Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes…
Th'overthrow of stage-plays, by the way of controversy betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections answered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the judgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easily be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not only unlawful to be an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Whereunto are added also and annexed in th'end certain latin letters betwixt the said Master Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.Th'overthrow of stage-playes, by the way of controversie betwixt D. Gager and D. Rainoldes wherein all the reasons that can be made for them are notably refuted; th'objections aunswered, and the case so cleared and resolved, as that the iudgement of any man, that is not froward and perverse, may easelie be satisfied. Wherein is manifestly proved, that it is not onely vnlawfull to bee an actor, but a beholder of those vanities. Wherevnto are added also and annexed in th'end certeine latine letters betwixt the sayed Maister Rainoldes, and D. Gentiles, reader of the civill law in Oxford, concerning the same matter.
John Rainolds 1549–1607Middelburg: printed by Richard Schilders, 1599
[8], 163, [1], 164-190, [1] p. · 74k words · STC 20616 · ESTC S115568
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
qWhen the Lacedaemonians had accused the Thebans of many and grievous matters: In deed, quoth Epaminondas, 9these have made you give over your short form of speaking. I wish I might be short, as were the Lacedaemonians; but you constrain me to be long: you deal so Theban-like continually with me. A doubtful word being used in a question of yours, 1whether we account it a loss recitare, to recite Seneca; Whereunto I answered that it is one thing 2to recite, another thing 3to play, as I declared by sundry writers; and added that I would have been content to hear your tragedy recited; had it been recited or pronounced only; you reply that the word is used in Quintilian; not onely de scripto, but also memoriter recitare; and therefore you might use it indifferently, for agere, in a general acceptation; moreover, that as Horace and Persius do scoff bitterly at recitatores also, and the law in the generality of the term noteth also with imfamie, them, qui pronuntiandi, that is properly, recitandi causa in scenam prodeunt: so the University would have thought it a more absurd thing to have heard you, or any other, ⟨p. 140⟩openly reading your Ulysses to them, then to have seen it acted as it was. Wherein to the intent you may see how you play the Theban, I will use a comparison, and that within some measure I trust. rPlutarch hath written a dialogue to prove that brute beasts have reason as well as men have: in jest peradventure, seeing he maketh it to be avouched by 4Gryllus: or meaning, that they have a natural sagacity and understanding like to reason, not reason capable of Religion, as in the 5conclusion he seemeth to insinuate, and a
Creatures void of reason. But suppose that some man being of Gryllus mind, (or let us call him Gryllus for more perspicuity, and make Sempronius likewise his adversaries name;) suppose then that Gryllus having asked this question,
Do you think that animal, a living creature endued with sense, wanteth reason? Sempronius answered him, that animal is one thing, and a beast an other, as
qWhen the Lacedaemonians had accused the Thebans of manie and greevous matters: In deed, quoth Epaminondas, 9these have made you give over your short forme of speaking. I wishe I might be short, as were the Lacedaemonians; but you constraine me to be long: you deale so Theban-like continually with me. A doubtfull woord being vsed in a question of yours, 1whether we account it a losse recitare, to recite Seneca; Wherevnto I answered that it is one thing 2to recite, another thing 3to play, as I declared by sundrie writers; and added that I would have bene content to heare your tragedie recited; had it bene recited or pronounced onely; you reply that the woord is vsed in Quintilian; not onely de scripto, but also memoriter recitare; and therefore you might vse it indifferentlie, for agere, in a generall acceptatiō; moreover, that as Horace and Persius doe scoffe bitterly at recitatores also, and the law in the generalitie of the terme noteth also with imfamie, them, qui pronuntiandi, that is properly, recitandi causa in scenam prodeunt: so the Universitie would have thought it a more absurd thing to have heard you, or any other, ⟨p. 140⟩openly reading your Vlysses to them, then to have seene it acted as it was. Wherein to the intent you may see how you play the Theban, I will vse a comparison, and that within some measure I trust. rPlutarch hath written a dialogue to proove that brute beastes haue reason as well as men haue: in iest peradvēture, seeing he maketh it to be avouched by 4Gryllus: or meaning, that they haue a naturall sagacitie and vnderstanding like to reason, not reason capable of Religion, as in the 5conclusion he seemeth to insinuate, and a scertaine Christian writer hath mainteined, though speaking not so fitlie in saying they have reason, sith the tScripture termeth them 6Creatures voide of reason. But suppose that some man being of Gryllus minde, (or let vs call him Gryllus for more perspicuitie, and make Sempronius likewise his adversaries name;) suppose then that Gryllus having asked this question, 7Doe you thinke that animal, a living creature indued with sense, wanteth reason? Sempronius answered him, that animal is one thing, and a beast an other, as vTullie declareth, affirming a 8man (whom he calleth animal) to be full of reason, whereof he saith, that 9no beast at all is partaker.
qPlutarch. apophthe. reg. & imperat.
9[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
1Senecamne tu recitare jacturam putes?
2Recitare.
3Agere.
r[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
4[Greek or Hebrew] a pig, or hog.〈non-Latin alphabet〉 a pigge, or hogge.
8Animal hoc providum, sagax, multiplex, acutum, memor, plenum rationis & consilii, quem vocamus hominē.Animal hoc providum, sagax, multiplex, acutum, memor, plenum rationis & consilii, quem vocamus hominē.
9Solum est enim ex tot animantium generibus atque naturis particeps rationis, & cogitationis, cùm caetera sint omnia expertia.Solum est enim ex tot animātium generibus atque naturis particeps rationis, & cogitationis, cùm caetera sint omnia expertia.
If Gryllus should reply that the word is used in xOvid for 1all things that have life and sense, not for men only, and therefore he might use it indifferently for beasts in a general acceptation: would not they, who see, that belike he meant to comprehend men also under that general word, thereby the more closely to fetch in beasts with them; and that, restraining it to beasts, his question must be, Think you that beasts want reason? which were an idle question, and openly implying a begging of the point in controversy; would they not, I say, condemn him as a wrangling and contentious Sophister? Now, if in the same vain, or rather in a worse, he should add moreover, that as yHorace and zPersius speak scoffingly of mad men too, and the alaw appointeth gar••s for idiots, that is properly, for men wanting the use of re•; so the grave Athenian bench of Areopagus would judge it more absurd to say that men have reason, then that beasts have it, chiefly certain beasts, as 2horses and ⟨p. 141⟩oxen dancing upon stages in a more exquisite manner then men are lightly able: would not this speech of Gryllus show that he deserveth a sharper commendation, then Plutarch by praising 3his sophistry meant unto him? Here your usual dealing causeth me to fear that you will ask whether I make you a Gryllus. As bwhen a Catholic Bishop, being rebuked by an Arian Emperor for standing alone with Athanasius against the whole world, said that the doctrine of faith was not impeached though he alone maintained it, seeing that of old time cthree alone were found who stood against the Kings commandment: What? quoth an Eunuch, 4doest thou make our Emperor a Nebuchadnezzar? But, I pray you, leave this Eunuchs odious practise in racking my comparisons: and mark the main point whereat I aim in them, and which I seek to open by them. For, as in Gryllus question, and verse, framed like yours, the circumstances give, that he used the general word comprising man, thereby to breed a fancy that if this kind of animal have reason, why not the other? In like sort your express mention of 5reading, I say, of reading, not of playing, in showing what a jewel you take the reciting of Seneca to be; maketh it probable that you meant to do by the generality of the word recitare.
