abstract:This essay examines the joint publication of Thomas Middleton's More Dissemblers besides Women (1614) and Women Beware Women (1621) as Two New Playes in protectorate England. Scholars have highlighted these Jacobean plays' sympathetic treatment of female characters and Middleton's interest in the plight of women generally. When these two plays were published together in 1657, however, their depiction of gender-based hierarchies gained new meaning and significance. Instead of critiquing patriarchal oppression, the plays helped to define the republican body politic as exclusively masculine, promoting a patriarchal model of republican governance at a time of unprecedented political participation among women.
{"title":"Ladies Rampant: Thomas Middleton's Two New Playes in the English Republic","authors":"Justin Kuhn","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2022.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2022.0002","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:This essay examines the joint publication of Thomas Middleton's More Dissemblers besides Women (1614) and Women Beware Women (1621) as Two New Playes in protectorate England. Scholars have highlighted these Jacobean plays' sympathetic treatment of female characters and Middleton's interest in the plight of women generally. When these two plays were published together in 1657, however, their depiction of gender-based hierarchies gained new meaning and significance. Instead of critiquing patriarchal oppression, the plays helped to define the republican body politic as exclusively masculine, promoting a patriarchal model of republican governance at a time of unprecedented political participation among women.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76555993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
• In one of early modern England’s most unlikely volte-faces, the notorious antitheatricalist William Prynne penned a tract defending the public stage. Published in 1649, Mr William Prynn His Defence of Stage-Plays reversed the same author’s landmark denunciation of theater in his Histrio-mastix. The Players Scourge, or, Actors Tragædie (1633).1 Prynne’s reference in the earlier work to “Women-Actors, notorious whores”2 was widely seen as glancing at Henrietta Maria’s participation in court plays; as a result, he was quickly condemned by the court of Star Chamber to stand in the pillory and have his ears “trimmed.” Prynne’s outrage in the 1630s at what he considered the growing authoritarianism of the king, and the threats from bishops and a Catholic queen, had turned by 1649 into alarm at “a Tyrannical, abominable, lewd, schismatical [and] hæretical Army”3 that not only held the king captive but also controlled Parliament following Pride’s Purge of its moderate members in December 1648. The specific occasion for Prynne’s defense of the stage was the removal of the “Players from their Houses”4 by groups of overzealous soldiers. For
{"title":"Foreword: Early Printed Responses to the Closing of London's Playhouses, 1641–43","authors":"C. Highley","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2022.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2022.0001","url":null,"abstract":"• In one of early modern England’s most unlikely volte-faces, the notorious antitheatricalist William Prynne penned a tract defending the public stage. Published in 1649, Mr William Prynn His Defence of Stage-Plays reversed the same author’s landmark denunciation of theater in his Histrio-mastix. The Players Scourge, or, Actors Tragædie (1633).1 Prynne’s reference in the earlier work to “Women-Actors, notorious whores”2 was widely seen as glancing at Henrietta Maria’s participation in court plays; as a result, he was quickly condemned by the court of Star Chamber to stand in the pillory and have his ears “trimmed.” Prynne’s outrage in the 1630s at what he considered the growing authoritarianism of the king, and the threats from bishops and a Catholic queen, had turned by 1649 into alarm at “a Tyrannical, abominable, lewd, schismatical [and] hæretical Army”3 that not only held the king captive but also controlled Parliament following Pride’s Purge of its moderate members in December 1648. The specific occasion for Prynne’s defense of the stage was the removal of the “Players from their Houses”4 by groups of overzealous soldiers. For","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80371065","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:According to James Wright's Historia Histrionica (1699), when professional stage players were prohibited from acting publicly during the English civil wars, they gravitated toward aristocratic residences, "in particular Holland-house at Kensington." This essay identifies the experiences of Holland House's principal proprietor, Isabel Rich (née Cope), first Countess of Holland, as the principal sponsor of these clandestine Kensington performances. Motivating her patronage, the essay argues, were the countess's obligations within an aristocratic moral economy; contemporary nostalgia for the prewar King's Men; the postwar affective dimensions of "mirth"; and investment in theater as a form of passive resistance to the authority of the new English republic.
