Page:The Elizabethan stage (Volume 3).pdf/489

This page needs to be proofread.

WILLIAM RANKINS (> 1587-1601 <).

The moralist who published A Mirrour of Monsters (1587), The English Ape (1588), and Seven Satires (1598) is, in spite of the attack on plays (cf. App. C, No. xxxviii) in the first of these, probably identical with the dramatist who received payment from Henslowe on behalf of the Admiral's for the following plays during 1598-1601: (i) Mulmutius Dunwallow.

Oct. 1598, £3, 'to by a boocke', probably an old one.

(ii) Hannibal and Scipio.

With Hathway, Jan. 1601.

(iii) Scogan and Skelton.

With Hathway, Jan.-Mar. 1601.

(iv) The Conquest of Spain by John of Gaunt.

With Hathway, Mar.-Apr. 1601, but never finished, as shown by a letter to Henslowe from S. Rowley, bidding him let Hathway 'haue his papars agayne' (Henslowe Papers, 56).

Rankins has also been suggested as the author of Leire (cf. ch. xxiv).


THOMAS RICHARDS (c. 1577).

A possible author of Misogonus (cf. ch. xxiv).


HENRY ROBERTS (c. 1606).

A miscellaneous writer (D. N. B.) who described the visit of the King of Denmark to England (cf. ch. xxiv, C). The stationer of the same name, who printed the descriptions, may be either the author or his son (McKerrow, 229).


JOHN ROBERTS (c. 1574).

A contributor to the Bristol Entertainment of Elizabeth (cf. ch. xxiv, C).


ROBINSON.

Henslowe paid £3 on behalf of the Admiral's men on 9 Sept. 1602 'vnto M^r. Robensone for a tragedie called Felmelanco'. Later in the month he paid two sums amounting to another £3 to Chettle, for 'his tragedie' of the same name. The natural interpretation is that Chettle and Robinson co-operated, but Fleay, i. 70, rather wantonly says, 'Robinson was, I think, to Chettle what Mrs. Harris was to Mrs. Gamp', and Greg, Henslowe, ii. 224, while not agreeing with Fleay, 'It is, however, unlikely that he had any hand in the play. Probably Chettle had again pawned his MS.'

Dates make it improbable that this Robinson was the poet Richard Robinson whose lost 'tragedy' Hemidos and Thelay is not likely to have been a play (cf. App. M).