If Gryllus should reply that the woord is vsed in xOvid for 1all things that have life and sense, not for men onely, and therfore he might vse it indifferently for beasts in a general acceptatiō: would not they, who see, that belike he meant to comprehend men also vnder that generall woord, thereby the more closely to fetch in beastes with them; and that, restraining it to beasts, his question must bee, Thinke you that beastes want reason? which were an idle question, and openly implying a begging of the point in controversie; would they not, I say, condemne him as a wrangling and contentious Sophister? Now, if in the same vaine, or rather in a woorse, he should adde moreover, that as yHorace and zPersius speake scoffingly of mad men too, and the alaw appointeth gar••s for idiots, that is properly, for men wanting the vse of re•; so the grave Athenian bench of Areopagus would iudge it more absurd to say that men haue reason, then that beasts haue it, chieflie certaine beastes, as 2horses and ⟨p. 141⟩oxen dansing vpon stages in a more exquisit maner then men are lightlie able: would not this speech of Gryllus shew that he deserveth a sharper commendation, then Plutarch by praysing 3his sophistrie meant vnto him? Here your vsuall dealing causeth mee to feare that you will aske whether I make you a Gryllus. As bwhen a Catholike Bishop, being rebuked by an Arian Emperour for standing alone with Athanasius against the whole worlde, said that the doctrine of faith was not impeached though he alone mainteined it, seeing that of olde time cthree alone were found who stoode against the Kings commandement: What? quoth an Eunuche,
xMetamor. lib. 1.
1Pronaque cùm spectent animalia caetera terram, os homini sublime dedit.
yEpist lib. 1. epi. 1.
zSatyr. 3.
aL. 2. D. de postulando. l. 2. D. de curatorib. suriosor.
2[Greek or Hebrew], saith Gryll• in Plutarch.〈non-Latin alphabet〉, saith Gryll• in Plutarch.
5Cuius vel unum simile carminibus me• Benigna carmen malo posteritas legate: legate, you say, not agat; though agat would have fitted the verse as well as legate.Cuius vel vnum simile carminibus me• Benigna carmen malo posteritas legat: legat, you say, not agat; though agat would haue fitted the verse as well as legat.
The more, because you used it not only in your verse, where your excuse might serve, that it stood better then agere would in that place; as Gryllus might say likewise for versifying animal rather, then bestiam: but in your prose also, the 6title of your tragedy; as if Gryllus, setting down the point controversed between him and Sempronius, should make it, utrum animal sit rationis expers; where the word 7bestia, would serve as fitly in prose; nay, (if plain dealing were meant) a great deal more fitly. And if you intended not to make that reason which I supposed you did, it is no loss to recite Seneca, Ergo no loss to play him: but meant to use the general word for the special, and to ask Momus only, Think you it a loss to play Seneca? then you begged at Momus hand, or took as granted, the point you should have proved; sith the playing of Seneca was condemned by him, and you undertook to confute his arguments. Again, as Horace, Persius, the law, alleged ⟨p. 142⟩by Gryllus, do show that certain men want the use of reason, but neither prove that beasts have it, nor that mankind wanteth it; and his presumed testimony of the Areopagus, brought in with a particle of similitude, So, as hitting jump with Horace, Persius, and the law, is too too absurd: in like sort the same authors, alleged by your self, do show that some reciters are misliked by them, but neither prove that players are liked, nor all reciters misliked; and the Universities testimony which you bring in with the same particle, as hitting jump with those authors, I can not say you bring it altogether as Gryllus, but you bring it strangely. For dHorace scoffeth at them, who 8recite their writings out of due place or time, and are 9importunately displeasant: ePersius, at 1wantons reciting 2wanton verses, with an 3effeminate voice, and a 4vainglorious mind. The law noteth with infamy such as come upon the stage to recite: belike, for their vain-glorious desire of 5being seen, and 6getting mens applause, which Persius jesteth at. Now in that you add hereto the University, and make us join with the former in opinion, saying; So the University would have thought it a more absurd thing, to have heard me, or any other, openly reading my Ulysses to them, then to have seen it acted, as it was: what mean you by this term, So?
The more, because you vsed it not onely in your verse, where your excuse might serve, that it stoode better then agere would in that place; as Gryllus might say likewise for versifying animal rather, then bestiam: but in your prose also, the 6title of your tragedie; as if Gryllus, setting downe the point controversed betweene him and Sempronius, should make it, vtrum animal sit rationis expers; where the woorde 7bestia, would serve as fitlie in prose; nay, (if plaine dealing were meant) a great deale more fitlie. And if you intended not to make that reason which I supposed you did, it is no losse to recite Seneca, Ergo no losse to play him: but meant to vse the generall woorde for the speciall, and to aske Momus onely, Thinke you it a losse to play Seneca? thē you begged at Momus hand, or tooke as graunted, the point you should haue prooved; sith the playing of Seneca was condemned by him, and you vndertooke to confute his arguments. Againe, as Horace, Persius, the law, alleaged ⟨p. 142⟩by Gryllus, doe shew that certaine men want the vse of reason, but neither proove that beasts haue it, nor that mankind wanteth it; and his presumed testimonie of the Areopagus, brought in with a particle of similitude, So, as hitting iumpe with Horace, Persius, and the law, is too too absurd: in like sort the same autours, alleaged by your selfe, doe shew that some reciters are misliked by them, but neither prove that players are liked, nor all reciters misliked; and the Vniversities testimonie which you bring in with the same particle, as hitting iumpe with those autours, I can not say you bring it altogether as Gryllus, but you bring it strangely. For dHorace scoffeth at them, who 8recite their writings out of due place or time, and are 9importunatlie displeasant: ePersius, at 1wantons reciting 2wanton verses, with an 3
6Tragoedia nova, in aede Christi recitata.Tragoedia noua, in aede Christi recitata.
7In the larger sense, that Tully giveth it: Tusc quae. lib. 5. De nat. Deor. lib. 2. not in the stricter of your Lawyers: l. 1. § removet. D de postulando. l. 1. §. in bestiis. D. si quadrup. pauper. sec. di.In the larger sense, that Tullie geueth it: Tusc quae. lib. 5. De nat. Deor. lib. 2. not in the stricter of your Lawiers: l. 1. § removet. D de postulando. l. 1. §. in bestiis. D. si quadrup. pauper. sec. di.
dSatyr. lib. […]. sat. 4. &. De art. poët.Satyr. lib. 〈…〉. sat. 4. &. De art. poët.
8In medio qui Scripta foro recitent, sunt multi, quique lavantes.
9Indoctum doctumque fugat recitator acerbus.
eSatyr. 1.
1Patranti fractus ocello.
2Quum carnima lúbum Intrant, & tremulo scalpuntur ubi in•ma versu.
4Quo didicisse, nisi hoc fermentum, & qua semel intus innata est, rupto jecore exierit caprificus? & usque adeò ne Scire •uú nihil est, nisi te scire hoc sciat alter?Quo didicisse, nisi hoc fermentum, & qua semel intus innata est, rupto jecore exierit caprificus? & vsque adeò ne Scire •uú nihil est, nisi te scire hoc sciat alter?
5Populo, pexusque, togaque recenti, & natalitia tandem cum sardonyche albus, Seed legens celsa.Populo, pexusque, togaque recenti, & natalitia tandem cum sardonyche albus, Sede legens celsa.
