Page:The Elizabethan stage (Volume 2).pdf/140

 A year later, the Admiral's were with Burbadge at the Theatre, and there I conceive that the residue of Strange's, deserted by Symons, had joined them. If they were too many for the house, we know that the Curtain was available as an 'easer'. After the quarrel with Burbadge in May 1591, the two companies probably went together to the Rose. The main evidence for such a theory is that, while the Privy Council record of play-warrants include two for the Admiral's men in respect of plays and feats of activity on 27 December 1590 and 16 February 1591, the corresponding Chamber payments are to George Ottewell on behalf of Strange's men.

This amalgamation of Strange's and the Admiral's, tentative perhaps in 1588-9, and conclusive, if not in 1589-90, at any rate in 1590-1, lasted until 1594. So far as Court records are concerned, the company seems to have been regarded as Strange's. But the leading actor, Edward Alleyn, kept his personal status as the Lord Admiral's servant, and it is to be observed that, for whatever reason, both the Admiral's and Strange's continue to appear, not only in combination, but also separately in provincial documents. I had better give the complicated and in some cases uncertain notices in full; the unspecified references are to Murray: Cambridge (1591-2), 'my Lord Stranges plaiers' (Cooper, ii. 518), and so also (ii. 229, 284) Canterbury (13 July 1592) and Gloucester (1591-2); Bath (1591-10 June 1592), 'my Lord Admiralls players' 'my L. Stranges plaiers' (ii. 202); Aldeburgh (1591-2), 'my Lord Admirals players' (Stopes, Hunnis, 314); Shrewsbury (30 Sept. 1591-29 Sept. 1592), 'my L. Admeralls players' 'my l. Stranges and my l. Admyralls players' (ii. 392, s. a. 1592-3, but the entries for the two years seem to be transposed; vide infra); Coventry (10 Dec. 1591-29 Nov. 1592), 'the Lord Strange players' (ii. 240); Leicester (19 Dec. 1592), 'the Lorde Admiralls Playars' (ii. 305); Shrewsbury (30 Sept. 1592-29 Sept. 1593), 'The iii of Feb: 1592. Bestowed vppon the players of my Lorde Admyrall' 'my L. Darbyes men being players' (ii. 392, s. a. 1591-2, but the detailed date and the name Derby make an error palpable); Bath (11 June 1592-10 Sept. 1593), 'my L. Stranges plaiers' (ii. 203); Coventry (30 Nov. 1592-26 Nov. 1593), 'the Lo Admiralls players' (ii. 240); York (April 1593), 'the Lord Admerall & Lord Mordens players' (ii. 412); Newcastle (May 1593), 'my Lord Admiralls plaiers, and my Lord Morleis plaiers being all in one companye' (G. B. Richardson, Extracts from Municipal Accounts of N.); Southampton (1592-3), 'my L. Morleys players and the Earle of Darbyes' (ii. 398, 'c. 18 May', but Strange became Derby on 25 Sept.); Leicester (Oct.-Dec. 1593), 'the Erle of Darbyes playors' (ii. 306); Coventry (2 Dec. 1593), 'the Lo: of Darbyes players' (ii. 240); Bath (11 Sept. 1593-1594), 'the L. Admiralls, the L. Norris players' (ii. 203); Ipswich (7 March 1594), 'vnto therlle of Darbys players and to the Lorde Admirals players, the ij amongste' (ii. 293, s. a. 1591-2, but on 7 March 1592 Strange was not yet Derby, and his men were playing for Henslowe). Of this various explanations are conceivable. One is that the municipal officials were not very precise in their methods, and when an amalgamated