{"title":"Holland House in the 1650s: Evidence and Possibilities of Interregnum Theatrical Entertainment","authors":"Christopher Matusiak","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2022.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2022.0003","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:According to James Wright's Historia Histrionica (1699), when professional stage players were prohibited from acting publicly during the English civil wars, they gravitated toward aristocratic residences, \"in particular Holland-house at Kensington.\" This essay identifies the experiences of Holland House's principal proprietor, Isabel Rich (née Cope), first Countess of Holland, as the principal sponsor of these clandestine Kensington performances. Motivating her patronage, the essay argues, were the countess's obligations within an aristocratic moral economy; contemporary nostalgia for the prewar King's Men; the postwar affective dimensions of \"mirth\"; and investment in theater as a form of passive resistance to the authority of the new English republic.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78922567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
• The second half of the seventeenth century was marked by attempts to limit access to the London theaters and by important developments in the trade in playbooks.1 The public theaters were closed when civil war broke out in 1642, and they remained closed for eighteen years. The punishments for performing plays during the ban were severe; as ordinances for theater closure state, punitive measures included the confiscation of profits and costumes, public whipping, arrests, and fines for audience members.2 The theaters were reopened shortly after the monarchy was restored in 1660, but only two playhouses were licensed for performance in London for most of the period 1660–1700, with their managers—William Davenant (Duke’s Company) and Thomas Killigrew (King’s Company)—to “suffer no rival companies.”3 This was further reduced to just one theater from 1682 to 1695, and admission prices radically increased in comparison to the Elizabethan and Jacobean outdoor playhouses.4 Thus, although Restoration is used frequently to describe the supposedly simultaneous return of the monarchy and the theaters, for
{"title":"Introduction: Performance and the Paper Stage, 1640–1700","authors":"E. Depledge, R. Willie","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2022.0000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2022.0000","url":null,"abstract":"• The second half of the seventeenth century was marked by attempts to limit access to the London theaters and by important developments in the trade in playbooks.1 The public theaters were closed when civil war broke out in 1642, and they remained closed for eighteen years. The punishments for performing plays during the ban were severe; as ordinances for theater closure state, punitive measures included the confiscation of profits and costumes, public whipping, arrests, and fines for audience members.2 The theaters were reopened shortly after the monarchy was restored in 1660, but only two playhouses were licensed for performance in London for most of the period 1660–1700, with their managers—William Davenant (Duke’s Company) and Thomas Killigrew (King’s Company)—to “suffer no rival companies.”3 This was further reduced to just one theater from 1682 to 1695, and admission prices radically increased in comparison to the Elizabethan and Jacobean outdoor playhouses.4 Thus, although Restoration is used frequently to describe the supposedly simultaneous return of the monarchy and the theaters, for","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89619875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:As early as 1687, Gerard Langbaine noted the tendency of the most prolific Restoration playwrights to borrow from a plurality of sources for a single play. While Langbaine's identifications of playwrights' source materials, or "thefts," have been widely expanded upon in recent decades, the precise nature (and implications) of such borrowings have been underexplored. This essay will demonstrate how close comparison between a Restoration play and its paper stage sources contributes to an understanding of what might be at issue in such "thefts." This essay's focus is on two plays by Aphra Behn: The Rover (1677) and Sir Patient Fancy (1678).