That if you, or an other, had read your Ulysses openly unto them, it had been done out of due place, or due time? or, they should have heard wanton verses read? or wantonly? or by a wanton? or with a vain-glorious mind? or on the stage? In deed, they should have heard 7some wanton verses, I grant: and both out of due place, and time, if you had read it 8where, & 9when it was acted. Neither do I doubt but the University would have thought such open reading, of such stuff, on such a day, absurd: though, whether more absurd, then to have seen it acted as it was, I know not. But whatsoever they would have thought in this comparison, wherein the flaw, that you cite, noting both with infamy, should give (me thinks) a deeper print thereof to acting then reading, all things weighed: you are far ⟨p. 143⟩from hitting the mark, whereat you shoot; namely, from convincing by the Universities testimony, and judgement, my sentence as absurd, that if your tragedy had been recited only, I would have accounted it no more loss of time to have heard you pronounce it, then my self to read it. For, I did not mean, if it had been recited as those were, which the authors by you alleged, do reprove: but as gHorace used to 1recite his own writings; as 2poems were recited to Quintilius Varus; as hPersius did recite his book unto Cornutus, before he published it. Whereof if you pronounce (as you do, if you speak to purpose) that our University would have thought it a more absurd thing, then to have seen it acted as it was: you deal in like manner with our University, as Gryllus with the reverend bench of Areopagus, if he should abuse their name and estimation, to persuade that brute beasts have more reason, then the wisest men have.
That if you, or an other, had read your Vlysses openly vnto them, it had bene done out of due place, or due time? or, they should haue heard wanton verses read? or wantonly? or by a wanton? or with a vaine-glorious minde? or on the stage? In deede, they should haue heard 7some wanton verses, I graunt: and both out of due place, and time, if you had read it 8where, & 9when it was acted. Neither doe I doubt but the Universitie would haue thought such open reading, of such stuffe, on such a day, absurd: though, whether more absurd, then to haue seene it acted as it was, I know not. But whatsoever they would haue thought in this comparison, wherein the flaw, that you cite, noting both with infamie, should giue (mee thinkes) a deeper print thereof to acting then reading, all things weighed: you are farre ⟨p. 143⟩from hitting the marke, whereat you shoote; namely, from cō vincing by the Universities testimonie, and iudgement, my sentence as absurd, that if your tragedie had bene recited onely, I would have accounted it no more losse of time to haue heard you pronounce it, then my selfe to reade it. For, I did not meane, if it had bene recited as those were, which the autours by you alleaged, doe reproove: but as gHorace vsed to 1recite his owne writings; as 2poëmes were recited to Quintilius Uarus; as hPersius did recite his booke vnto Cornutus, before he published it. Whereof if you pronounce (as you doe, if you speake to purpose) that our Universitie would haue thought it a more absurd thing, then to have seene it acted as it was: you deale in like maner with our Vniversitie, as Gryllus with the reverend bench of Areopagus, if he should abuse their name and estimation, to perswade that brute beastes have more reason, then the wisest men have.
7In Melanthos part, & Eurymachus.
8Qui pronuntiandi causa in scenam prodierit.
9Die Dominico.
fL. 1. D. de his qui not. infam.
gLib. 1. sat 4.
1Non recite cuiquam, nisi amicis, idque coactus. Non ubivis corámve quibuslibet.Non recite cuiquam, nisi amicis, idque coactus. Non vbiuis corámve quibuslibet.
2Quintilio si quid recitares corrige sodes Hoc aiebat, & hoc. Hora. de art. poet.
hPersii vita. Gloss. vet. […] Persium.Persii vita. Gloss. vet. 〈…〉 Persium.
Hereto would be annexed that, which in the fourth and, last head of reasons, you urge again concerning our Universities judgement for the approbation of your plays in general: if your interlaced defence of wasteful cost in setting forth thereof (the only point remaining besides) were discussed. And this is easily done, considering what hath been already proved against you touching the inconveniences and mischiefs of your plays. For having made Momus object the great charges; which how great they were, you know better then I, who summed them perhaps too much beneath the due when I did mention thirty pound; but having made him say that it should have been bestowed on the poor rather, you take him up with three answers: one, that the money was your own, not his; an other, that the charge, though great to him, was mean to you; the third, that none would give the less to the poor for that, none would have given the more without it. All the which I showed to be of no force for warranting of expenses on things of that quality, because, both unhonest spending of a mans own, is wastefulness & riot, condemned by our Saviour in the prodigal son: and, as Nero giving much to get a Plaudit, was the less able to help the poor by so much, and the less willing too perhaps; in like ⟨p. 144⟩sort may you be. Hereupon you demand of me, What similitude is there, or can there be, between the prodigal son, that in such a sort, as he did, spent all, and brought him self to the extremest misery; and between your expense? A question, which you would not have pressed, as you do; for your unlikeness to him in that he wasted all, and brought him self to extreme misery thereby: if you had considered that 3word in the original text of the Gospel, whereto my quotation for iriot did direct you. For usually it noteth the quality of expenses made by loose & wanton persons on their pleasures, as in foreign writers, kAristotle and lTully; so in mScripture likewise: and, to that effect in the same parable of the prodigal son is it said nafterward, that he devoured his goods 4with harlots. Now, in Rome, of old time, there were common 5harlots to be hired for 6two pence half-penny. The price in our days, by reason of the otribute, which they are to pay the Pope, may be enhanced.
Hereto would be annexed that, which in the fourth and, last head of reasons, you vrge againe concerning our Universities iudgement for the approbation of your playes in generall: if your interlaced defense of wastfull cost in setting foorth therof (the onely point remaining besides) were discussed. And this is easilie done, considering what hath bene alreadie prooved against you touching the inconveniences and mischifes of your playes. For having made Momus obiect the great charges; which how great they were, you know better then I, who summed them perhaps too much beneath the due whē I did mention thirtie pound; but having made him say that it should haue bene bestowed on the poore rather, you take him vp with three answeres: one, that the mony was your own, not his; an other, that the charge, though great to him, was meane to you; the thirde, that none would give the lesse to the poore for that, none would have given the more without it. All the which I shewed to be of no force for warrāting of expēses on things of that qualitie, because, both vnhonest spending of a mans owne, is wastfulnes & riott, condemned by our Saviour in the prodigall sonne: and, as Nero giving much to gett a Plaudite, was the lesse able to help the poore by so much, and the lesse willing too perhaps; in like ⟨p. 144⟩sort may you be. Herevpon you demand of me, What similitude is there, or can there be, betweene the prodigall sonne, that in such a sort, as he did, spent all, and brought him selfe to the extreemest miserie; and betweene your expense? A question, which you would not have pressed, as you doe; for your vnlikenes to him in that he wasted all, and brought him selfe to extreeme miserie thereby: if you had considered that 3woord in the originall text of the Gospell, whereto my quotation for iriott did direct you. For vsually it noteth the qualitie of expenses made by loose & wanton persons on their pleasures, as in forein writers, kAristotle and lTullie; so in mScripture likewise: and, to that effect in the same parable of the prodigall sonne is it said nafterward, that he devoured his goods 4
6Two oboli being the third part of drachma, or denarius; & eight drachma, or denarii, weighing an ounce of silver.Two oboli beeing the third part of drachma, or denarius; & eight drachma, or denarii, weighing an ounce of siluer.
oJo. Athon. gloss. in constit. Othon. de concubin. clericor. removend. Fr. Sansovin. de administr. regnor & rerumpub. lib. 11. cap. de mareschallo.Io. Athon. gloss. in constit. Othon. de concubin. clericor. remouend. Fr. Sansouin. de administr. regnor & rerumpub. lib. 11. cap. de mareschallo.
