must blame the printer for certain misprints that make the meaning sometimes very hard indeed to interpret.91
Even so, stage directions in the play may be seen to break new ground through an authorial decision to provide directions to players. Magnyfycence is given a letter by Fancy, and a stage direction records:
Hic faciat tanquam legeret litteras tacite. Interim superueniat cantando Counterfet Countenaunce suspenso gradu, qui uiso Magnyfycence sensim retrocedat; at tempus post pusillum rursum accedat Counterfet Countenaunce prospectando et uocitando a longe; et Fansy animat silentium cum manu.
[Here let him make as if he were reading the letter silently. Meanwhile let Counterfeit Countenance come on singing, who on seeing Magnificence should softly retreat on tiptoe but at the right moment, after a while, let Counterfeit Countenance approach again looking out and calling from a distance, and Fancy motions silence with his hand.]92
This stage direction is not one that simply records observed action; it promotes direction for players. Magnyfycence is instructed to create the appearance of reading the letter, ‘silently’; on sighting Magnyfycence, Counterfeit Countenance is instructed to ‘softly retreat on tiptoe’; on his re-entry ‘at the right moment’, Counterfeit Countenance should call ‘from a distance’, and Fancy is instructed to motion for silence with his hand. These requirements go beyond recorded descriptions of action into directions for action. Players are instructed in the ways they should conduct their performances. This stage direction marks a transitional change in function from one that solely describes action to one that directs players. The moment when Counterfeit Countenance sees and recognises Magnificence is a clear directorial requirement. A similar moment of recognition is recorded in another stage direction when Counterfeit Countenance witnesses Crafty Conveyance:
Hic ingrediatur Fansy properanter cum Crafty Conueyaunce, cum famine multo adinuicem garrulantes; tandem uiso Counterfet Countenaunce dicat Crafty Conueyaunce
[Here let Fancy come in hurriedly with Crafty Conveyance, gabbling many things together; finally on seeing Counterfeit Countenance let Crafty Conveyance say.]93
In many ways, the stage directions in Magnyfycence mark the start of a transitional phase into the articulation of stage directions to direct players. There are a number of features and conditions that delineate stage directions in Magnyfycence as different from earlier examples. Indeed, Richard Southern stated that: ‘There are many points about them that make them worth considering on their own, and to read them through in order gives a not inadequate introduction to the whole action of the play’.94 For instance, Skelton directs the manner in which the player is to play the moment. All these stage directions contain colourful descriptions of the manner in which the player should play. Stage directions in earlier English plays do not consistently record use of such colourful action as that promoted in Skelton’s Magnyfycence, where the player is instructed how to play:
Hic ingrediatur Cloked Colusyon, cum elato aspectu, deorsum et sursum ambulando.
[Here let Cloaked Collusion come in with a haughty expression, strolling up and down.]
Et faciat tanquam exuat beretum ironice.
[And let him make as if he doffs his cap ironically.]
Here Foly maketh semblaunt to take a lowse from Crafty Conueyaunce showlder.
Here Foly maketh semblaunt to take money of Crafty Conueyaunce, saynge to hym.
Here cometh in Courtly Abusyon, doynge reuerence and courtesy.
Hic introducat Colusion Mesure, Magnyfycence aspectante uultu elatissimo.
[Here let Collusion bring Measure forward, Magnificance looking on with a very haughty expression.]
Discedendo dicat ista uerba.
[Despairingly let him say these words.]
Here Magnyfycence dolorously maketh his mone
Hic aliquis buccat in cornu a retro post populum.
[Here someone blows a horn from the back behind the audience.] [Exit Lyberte.]
Here cometh in Crafty Conueyaunce [and] Cloked Colusyon, with a lusty laughter.
Et cum festinacione discedant a loco.
[And let them leave the place hurriedly.]
Here Magnyfycence wolde slee hymselfe with a knyfe.95
Modern stage directions direct both the director and the player in ways that the dramatist deems necessary in order to realise his/her theatrical vision. The same may be said of Skelton in Magnyfycence. His text was not published as an anonymous one, nor was it a copy to be held by a local authority, guild or religious body: it was published for public consumption as a printed text. Skelton was the acknowledged author of the play who made the conscious decision to guide and direct subsequent players of his play. His stage directions are original ones, published with the original text and conceived by him. It is quite possible that John Skelton was the originator of the stage direction as we understand the term today.