{"title":"Aphra Behn's Adaptations: Paper and Stage Sources for The Rover (1677) and Sir Patient Fancy (1678)","authors":"Claire Bowditch, E. Hobby","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2022.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2022.0007","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:As early as 1687, Gerard Langbaine noted the tendency of the most prolific Restoration playwrights to borrow from a plurality of sources for a single play. While Langbaine's identifications of playwrights' source materials, or \"thefts,\" have been widely expanded upon in recent decades, the precise nature (and implications) of such borrowings have been underexplored. This essay will demonstrate how close comparison between a Restoration play and its paper stage sources contributes to an understanding of what might be at issue in such \"thefts.\" This essay's focus is on two plays by Aphra Behn: The Rover (1677) and Sir Patient Fancy (1678).","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88435620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:Despite repeated outbreaks of plague in the centuries following the Black Death, no consensus existed in England on the issues of how plague should be fought, how the infected should be cared for, and how the implementation of such measures would be funded. An abundance of printed texts emerged during the sixteenth century offering English readers information on what could and should be done to contain plague's spread. Ultimately their authors explained plague providentially, with many going so far as to claim that plague was entirely beyond the control of human actions. Placing the Tudor and Stuart Crowns' evolving quarantine policy into dialogue with the voices of clerics, physicians, philosophers, and poets who engaged with royal policy and at times offered substantial criticisms of it, this essay argues that the national imposition of quarantine provoked royal subjects to articulate and defend their own opinions about the practice, encouraging the development of popular political dialogue.
{"title":"Quarantining Contagion: Providentialist Debates over Plague and Public Health in Elizabethan and Jacobean England","authors":"Kathryn Wolford","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2021.0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2021.0025","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:Despite repeated outbreaks of plague in the centuries following the Black Death, no consensus existed in England on the issues of how plague should be fought, how the infected should be cared for, and how the implementation of such measures would be funded. An abundance of printed texts emerged during the sixteenth century offering English readers information on what could and should be done to contain plague's spread. Ultimately their authors explained plague providentially, with many going so far as to claim that plague was entirely beyond the control of human actions. Placing the Tudor and Stuart Crowns' evolving quarantine policy into dialogue with the voices of clerics, physicians, philosophers, and poets who engaged with royal policy and at times offered substantial criticisms of it, this essay argues that the national imposition of quarantine provoked royal subjects to articulate and defend their own opinions about the practice, encouraging the development of popular political dialogue.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77883392","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:In 1624, Parliament passed An Act to Prevent the Destroying and Murdering of Bastard Children. The Virginia General Assembly enacted a similar law in 1710. Those statutes treated the concealment of a nonmarital newborn's death as presumptive murder. The essay argues that colonial Virginians' main objective in enforcing these acts was to scare pregnant servants into revealing their condition so that their masters could extract additional service without pay. Convictions for concealment alone, and not willful murder, rarely, if ever, resulted in execution. Deterrence was achieved through show trials and the criminal process, mitigated by a liberal pardon policy.
{"title":"Poor Babes, Desperate Mothers: Concealment of Dead Newborns in Early Virginia","authors":"J. Pagan","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2021.0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2021.0024","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:In 1624, Parliament passed An Act to Prevent the Destroying and Murdering of Bastard Children. The Virginia General Assembly enacted a similar law in 1710. Those statutes treated the concealment of a nonmarital newborn's death as presumptive murder. The essay argues that colonial Virginians' main objective in enforcing these acts was to scare pregnant servants into revealing their condition so that their masters could extract additional service without pay. Convictions for concealment alone, and not willful murder, rarely, if ever, resulted in execution. Deterrence was achieved through show trials and the criminal process, mitigated by a liberal pardon policy.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79246412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:Early modern women's poetry tends to be read in one of two prevailing critical paradigms. On the one hand, much important scholarship emphasizes revision, augmentation, and the malleability of women's manuscript texts. On the other, print editions of women's texts are celebrated as landmarks; print publication, in this view, bestows new qualities of posterity, stability, and fixity. This essay reinterrogates these paradigms of malleability in manuscript and fixity in print. Focusing on the variant print editions of poetry by Katherine Philips, Anne Bradstreet, and Margaret Cavendish, it reveals a complex contingency to women's printed poetic texts and, in doing so, reassesses women poets' relationship to seventeenth-century print culture.