But if one, desirous of an harlots company, could have her so cheap, and should plead for him self that the money he spendeth on her is his own, & the charge not great, neither would he give the less unto the poor for that, nor more without it: were this a lawful bar to stay us from accusing him of 7riot, I mean, of wasteful and unhonest spending; (give it a fitter English name, if you know any; I took that which our best interpreters agree on;) but might we not accuse him thereof upon the same ground that Scripture doeth the prodigal son? Or, if some Preacher, more severe then pCato, should deal so strictly and rigorously with him; might he ask what similitude there is, or can be, between his expense of two pence half-penny, and the prodigal son, who in such a sort, as he did, spent all, and brought himself to the extremest misery? Much fault have you found with my hard incomparable comparisons and similitudes; & some of them are 8hard in deed, though none incomparable: but I must say thereof, as the Apostle of his boasting, qyou have compelled me. For when I took a softer and more gentle course, as here, to encounter that answer made to Momus, Thou sayest the charge is great; but thou mayst come, and look on, Momus, and pay nothing, no man doeth ask thee a penny; ⟨p. 145⟩I resembled it to an answer which the prodigal son might thus have made to his reprover, Thou blamest me for wasting, but I wast none of thine; thou mayst drink with me scot-free, if thou be a good fellow, & welcome: albeit the very word, wasting, might have showed I meant unhonest spending, (for rthings spent honestly are not wasted,) chiefly sith I used it in respect of the riot noted by our Saviour; and in the unthrifts speech, drawing good fellows to drink with him, I pointed to his lusty, excessive, dissolute sdrinkings with lewd companions like himself; yet you did reply, that, if he had been as moderate and thrifty in spending at his board, as you were at your plays, he might well enough have said to any niggard, that should have unwisely found fault with him, as much as I make him say, not with the note of a prodigal, but with the commendation of an ingenuous and liberal disposition.
But if one, desirous of an harlots company, could have her so cheape, and should pleade for him self that the moony he spendeth on her is his owne, & the charge not great, neither would he geve the lesse vnto the poore for that, nor more without it: were this a lawfull barre to stay vs from accusing him of 7riott, I meane, of wastfull and vnhonest spending; (give it a fitter English name, if you know any; I tooke that which our best interpreters agree on;) but might we not accuse him thereof vpon the same ground that Scripture doeth the prodigall sonne? Or, if some Preacher, more severe then pCato, should deale so strictly and rigorously with him; might he aske what similitude there is, or can be, betweene his expense of two pence half-peny, and the prodigall sonne, who in such a sort, as he did, spent all, and brought himselfe to the extremest miserie? Much fault haue you found with my hard incomparable comparisons and similitudes; & some of them are 8hard in deede, though none incōparable: but I must say thereof, as the Apostle of his boasting, qyou haue compelled me. For when I tooke a softer and more gentle course, as here, to encounter that aunswere made to Momus, Thou saist the charge is great; but thou mayst come, and looke on, Momus, and pay nothing, no man doeth aske thee a peny; ⟨p. 145⟩I resembled it to an aunswere which the prodigall sonne might thus haue made to his reproover, Thou blamest me for wasting, but I wast none of thine; thou mayst drinke with me scotfree, if thou be a good felow, & welcome: albeit the very woord, wasting, might haue shewed I meant vnhonest spending, (for rthinges spent honestly are not wasted,) chiefly sith I vsed it in respect of the riot noted by our Saviour; and in the vnthrifts speech, drawing good felowes to drinke with him, I pointed to his lusty, excessive, dissolute sdrinkings with lewde companions like himselfe; yet you did reply, that, if hee had bene as moderate and thrifty in spending at his boord, as you were at your playes, he might well enough have said to any niggard, that should haue vnwisely found fault with him, as much as I make him say, not with the note of a prodigall, but with the commendation of an ingenuous and liberall disposition.
7[Greek or Hebrew]〈non-Latin alphabet〉
pHorat. satyrar. li 1. sat. 2
8Sed quid opus teneras mordaci radere vero Auricolas? Pers. sat. 1.
Whereby you make me see, to what reproachful contumelies of a niggardly mind, and want of wisdom and discretion, I should have laid my self open, if I had still endeavoured to disclose unto you the weakness of your answers by gentle similitudes. That similitude therefore of mine, the tender smoothness whereof occasioned you to mistake my meaning, and entertain it so coarsely, I have now corrected with substituting a rougher, which may deliver you from error, and me from such taunts. For seeing you perceive this to be my meaning, that the threefold answer made by you to Momus is like as if tGallonius, or some other Epicure, reproved by a Stoic for going to the stews, should answer him; Thou blamest me for spending two pence half-penny on a wench, but I spend none of thine; thou mayest go with me thither, if thou be a good fellow, & I will give her as much for thee too; the charge, though it seem great to thee, is small to me; neither will I bestow a dodkin less upon the poor for that, nor more without it: you will not reply, that if Gallonius had been as moderate and thrifty in his spending at his bed, as you were at your plays, (they cost a number of you more, you wot, in several, then twice two pence half-penny;) he might well enough have said to any niggard, that should have unwisely found fault with him, as much as I make him say, not with the note of a prodigal, but with the ⟨p. 146⟩commendation of an ingenuous and liberal disposition. And so, by the other similitude likewise mended, and as it were rough hewen, you may the better learn to discern my drift, and spare your own replying. For when, to discover the poverty of your answer touching the poor, I said, that Nero peradventure was either less able, or less willing to help the poor, by reason of five or six thousand pound given for a Plaudit; which charge notwithstanding he might better bear, then some of your students may five or six shillings: you replied, that, if Nero could have as well spared such huge sums of money, which he spent that way often, as your House, with the company in it, and belonging to it, can once in many years thirty pounds: Nero should have been wronged greatly, being an Emperor, to have been noted of wastefulness; and, if ever he had any such good mind, he mought nevertheless have relieved the poor.
Whereby you make mee see, to what reprochefull contumelies of a niggardly minde, and want of wisedome and discretion, I should haue laid my selfe open, if I had still endevoured to disclose vnto you the weaknes of your aunswers by gentle similitudes. That similitude therefore of mine, the tender smoothnes whereof occasioned you to mistake my meaning, and intertaine it so coursly, I have now corrected with substituting a rougher, which may deliver you from errour, and me from such tantes. For seeing you perceve this to be my meaning, that the threefold answer made by you to Momus is like as if tGallonius, or some other Epicure, reprooved by a Stoike for going to the stewes, should answer him; Thou blamest me for spending two pence half-peny on a wench, but I spend none of thine; thou maist goe with me thither, if thou be a good felow, & I will give her as much for thee too; the charge, though it seeme great to thee, is small to me; neither will I bestow a dodkin lesse vpon the poore for that, nor more without it: you will not reply, that if Gallonius had bene as moderate and thrifty in his spending at his bedde, as you were at your playes, (they cost a number of you more, you wote, in severall, then twise two pence halfe-peny;) hee might well enough have said to any niggard, that should haue vnwisely found fault with him, as much as I make him say, not with the note of a prodigall, but with the ⟨p. 146⟩commendation of an ingenuous and liberall disposition. And so, by the other similitude likewise mended, and as it were rough hewen, you may the better learne to discerne my drift, and spare your owne replying. For when, to discover the povertie of your aunswere touching the poore, I said, that Nero peradventure was either lesse able, or lesse willing to helpe the poore, by reason of five or sixe thousand pownd given for a Plaudite; which charge notwithstanding he might better beare, then some of your students may fiue or six shillings: you replyed, that, if Nero could haue as well spared such huge summes of moony, which hee spent that way often, as your House, with the company in it, and belonging to it, can once in many yeares thirty powndes: Nero should haue bene wronged greatly, being an Emperour, to haue bene noted of wastfulnes; and, if ever hee had any such good minde, hee mought neverthelesse haue releeved the poore.
