Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 2, 1891.djvu/370

 FOLK-DRAMA.

N the following pages I shall not emulate the example of writers on English dramatic history, who ascribe the origin of our drama to the mediæval miracle-plays in a truly traditionary manner. If they could be questioned as to why they did this, I feel persuaded they could give no better answer than that which ever delights the ears of the folk-lore collector: “Because our fathers did it.” I feel that is not the place to trample on tradition; but this particular tradition is of literary origin, and I hope the mention of that fact alone will enlist the reader’s sympathies on the side of the iconoclast.

The author of a recent work on the English stage—a work in many respects of great importance and usefulness—even protests against the taking into account of early acting in rural districts and provincial towns in connection with “the general history of the stage”. All such matters he leaves aside as having no place in a book intended “as an aid to the literary student”.

The English drama, it is evident, is regarded as a literary institution, for which an arbitrary literary origin is to be accepted. Conformably with this conception, the same author remarks: “The principal reason for the existence of any players at all must be looked for in Court fashion and Royal patronage.” It is very clear that the people, the folk, are nowhere in this account. The usual conception of the origin of our drama may be stated in a few words as follows: It arose from the miracle-plays and mysteries, which gave way to moralities and interludes; these were succeeded by the Elizabethan drama, which was a