Notes
1. John Rastell (inconclusive), ‘A new cōmodye in englysh in maner Of an enterlude ryght elygant & full of craft of rethoryk/wherein is shewd & dyscrybyd as well the bewte & good propertes of women/ as theyr vycys & euyll cōdiciōs/with a morall cōclusion & exhortacyon to vertew [Calisto and Melebea]’ (London: Iohēs rastell, 1525), sig. Ciir; Three Rastell Plays: Four Elements, Calisto and Melebea, Gentleness and Nobility, ed. by Richard Axton (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1979), p. 94.
2. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 116.
3. Ibid.
4. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 53.
5. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 49.
6. Mahnia A. Nematollahi Mahani, The Holy Drama: Persian Passion Play in Modern Iran (Leiden: University Press, 2013), p. 35. This is the same play as that described as the Iranian Passion Play or the Taziyeh Passion Play in the Prelude, of which there are many versions; Mumammad Ja’far Mahjub, ‘The Effect of European Theatre and the Influence of its Theatrical Methods upon Ta’ziyeh’ in Ta’ziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran, ed. by Peter J. Chelkowski (New York: New York University Press; Soroush Press, 1979), p. 138; Peter J. Chelkowski, ‘Ta’ziyeh: Indigenous Avant-Garde Theatre of Iran’, Performing Arts Journal, 2.1 (Spring, 1977), 31–40 (35); Willem Floor, The History of Theater in Iran (Washington, DC: Mage, 2005), p. 177.
7. Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, pp. 80–81.
8. Eccles, The Macro Plays, pp. 68, 73. See also the Prelude and Chapter 8.
9. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, p. 362.
10. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 312.
11. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, p. 340.
12. In attempting to make sense of this stage direction, Neville Denny makes the following assessment in a note: ‘A puzzling stage-direction, unless it refers to a cell in/under the Torturer’s scaffold. Historically according to the gospels, a night elapsed here. Interestingly enough, the direction occurs at a useful point for a half-way interval. If it were so used the action would resume with Christ being brought from his cell to appear before Caiaphas again’: University of Bristol, Theatre Collection, TC/W/S/18, Notes, The Passion of our Lord, p. 6, n. 53.
13. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, p. 394.
14. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 260; Peter Meredith, ‘Stage Directions and the Editing of Early English Drama’, in Editing Early English Drama: Special Problems and New Directions, ed. by A. F. Johnston (New York: AMS Press, 1987), pp. 85–86: the text used by Meredith is Ludus Coventriae, ed. by K. S. Block, The Early English Text Society, ES120 (London: Oxford University Press, 1922), p. 238; Peter Meredith and Stanley J. Kahrl, intro., The N-Town Plays: A Facsimile of British Library MS Cotton Vespasian D VIII, Leeds Texts and Monographs, Medieval Drama Facsimiles IV (Leeds: School of English, University of Leeds, 1977), fol.143v; Butterworth, Staging Conventions, p. 166. There are spelling differences between Block’s and Spector’s editions.
15. Samuel L. Leiter, Frozen Moments: Writings on Kabuki 1966–2001, East Asia Program (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 2002), pp. 59–73 (p. 60).
16. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 208.
17. There is a temptation to interpret a description such as ‘another location far from the temple’ as a literal record to suggest a location away from the pageant carriage—possibly in the street. But the description exists within the reality of the narrative and not the reality of the staging arrangements.
18. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 10
19. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, pp. 302–03.
20. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, pp. 304–05. See also pp. 306–07.
21. See Butterworth, Staging Conventions, Chapter 9, where notions of ‘stillness’, ‘silence’ and ‘waiting’ are discussed.
22. Stokes, Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek, pp. 84, 118, 164, 208.
23. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 374.
24. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama, Passio Domini Nostri Jhesu Christi, I, pp. 296, 298.
25. Stokes, Beunans Meriasek: The Life of St. Meriasek, pp. 72, 110.
26. Karl Hase, Miracle Plays and Sacred Dramas: A Historical Survey, trans. by A. W. Jackson, ed. by W. W. Jackson (London: Trübner, 1880), p. 21.
27. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 120.
28. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 101.