Now, altering and changing Neros charge on Plaudit into vhis charge on Act (a harlot whom he loved better then his wife,) and telling you that he was less able, or less willing (nay, both) to help the poor, by reason of 9gifts bestowed on her: I shall not hear, I trust, that, if Nero could have as well spared the sundry sums of money which he spent that way often, as your House, with the company in it, and belonging to it, can once in many years thirty pounds: Nero should have been wronged greatly, being an Emperor, to have been noted of wastefulness. No, not, though in adding that clause, being an Emperor, you seem to allude to xAristotle's saying, that 1Princes are not termed wasteful, or prodigal. For therein he respecteth 2the abundance of their wealth, which Nero could hardly exceed in gifts and expenses: not the 3quality of the matters that they spend their wealth on, wherein as prodigal persons may and do wast, so Nero. Neither will you affirm that Nero mought nevertheless have relieved the poor; for fear least you cause your reader to suspect you of shamelessness, or sophistry. Shamelessness, if you say, that, whatsoever it were which Nero gave to Act, he had no whit the less in his coffers to give others. Sophistry, if by the word nevertheless, you mean, notwithstanding. For Phoedria in the yComedy, mought have helped Parmeno, notwithstanding ⟨p. 147⟩the money that he spent on Thais. Yet 4the greater charge he was at with his harlot, the less had he remaining to give his poor servant. And your doubt, if Nero had ever any such good mind, will be as badly opposed unto my speech of his less willingness. For both him self, zhaving so good a mind once, became aworse minded afterward, when he was grown bwasteful such ways, yea, simply wasteful, proving that to be possible which Aristotle judgeth 5not easy to be done: and if he had always been equally ill-minded, yet cometh it otherwise to pass in mans nature, as you might have learned by Caesar and Plutarch. Of whom the one, beholding certain rich strangers and foreigners, at Rome, carrying whelps of dogs and apes in their bosoms, and making much of them, did ask, Whether women brought not forth children in their countries:
Nowe, altering and changing Neros charge on Plaudite into vhis charge on Acte (a harlot whom hee loved better then his wife,) and telling you that he was lesse able, or lesse willing (nay, both) to helpe the poore, by reason of 9gifts bestowed on her: I shall not heare, I trust, that, if Nero could haue as well spared the sundry summes of moony which he spent that way often, as your House, with the company in it, and belonging to it, can once in many yeares thirty powndes: Nero should haue bene wronged greatly, beeing an Emperour, to haue bene noted of wastfulnes. No, not, though in adding that clause, being an Emperour, you seeme to allude to xAristotles saying, that 1Princes are not termed wastfull, or prodigall. For therin he respecteth 2the abundance of their wealth, which Nero could hardly exceede in gifts and expenses: not the 3qualitie of the matters that they spend their wealth on, wherin as prodigall persons may and doe wast, so Nero. Neither will you affirme that Nero mought neverthelesse have releeved the poore; for feare least you cause your reader to suspect you of shamelesnesse, or sophistrie. Shamelesnesse, if you say, that, whatsoever it were which Nero gaue to Acte, he had no whit the lesse in his coffers to giue others. Sophistrie, if by the woorde neverthelesse, you meane, notwithstanding. For Phoedria in the yComedie, mought haue helped Parmeno, notwithstanding ⟨p. 147⟩the moony that he spent on Thais. Yet 4the greater charge he was at with his harlot, the lesse had he remaining to giue his poore seruant. And your dout, if Nero had ever any such good minde, will bee as badly opposed vnto my speech of his lesse willinglesse. For both him selfe, zhaving so good a minde once, became a
vCorn. Tacit. annal. li. 13.
9Quae Princeps furtim mulierculae tribuebat.
xEthicor. li. […].Ethicor. li. 〈…〉.
1[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
2[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
3[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
yTerent. Eun.
4Nam quod nos capere oportet haec intercipit.
zSueton Ner. cap. 10.
aCap. 32. & 38.
bca. 30. & 31.
5[Greek or Hebrew] in the words alleged.〈non-Latin alphabet〉 in ye woords alleaged.
cthe other saith that Caesar herein gave a worthy and princely admonition to them 6who do consume & wast, upon beasts, the natural affection and love due to men. Both, evidently showing, that the more we spend on things of less value, the less we are disposed to spend on things more precious; sith, das a mans love is, so is his willingness to spend for love sake: and the love of apes and dogs may better stand with the love of Children, eeach of them being to be loved, though not alike; then expenses on plays may with relieving of the poor, fthe Lord accounting mercy had upon the poor, as had upon him self, & money spent on plays, being as money spent on harlots. Wherefore, if you will be suitable to your self, & as you deal for plays, so for the love of apes & dogs, for which you may more reasonably; your threefold answer against Momus in your own defence, is quickly turned against Caesar & Plutarch, for those strangers: The love, which they did bear to the whelps of dogs and apes, was their own love, it was not Caesars, or Plutarchs; great might it be to Caesar and Plutarch, mean to them; neither would they love children the less for that, nor more without it. And as you assaulted Momus with the Scripture, telling him that Judas his speech, who said, what needed this wast? is an evil speech; and now, notwithstanding the difference between your plays and Christ; us and Judas, do think that it ⟨p. 148⟩may also be applied against either the niggardise, or the hypocrisy of any Momus, that shall condemn all expense, as cast away, that is sometime moderately bestowed upon honest sports and pastimes, and not upon the poor: so, what letteth you to think that it may also be applied against either the clownishness, or the hypocrisy of Caesar and Plutarch, who condemned all love, as cast away, that is sometime, moderately bestowed upon sweet whelps of dogs and apes, and not upon children? For, if you should answer, the case is unlike because you can not prove that mens colling and dandling of such whelps is seemly, which Caesar and Plutarch saw good cause to reprove: you must be remembered that yet you may say, the thing is seemly, though say it only, and deny their reproof to be just, though not refute it;
cthe other saith that Caesar herein gaue a woorthy and princely admonition to them 6who doe consume & wast, vpon beasts, the naturall affection and loue due to men. Both, evidently shewing, that the more wee spend on thinges of lesse value, the lesse we are disposed to spend on thinges more pretious; sith, das a mans loue is, so is his willingnes to spend for loue sake: and the loue of apes and dogges may better stande with the loue of Children, eeche of them beeing to bee loved, though not alike; then expenses on playes may with releeving of the poore, fthe Lorde accounting mercy had vpō the poore, as had vpō him selfe, & mony spēt on playes, being as mony spent on harlots. Wherfore, if you wil be sutable to your self, & as you deale for playes, so for the loue of apes & dogges, for which you may more reasonably; your threefold answer against Momus in your own defense, is quicklie turned against Caesar & Plutarch, for those strangers: The loue, which they did beare to the whelpes of dogges and apes, was their owne loue, it was not Caesars, or Plutarchs; great might it be to Caesar and Plutarch, meane to them; neither would they loue children the lesse for that, nor more without it. And as you assaulted Momus with the Scripture, telling him that Iudas his speech, who said, what needed this wast? is an evill speech; and nowe, notwithstanding the difference betwene your playes and Christ; vs and Indas, doe thinke that it ⟨p. 148⟩may also be applyed against either the niggardise, or the hypocrisie of any Momus, that shall condemne all expense, as cast away, that is sometime moderatly bestowed vpon honest sportes and pastimes, and not vpon the poore: so, what letteth you to thinke that it may also bee applyed against either the clownishnes, or the hypocrisie of Caesar and Plutarch, who condemned all loue, as cast away, that is sometime, moderatly bestowed vpon sweete whelpes of dogges and apes, and not vpon children? For, if you should answer, the case is vnlike because you can not proove that mens colling and dandeling of such whelpes is seemely, which Caesar and Plutarch sawe good cause to reproove: you must bee remembred that yet you may say, the thing is seemely, though say it onely, and deny their reproofe to bee iust, though not refute it;
as you avouch against me that your plays were honest and lawful recreations, whatsoever is rather objected then proved to the contrary. Nay, if Caesar, or Plutarch, had, beside their reasons to prove it unseemly; alleged sundry testimonies of Romans and Grecians so esteeming it, as I did the judgements of a Lacedaemonian, of Horace, of Tully of other learned men, to show that they deemed such cost, as you were at, to be vain and wasteful: yet, as you reply to me that all Paynim and heathen judgement you have answered in the defence of your first reason; so might you to them, that all the testimonies which they bring, you have answered in the 7prologue of your last play. I have read gthat when the Spaniards invincible navy met with ours, about some five years since, upon the narrow seas, it was published in print, at Paris, by Mendoza the Spaniards procurement, that they got a brave victory, wherein my Lord Admiral of England, with sixteen of the Queens great ships, were sunk to the bottom of the sea, and the rest put to flight with the Vice-admiral Francis Drake. But, God be thanked, we saw my Lord Admiral of England alive at her Majesties late being here with us: and now may the Mendozians pick out of their own hMercurius Gallobelgicus, that neither any one ship of the Queens navy, were it great, or small, was sunk by the Spaniards, nor the Vice-admiral put to flight.
