Master for the excision or alteration of obnoxious passages. It is a curious document. The draft of the original author has been patched and interpolated with partial redrafts in a variety of hands, amongst which, according to some palaeographers, is to be found that of Shakespeare. One wonders that any licenser should have been complaisant enough to consider the play at all in such a form; and obviously the instance is a crucial one against the theory of scrivener's copies.[1] It may also be argued on a priori grounds that such copies would be undesirable from the company's point of view, both as being costly and as tending to multiply the opportunities for 'surreptitious' transmission to rivals or publishers. Naturally it was necessary to copy out individual parts for the actors, and Alleyn's part in Orlando Furioso, with the 'cues', or tail ends of the speeches preceding his own, can still be seen at Dulwich.[2] From these 'parts' the 'original' could be reconstructed or 'assembled' in the event of destruction or loss.[3] Apparently the book-keeper also made a 'plot' or scenario of the action, and fixed it on a peg for his own guidance and that of the property-man in securing the smooth progress of the play.[4] Nor could the companies very well prevent the poets from keeping transcripts or at any rate rough copies, when they handed over their 'papers', complete or in instalments, as they drew their 'earnests' or payments 'in full'.[5] It does not follow that they always did so. We know that Daborne made fair copies for Henslowe;[6] but the Folio editors tell us that what Shakespeare thought 'he vttered with that easinesse,
- ↑ Sir Henry Herbert noted in his office-book in 1633 (Variorum, iii. 208), 'The Master ought to have copies of their new playes left with him, that he may be able to shew what he hath allowed or disallowed', but it was clearly not the current practice. In 1640 (Variorum, iii. 241) he suppressed an unlicensed play, and noted, 'The play I cald for, and, forbiddinge the playinge of it, keepe the booke', which suggests that only one copy existed.
- ↑ Greg, Henslowe Papers, 155, prints it; cf. 1 Antonio and Mellida, ind. 1, 'Enter . . . with parts in their hands'; Wily Beguiled, prol. 1, 'Where are these paltrie Plaiers? stil poaring in their papers and neuer perfect?' By derivation, the words assigned to an actor became his 'part'; cf. Dekker, News from Hell (1606, Works, ii. 144), 'with pittifull action, like a Plaier, when hees out of his part'.
- ↑ In 1623 Herbert re-allowed The Winter's Tale, 'thogh the allowed booke was missinge', and in 1625 The Honest Man's Fortune, 'the originall being lost' (Variorum, iii. 229).
- ↑ Cf. App. N.
- ↑ The handing over of 'papers' is referred to in several letters to Henslowe; cf. Henslowe Papers, 56, 69, 75, 76, 81, 82.
- ↑ He sends Henslowe an instalment 'fayr written', and on another occasion says, 'I send you the foule sheet and y^e fayr I was wrighting as your man can testify' (Henslowe Papers, 72, 78).