29. Stokes, Gwreans An Bys: The Creation of the World, p. 40.
30. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 205; Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, p. 110; The Cornish Ordinalia, p. 20; Stokes, Gwreans An Bys: The Creation of the World, pp. 64, 178; Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. 67; Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 396.
31. Stokes, Gwreans An Bys: The Creation of the World, pp. 68, 90, 92.
32. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 285.
33. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 76; see McKinnell, ‘Staging The Digby Mary Magdalen’, p. 134.
34. Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, pp. 100–01; ‘The trembling is a stylized action in which the children splay their hands, arms at their sides, and physically shake their hands and arms to indicate their fear in a prescribed fashion. It has to be learned, and is a hallmark of a weak or helpless person who knows he is about to be murdered. Ta’ziyeh productions all over the country share this convention’: Beeman and Ghaffari, ‘Acting Styles and Actor Training in Ta’ziyeh’, in Eternal Performance, ed. by Chelkowski, pp. 74–93 (p. 84).
35. Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, p. 32; See Fletcher, ‘The Staging of the Middle Cornish Play Bewnans Ke’, pp. 166–67.
36. Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, pp. 218–19.
37. Thomas and Williams, Bewnans Ke The Life of St Kea, pp. 216–17.
38. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, pp. 23, 27, 39.
39. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 244.
40. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 314.
41. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 350.
42. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 177.
43. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 160.
44. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 142.
45. The earliest OED Online record of the term ‘offstage’ occurs as an 1861 reference.
46. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Digby Plays Facsimiles, III, fol. 140v; these two cancelled lines are taken up by Jessica Brantley, who regards them as ‘out of place in a dramatic script’ because ‘there is no chorus figure here, such as Contemplacio in N-Town’. She does not acknowledge that these lines have been cancelled in the MS. Given the didactic context in which these lines occur, there is no reason why the prologue speaker could not have delivered them if they had remained. There is no doubt that the ‘buryall of Criste’ is a play, and the emphasis placed on the two cancelled lines by Brantley is questionable. Brantley does not explain why, if the piece is intended for private reading, there are explicit stage directions contained in the play. Each of these stage directions records action of some sort: Jessica Brantley, Reading in the Wilderness: Private Devotion and Public Performance in Late Medieval England (Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 2007), pp. 297–98; Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays p. 141; the composition and identity of both the Bodley Burial and Resurrection plays is discussed by Chambers, Mediaeval Stage, II, p. 129; Craig, English Religious Drama, pp. 317–19; Rosemary Woolf, The English Mystery Plays (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972), pp. 331–33; perhaps the most balanced discussion of the meditation/performance dilemma is that conducted by Peter Meredith, ‘The Bodley Burial and Resurrection’ in Between Folk and Liturgy, ed. by Alan J. Fletcher and Wim Hüsken, Ludus Medieval and Early Renaissance Theatre and Drama 3 (Amsterdam, Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, 1997), pp. 133–55.
47. Davis, Non-Cycle Plays and Fragments, p. 11.
48. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 323.
49. The Right Plesaunt and Goodly Historie of the Foure Sonnes of Aymon, ed. by Octavia Richardson, The Early English Text Society, 2 vols, ES 44 45 (London: Trübner, 1885), I, p. 37.
50. Stokes, Gwreans An Bys: The Creation of the World, p. 100.
51. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 252.
52. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 355.
53. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 127.
54. Norris, The Ancient Cornish Drama: Ordinale De Origine Mundi, I, pp. 200–01. Norris, in his translation, misinterprets ‘stuppa’ as a ‘stove’. Stuppa or stupa refers to tow, hards or oakum, and, in this context, it is the tinder to light Maximilla’s clothing. It is likely that the stuppa and Maximilla’s clothing are soaked in aqua vitae (brandy) for it burns without burning the host material. This is because it is the vapour that burns and not the liquid. When aqua vitae burns under conventional conditions, it produces a colourless flame. It needs to be mixed with a salt in order to show discernible colour. See Butterworth, Theatre of Fire, pp. 31, 87.
55. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 380.
56. The playe of this tretye. or meditation off the buryall of criste and mowrnyng þerat [Christ’s Burial], in Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 142. This stage direction is a rubricated one in the MS, written as the top line of f.141r within the text column.
57. Her Begynnes His Resurrection on Pas[c]he daye at Morn [Christ’s Resurrection], in Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 173.
58. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 58.
59. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 309.
60. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 321.
61. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 322.
62. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 112.
63. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 104.
64. Karl Hase, writing of the German Miracle Plays, states: ‘It occasionally happened that the action went on at the same time in different parts of the stage, in cases where there was no immediate personal manifestation—as, for instance, when a voice was heard from heaven or hell. It was then possible to carry on the action in one place by dumb show only, while in another the words would be spoken.’: Hase, Miracle Plays and Sacred Dramas, p. 21.
65. John Skelton: Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. 73.
66. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 185.
67. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 253.
68. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 255.
69. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 256.
70. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 267.
71. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 291.
72. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 295.
73. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 314.
74. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 328.
75. David Bain, Actors and Audience: A Study of Asides and Related Conventions in Greek Drama (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. 162.
76. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 33.
77. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 276; see n. 93 in Chapter 5 of this work.
78. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 317.
79. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 394.
80. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 396.
81. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 289.
82. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 242.
83. The ‘vanishing’ as determined by this stage direction appears to have been a theatrical interpretation of the source in John: Kinney, The Vulgate Bible, John 10:39, records: ‘Quaerebant ergo eum prendere, et exivit de manibus eorum’ (They sought therefore to take him, and he escaped out of their hands). On his disappearance, the Secundus Judeus says ‘Owt, owt, alas where is our fonne?/Quyntly that hee is heathen gonne’: Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, p. 242; see MED queint(e adj. 1 (c) ‘crafty, wily; cunning, sly, deceitful’.
84. Lumiansky and Mills, Chester Mystery Cycle, I, pp. 361, 366. For further consideration of the stage direction at p. 361 see Chapter 4, n. 36, in this work.
85. Spector, The N-Town Play, I, p. 376.
86. Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 18; see also Butterworth, Theatre of Fire, pp. 41–42, for a discussion of the likely nature of this effect.
87. One such scribe is John Clerke who was responsible for significant sections of the York Play. Lucy Toulmin Smith identifies Clerke in a note in her edition of the play: ‘Item, payd to John Clerke for entryng in the Regyster the Regynall of the pagyant pertenynge to Craft of Fullars, which was never before regestred’: York Plays, ed. by Lucy Toulmin Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885), p. 18n. For a thorough investigation of Clerke’s role as a scribe of the York Play, see Peter Meredith, ‘John Clerke’s Hand in the York Register’, 245–71. Recorded acknowledgement for ‘writing’ a play sometimes obscures the roles of author and copyist. Robert Croo at Coventry is a case in point. He is recorded as being responsible for writing the Weavers’ Pageant of the Presentation in the Temple: Two Coventry Corpus Christi Plays: 1. The Shearmen and Taylors’ Pageant and 2. The Weavers’ Pageant, ed. by Hardin Craig, The Early English Text Society, ES87 (London: Oxford University Press, 1902, rpr. 1957), pp. x–xi; The Coventry Corpus Christi Plays, ed. by Pamela M. King and Clifford Davidson, Early Drama, Art, and Music Monograph Series 27 (Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, Western Michigan University, 2000), pp. 23–29. A presumed scribe is recorded at Coventry for a copy of the Drapers’ play: ‘Itm pd to ffrancys pynnyg for a playe v s’: R. W. Ingram, REED: Coventry, pp. 247, 576. In a later hand at the end of the Digby The Killing of the Children, it is recorded that ‘Jhon Parfre ded wryte thys booke’: Baker, Murphy and Hall, The Late Medieval Religious Plays, p. 115.
88. An enterlude of Welth, and Helth, very mery and full of Pastyme, newly att his [this] tyme Imprinted, ed. by John S. Farmer, The Tudor Facsimile Texts (London: T. C. & E. C. Jack, 1907), sigs. C.iiiiv, D.iiv
89. Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. x.
90. Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. xliv.
91. Richard Southern, The Staging of Plays before Shakespeare (London: Faber, 1973), p. 183.
92. Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. 11; see also Southern, The Staging of Plays before Shakespeare, for his translation, p. 183.
93. Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, p. 16.
94. Southern, The Staging of Plays before Shakespeare, p. 183.
95. Skelton, Magnyfycence, ed. by Ramsay, pp. 19, 24, 38 (×2), 48, 53, 63, 64, 67 (×2), 71, 72. For methods and techniques of stabbing oneself and others, see Philip Butterworth, Magic on the Early English Stage (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 164–72.