as you avouch against mee that your playes were honest and lawfull recreations, whatsoever is rather obiected then prooved to the contrary. Nay, if Caesar, or Plutarch, had, beside their reasons to proove it vnseemely; alleaged sundry testimonies of Romans and Grecians so esteeming it, as I did the iudgements of a Lacedemonian, of Horace, of Tullie of other learned men, to shew that they deemed such cost, as you were at, to bee vaine and wastfull: yet, as you reply to me that all Paynim and heathen iudgement you haue answered in the defense of your first reason; so might you to them, that all the testimonies which they bring, you haue aunswered in the 7prologue of your last play. I haue read gthat whē the Spaniards invincible navie mett with ours, about some five yeares since, vpon the narow seas, it was published in print, at Parise, by Mendoza the Spaniards procurement, that they gott a brave victorie, wherein my Lorde Admirall of England, with sixteene of the Queenes great shippes, were sunke to the bottome of the sea, and the rest put to flight with the Vice-admirall Francis Drake. But, God bee thanked, wee saw my Lord Admirall of England alive at her Maiesties late being here with vs: and now may the Mendozians picke out of their owne hMercurius Gallobelgicus, that neither any one shippe of the Queenes navie, were it great, or small, was sunke by the Spaniards, nor the Vice-admirall put to flight.
And thus at length approaching unto the conclusion, I come ⟨p. 149⟩to your maintenance of that which you objected concerning the judgement of our University. Wherewith (least I pass any thing of weight in your reply, as you do many in mine) I will join that elsewhere you touch about the worshipful, & sometimes honourable presence at your plays; and those reverend, famous, and excellent men, for life, and learning, and their places in the Church of God, who have been not only writers of such things them selves, but also actors, and do think well of them (as you affirm) to this day. Our Universities judgement therefore you avow that you produced rightfully to the approving of your plays, because the greater part of the University did with their hearty applause approve them. An argument, that neither layeth sound foundation, nor buildeth thereupon to purpose. For how prove you, first, that the greater part did with their hearty applause approve them; seeing you acknowledge that many, some absent, some present, disallowed them? Forsooth, you say, you are sure of it. But your bold avouching things, you are not sure of, doeth make me doubt of your assurance. For, upon my speech that certain who came thither were pressed thereunto by great importunity, you wish they had more truly, and more charitably, for dancing, kissing, and other demeanour, reported to me of your plays, with such a mind as you will forbear (you say) to speak of. Wherein you do charge them, how charitably, judge your self; but questionless, most untruly, with making false reports of your plays to me, to whom they made no report at all thereof. Yea, you take upon you to pronounce of their thoughts: and say they did it with such a mind, as in your ifigurative forbearing to speak of, you speak most bitterly of, and raise a very wrongful and vile suspicion of them. Again, where I told you how the grave and learned man, our common friend, showed me his dislike of the representation of amorousness, and drunkenness; in the Comedy, both; the former, not in it only: you say, that you know how far he did somewhat dislike some Comical action; but you are sure he commended much the plays to you, & would be sorry that any speech of his should be, by mistaking, alleged against you.
And thus at length approching vnto the conclusion, I come ⟨p. 149⟩to your maintenance of that which you obiected concerning the iudgement of our Vniversitie. Wherewith (least I passe any thing of weight in your reply, as you doe many in mine) I will ioyne that elswhere you touch about the woorshipfull, & sometimes honorable presence at your playes; and those reverend, famous, and excellent men, for life, and learning, and their places in the Church of God, who haue bene not onely writers of such things them selves, but also actors, and doe thinke well of them (as you affirme) to this day. Our Vniversities iudgement therefore you avow that you produced rightfully to the approoving of your playes, because the greater part of the Universitie did with their harty applause approove them. An argument, that neither layeth sound foundation, nor buildeth therevpon to purpose. For how proove you, first, that the greater part did with their harty appause approove them; seeing you acknowledge that many, some absent, some present, disallowed them? Forsooth, you say, you are sure of it. But your bolde avouching thinges, you are not sure of, doeth make mee dout of your assurance. For, vpon my speech that certaine who came thither were pressed therevnto by great importunitie, you wish they had more truly, and more charitably, for dansing, kissing, and other demeanour, reported to me of your playes, with such a minde as you will forbeare (you say) to speake of. Wherein you doe charge them, how charitably, iudge your selfe; but questionlesse, most vntruly, with making false reports of your playes to me, to whom they made no report at all thereof. Yea, you take vpon you to pronounce of their thoughts: and say they did it with such a minde, as in your ifigurative forbearing to speake of, you speake most bitterly of, and raise a very wrongfull and vile suspicion of them. Againe, where I tolde you how the grave and learned man, our common friend, shewed me his dislike of the representation of amorousnes, and drunkennes; in the Comedie, both; the former, not in it onely: you say, that you know how farre hee did somewhat dislike some Comicall action; but you are sure he commended much the playes to you, & would be sorry that any speech of his should bee, by mistaking, alleaged against you.
And do you not in assuring us after this sort that he did like of your ⟨p. 150⟩plays, saving a little in the Comedy, imply that he disliked nought in any tragedy? Or breed you not a slanderous surmise of his integrity, as if he had commended to you the very same, which unto me he discommended? Or seek you not to make men think that I mistook him, in fathering that upon him; when him self hath sithence acknowledged unto me, that I mistook him not; and (as I am persuaded) hath certified you no less too?
And doe you not in assuring vs after this sort that hee did like of your ⟨p. 150⟩playes, saving a litle in the Comedie, imply that hee disliked nought in any tragedie? Or breede you not a sclanderous surmise of his integritie, as if hee had commended to you the very same, which vnto me he discommended? Or seeke you not to make men thinke that I mistooke him, in fathering that vpon him; when him selfe hath sithence acknowledged vnto mee, that I mistooke him not; and (as I am perswaded) hath certified you no lesse too?