{"title":"\"Corrected by the Author\": Women, Poetry, and Seventeenth-Century Print Publication","authors":"Sarah C. E. Ross, Elizabeth Scott-Baumann","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2021.0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2021.0027","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:Early modern women's poetry tends to be read in one of two prevailing critical paradigms. On the one hand, much important scholarship emphasizes revision, augmentation, and the malleability of women's manuscript texts. On the other, print editions of women's texts are celebrated as landmarks; print publication, in this view, bestows new qualities of posterity, stability, and fixity. This essay reinterrogates these paradigms of malleability in manuscript and fixity in print. Focusing on the variant print editions of poetry by Katherine Philips, Anne Bradstreet, and Margaret Cavendish, it reveals a complex contingency to women's printed poetic texts and, in doing so, reassesses women poets' relationship to seventeenth-century print culture.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76758002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:This essay reintroduces to scholars Bodleian MSS. Eng. th. b. 1–2, a substantial and enigmatic two-volume manuscript work bearing witness to the English Catholic community, its identity, its preoccupations, and the ways in which these found expression. The essay makes new arguments for the circumstances of the work's compilation and gives an account of its contents in order to facilitate further research into this important source. The manuscript's compiler sought to console and to educate his readership in the traditions and doctrines of the Catholic faith, but he also wrote to stir them to resistance against persecution. A rich example of lay authorship, the manuscript served as a vehicle for views that could not be expressed publicly, and it spoke for a community that identified itself as persecuted.
{"title":"\"Flowers of Fathers\": Resistance and Consolation in a Catholic Manuscript Compilation, Bodleian MSS. Eng. th. b. 1–2","authors":"Katie Mckeogh","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2021.0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2021.0026","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:This essay reintroduces to scholars Bodleian MSS. Eng. th. b. 1–2, a substantial and enigmatic two-volume manuscript work bearing witness to the English Catholic community, its identity, its preoccupations, and the ways in which these found expression. The essay makes new arguments for the circumstances of the work's compilation and gives an account of its contents in order to facilitate further research into this important source. The manuscript's compiler sought to console and to educate his readership in the traditions and doctrines of the Catholic faith, but he also wrote to stir them to resistance against persecution. A rich example of lay authorship, the manuscript served as a vehicle for views that could not be expressed publicly, and it spoke for a community that identified itself as persecuted.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77206520","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
abstract:The way that scholars have discussed Catholicism inside the Church of England after the Reformation has been problematic. If the English Reformation is, as some have claimed, an anomaly, then post-Reformation Catholicism in England and the British Isles can sometimes seem to be an irrelevance. This essay revisits the recent historiography of the topic and makes the case for a "narrative turn" in the way that we think and write about it. If we do this, the subject might be rescued from its tendency toward introspection and made compatible with the best current writing on the rest of the English Church in that period, and indeed the politics of the Reformation more generally.
{"title":"Going Nowhere Fast? The Historiography of Catholicism in Post-Reformation Britain","authors":"M. Questier","doi":"10.1353/hlq.2021.0029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hlq.2021.0029","url":null,"abstract":"abstract:The way that scholars have discussed Catholicism inside the Church of England after the Reformation has been problematic. If the English Reformation is, as some have claimed, an anomaly, then post-Reformation Catholicism in England and the British Isles can sometimes seem to be an irrelevance. This essay revisits the recent historiography of the topic and makes the case for a \"narrative turn\" in the way that we think and write about it. If we do this, the subject might be rescued from its tendency toward introspection and made compatible with the best current writing on the rest of the English Church in that period, and indeed the politics of the Reformation more generally.","PeriodicalId":45445,"journal":{"name":"HUNTINGTON LIBRARY QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2022-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85321632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：