Wherefore your pronouncing, that you are sure the greater part did with their hearty applause approve your plays, may rather prove you to be rash, then your assertion to be true. Chiefly, sith you mention, not only their applause, a thing that sense might judge of; but their hearty applause, a circumstance presumed by your conceit peradventure. For as they did 8clap their hands after your plays, so 9after the appendix thereof touching Momus. Which yet some approvers of your plays approved not: as them selves have signified. How can you then be sure, that all, who did clap their hands, did it with liking; and that the applause, which they gave, was hearty? Beside that, if their hearts joined with their hands, how can you be sure they approved your plays by such applause, and not somewhat else? As kTully declareth that the Romans used it to show their love of gracious persons: and in lone of your plays 1you wished it to be given to her gracious Majesty. Nether is it impossible, but that, as a mnumber gave it to the 2apparel and furniture of the stage at Rome: so lighter bodies might with you. And what if the graver sort did show the liking of your pains and charges employed for their delight sake? or of the better parts; not of wantons, of drunkards, & of the whole plays? Now, suppose the greater part of the University approved them with their hearty applause: might you therefore lawfully urge the Universities judgment as making for them? Yea, say you, if the greater part may denominate the whole, Nay, by your leave, even so too will you come short still, unless you add, that judgement and hearty applause is all one: which nhe, who affirmed that 3the people of Rome was lead with affection sometimes, not with judgement, did put a difference ⟨p. 151⟩between. And though the greater part denominate the whole, commonly; & always may, if the word, greater, be well expounded: yet there fall out cases when the lesser part in number shall denominate it, and the greater shall not. For example sake, othere were in the primitive Church certain Christians (as in ours there are) who, having lost somewhat, would go to a wizard, or a setter of figures, or other such soothsayer, to know how it went from them, or by what means they might recover it. pOne of the general Councils spake against this: and called it 4a pernicious and an heathenish custom.
Wherefore your pronouncing, that you are sure the greater part did with their hartie applause approoue your playes, may rather proove you to bee rash, then your assertion to be true. Chieflie, sith you mention, not onely their applause, a thing that sense might iudge of; but their harty applause, a circumstance presumed by your conceit peradventure. For as they did 8clappe their handes after your playes, so 9after the appendix thereof touching Momus. Which yet some approovers of your playes approoved not: as them selves haue signified. How can you then be sure, that all, who did clappe their handes, did it with liking; and that the applause, which they gave, was hartie? Beside that, if their hearts ioyned with their handes, how can you be sure they approoved your playes by such applause, and not somewhat else? As kTullie declareth that the Romans vsed it to shew their loue of gratious persons: and in lone of your playes 1you wished it to be geuen to her gratious Maiestie. Nether is it impossible, but that, as a mnumber gaue it to the 2apparell and furniture of the stage at Rome: so lighter bodyes might with you. And what if the grauer sort did shew the liking of your paines and charges employed for their delite sake? or of the better parts; not of wantons, of drunckards, & of the whole playes? Now, suppose the greater part of the Vniversitie approoued them with their harty applause: might you therefore lawfully vrge the Universities iudgment as making for them? Yea, say you, if the greater part may denominate the whole, Nay, by your leaue, euen so too will you come short still, vnlesse you adde, that iudgement and harty applause is all one: which nhe, who affirmed that 3the people of Rome was lead with affection sometimes, not with iudgement, did put a difference ⟨p. 151⟩betweene. And though the greater part denominate the whole, cōmonly; & alwayes may, if the woord, greater, be well expounded: yet there fall out cases when the lesser part in number shall denominate it, and the greater shall not. For example sake,
3In comitiis, praesertim aedilitiis, studium esse populi, non •dicium.
oSynod. A• cyr. can. 2•. Basil. ep. ad Amphil. can. 83. Greg. Nysse. epist. ad. Lat. can. 3
pSext. synod. in Trul. can. 61.
4[Greek or Hebrew], saith the Councell touching this and the like customs.〈non-Latin alphabet〉, saith the Councell touching this and the like customes.
The number of Bishops assembled in that Council was lesser of all likelihood (amounting qnot to twelve score) then the number of Christians, who either used that practise them selves, or liked it in others. Yet, in my opinion, the Churches judgement did control it: and to say the contrary, because the greater part denominateth the whole, were most injurious to the Church. Or, if this example satisfy you not, rthe same Council made a decree, that 5no man should put on woman's raiment. Whereto, being pressed by me, when you reply that the voice of the Church therein may be interpreted by them who are of your mind; you acknowledge, that, taking it in the right sense, it is the Churches judgement. And the sense thereof by 6your interpretation of putting on, or wearing, must be that none may do it commonly. So, the Council speaking of doing it in plays, you grant that the Churches judgement is against it as common players use to practise it. But greater assemblies of Christians then that Council, allow it in common players: the Curtain and Theatre can tell so much. Neither will you say, that common players are approved by the Churches judgement. For, the Churches judgement you profess obedience too: yet 7common players you condemn. The lesser part therefore in number may sometime denominate the whole; and the greater may not. Which if we apply to the case in question, it is plain you should not have urged the Universities judgement for your plays, although the greater part thereof had approved them. For, the chiefest cause that moved the governors of our University, the Uicechancellour and Convocation, to forbid by ⟨p. 152⟩statute the use of common plays among us, was, sleast the younger sort should be spectators of so many lewd and evil sports as in them are practised. Now, reason doeth give, that men of understanding, who, through a godly care of the good training up of youth, restrained them from seeing those plays, because of such sports; must think it inconvenient for them to see such sports in what soever plays, even in your Rivals. And, if inconvenient to see such sports only, much more to play and represent such:
The number of Bishops assembled in that Councell was lesser of all likelyhoode (amounting qnot to twelve score) then the number of Christians, who either vsed that practise them selves, or liked it in others. Yet, in my opinion, the Churches iudgement did controll it: and to say the contrary, because the greater part denominateth the whole, were most iniurious to the Church. Or, if this example satisfie you not, rthe same Councell made a decree, that 5no man should put on womans raiment. Whereto, being pressed by me, whē you reply that the voice of the Church therein may be interpreted by them who are of your minde; you acknowlege, that, taking it in the right sense, it is the Churches iudgement. And the sense thereof by 6your interpretation of putting on, or wearing, must be that none may doe it commonly. So, the Councell speaking of doeing it in playes, you graunt that the Churches iudgement is against it as common players vse to practise it. But greater assemblies of Christians then that Councell, allow it in common players: the Curtaine and Theater can tell so much. Neither will you say, that common players are approoved by the Churches iudgement. For, the Churches iudgement you professe obedience too: yet 7cōmon players you condemne. The lesser part therefore in number may sometime denominate the whole; and the greater may not. Which if wee apply to the case in question, it is playne you should not have vrged the Universities iudgement for your playes, although the greater part thereof had approoved them. For, the chiefest cause that moved the governours of our Vniversitie, the Uicechancellour and Convocation, to forbidde by ⟨p. 152⟩statute the vse of common playes among vs, was, sleast the younger sort should be spectators of so many lewde and evil sports as in them are practised. Now, reason doeth give, that men of vnderstanding, who, through a godly care of the good training vp of youth, restrayned them from seeing those playes, because of such sportes; must thinke it inconvenient for them to see such sportes in what soever playes, even in your Rivales. And, if inconvenient to see such sportes onely, much more to play and represent such:
qTheodor. Balsam. de ea synodo quae dicitur sexta.
rCan. 62.
5[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
6Of the text of Scripture, Deut. 22. 5. where the Greek tram slation hath, [Greek or Hebrew]: the very words used by the Councell.Of the text of Scripture, Deut. 22. 5. where the Greeke trā slation hath, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉: the very woords vsed by the Councell.
7Histrioniam accusas? Non defendo sed famam, pudorem, atque innocentiam. Histrioniam vero ipsam, vel tecum accusabo, si voles.
sThe University statute against common stageplayers: made in the year 1584.The Vniuersitie statute against common stageplayers: made in the yeare 1584.
the representing of them being so far worse, then the beholding, in tPlato's judgement, that 8they would be seen and known, he sayeth, because their contraries, honest things and serious, can not be known without them, if one intend to be wise; but 9practise both them, and their contraries, it is impossible, if one intend to have as much as a spark of virtue. Our governors might think more hopefully, then Plato, that virtuous youths may do them both: and Plato peradventure meant by impossible, very hard, as vTully 1elsewhere doeth interpret him. But the dutiful reverence, which I owe unto them, will not permit me to judge of them, that where Plato suffered his citizens to see sports of folly and scurrility, yet none 2beside bondslaves & mercenary strangers to imitate and express them: the guides of our University should deem it convenient for youths to be actors of loose and wanton pranks, whereof to be spectators, they have pronounced it unmeet and hurtful for them. Wherefore, what soever the greater part approved with their hearty applause, I am persuaded still that you did wrong in urging the Universities judgement as making for your plays. No less in a manner, then if one beholding a great number of Scholars playing in winter time at football, should say, the Universities judgement doeth approve it. Which I contrariwise should be so far from thinking, that if any graver man were looking on them, or touched the ball with his foot, I would take it rather to savour of affection borne to some playing thereat, then of judgement.
the representing of them beeing so farre woorse, then the beholding, in tPlatos iudgement, that 8they would be seene and knowne, hee sayeth, because their contraries, honest things and serious, can not be knowen without them, if one intend to bee wise; but 9practise both them, and their contraries, it is impossible, if one intende to have as much as a sparke of vertue. Our gouvernours might thinke more hopefully, then Plato, that vertuous youths may doe them both: and Plato peradventure meant by impossible, very hard, as vTullie 1elswhere doeth interpret him. But the duetifull reverence, which I owe vnto them, will not permitt me to iudge of them, that where Plato suffered his citizens to see sportes of folly and scurrilitie, yet none 2beside bondslaves & mercenarie strangers to imitate and expresse them: the guides of our Universitie should deeme it convenient for youths to be actors of loose and wanton prankes, whereof to be spectatours, they have pronounced it vnmeete and hurtfull for them. Wherefore, what soeuer the greater part approoved with their harty applause, I am perswaded still that you did wrong in vrging the Universities iudgement as making for your playes. No lesse in a manner, then if one beholding a great number of Scholers playing in winter time at footeball, should saye, the Universities iudgement doeth approove it. Which I contrariewise should be so farre from thinking, that if any graver man were looking on them, or touched the ball with his foote, I would take it rather to savour of affection borne to some playing thereat, then of iudgement.
As for the worshipful, and sometimes honourable presence at your plays, you might seem to press it against me with more credit, ⟨p. 153⟩if honourable and worshipful persons never used to grace any plays, save only yours, with their presence. But if they be present at common plays also, such as our University-statute banisheth hence, and your self make offer that 3you will join with me in writing against the players thereof, if I will: consider with your self what you would answer to this argument alleged by those players, and let the same serve on my behalf to yours. For a supply whereof I add, that worthy personages, who, upon entreaty, become your spectators, perhaps think with Plato, that the seeing of Comedies played can do no harm, of tragedies may be dangerous; perhaps incline to Aristotle, that they both may safely be seen by elder folk, not by younger: and so, though them selves behold one, or both, yet do they warrant neither of the points you strive for; I mean, that either students of Christ-church may be actors, or the youth of Oxford spectators of your plays. xThere were at Vienna, in the time of Trajan the Emperor, by some bodies last will and testament, certain solemn games and shows set forth yearly: 4the which, as Pliny saith, had stained the manners of the inhabitants of that city, in like sort as the games & shows set forth at Rome had stained the manners of all the world. This corruption of manners was not bred by other exercises and masteries tried, in those games, but by the stage-plays, as a ylearned man of your profession judgeth: and zPlinies own speech, concerning sundry kinds of games among the Romans, maketh it most probable, that he meant, the corruption grew from stage-plays chiefly, if not from them alone.
As for the worshipfull, and sometimes honorable presence at your playes, you might seeme to presse it against me with more credit, ⟨p. 153⟩if honorable and worshipfull persons never vsed to grace any playes, saue onely yours, with their presence. But if they be present at common playes also, such as our Vniversitie-statute banisheth hence, and your selfe make offer that 3you will ioyne with me in writing aginst the players thereof, if I will: consider with your selfe what you would aunswere to this argument alleaged by those players, and let the same serve on my behalfe to yours. For a supply whereof I adde, that worthy personages, who, vpon intreatty, become your spectators, perhaps thinke with Plato, that the seeing of Comedies played can doe no harme, of tragedies may be dangerous; perhaps incline to Aristotle, that they both may safely bee seene by elder folke, not by younger: and so, though them selves beholde one, or both, yet doe they warrant neither of the pointes you strive for; I meane, that either students of Christ-church may bee actors, or the youth of Oxford spectators of your playes. xThere were at Uienna, in the time of Traian the Emperour, by some bodyes last will and testament, certaine solemne games and shewes sett foorth yearely: 4the which, as Plinie saith, had stained the maners of the inhabitants of that citie, in like sort as the games & shewes sett foorth at Rome had stained the maners of all the world. This corruption of maners was not bredde by other exercises and masteries tried, in those games, but by the stage-playes, as a ylearned man of your profession iudgeth: and zPlinies owne speech, concerning sundry kindes of games among the Romans, maketh it most probable, that he meant, the corruption grew from stage-playes chiefly, if not from them alone.
3Histrioniam ipsam vel tecum accusabo, si voles.
xPliny epistolar. lib. […]. ep. 22. ad Sempronium Rufum.Plini epistolar. lib. 〈…〉. ep. 22. ad Sempronium Rufum.
4Placuit ag• na tolli, qui mores Viennensium infecerat, ut noster hic omnium.Placuit ag• na tolli, qui mores Viennensium infecerat, vt noster hic omnium.
doest thou make our Emperour a Nabuchodonosor? But, I pray you, leave this Eunuches odious practise in racking my cōparisons: and marke the maine point whereat I aime in them, and which I seeke to open by them. For, as in Gryllus question, and verse, framed like yours, the circumstances giue, that he vsed the generall woord comprising man, thereby to breed a fansie that if this kinde of animal haue reason, why not the other? In like sorte your expresse mention of
reading, I say, of reading, not of playing, in shewing what a iewell you take the reciting of Seneca to be; maketh it probable that you meant to doe by the generalitie of the woord recitare.
getting mens applause, which Persius iesteth at. Now in that you adde hereto the Universitie, and make vs ioyne with the former in opinion, saying; So the Vniversitie would have thought it a more absurd thing, to have heard me, or any other, openly reading my Ulysses to them, then to have seene it acted, as it was: what meane you by this terme, So?
6At pulchrum est digito monstrari, & dicier, hic est.
with harlotts. Now, in Rome, of olde time, there were common
not easy to bee done: and if he had alwayes bene equally ill-minded, yet commeth it otherwise to passe in mans nature, as you might haue learned by Caesar and Plutarch. Of whom the one, beholding certaine rich strangers and foreiners, at Rome, carying whelpes of dogges and apes in their bosomes, and making much of them, did aske, Whether wemen brought not foorth children in their countries:
there were in the primitiue Church certaine Christians (as in ours there are) who, having lost sowewhat, would goe to a wisard, or a setter of figures, or other such soothsayer, to knowe how it went from them, or by what meanes they might recover it.
