Page:The Elizabethan stage (Volume 2).pdf/430



downe the playehowse then I wold do so & he beade me do & sayd he gaue me leaue & wold beare me owt for yt wasse in him to do yt.'

It is impossible to say whether 'Mr. Pope' was Thomas Pope of the King's men at the neighbouring Globe, or Morgan Pope, who was formerly interested in the Bear House, or some other Pope; nor is it clear how he was in a position to authorize Henslowe to pull down the theatre. Dr. Greg draws the natural inference from the wording that he may have given his consent as a prospective lessee of the property. In any case the Rose was not pulled down until two or three years later. The Sewers records show that in January 1604 not Philip but Francis Henslowe was amerced 6s. 8d. for it, which may mean that Lennox's men were playing there; that on 4 October 1605 Philip Henslowe was amerced, but return was made that it was 'out of his hands'; that on 14 February 1606 Edward Box, of Bread Street, London, was amerced for it; and that on 25 April 1606 Box was amerced for the site of 'the late playhouse in Maid lane'.

There is no record of plays at the Rose after 1603. It is in the Delaram engravings, but not in any later views except those of the Merian group, where it appears, flagged but unnamed, on the river edge. Nor is it mentioned with the Hope, Globe, and Swan in Holland's Leaguer (1632). The explanation may perhaps be that the Merian engraver followed some out-of-date authority, such as Delaram, which had got the house farther north than Norden puts it, and as it had long ceased to exist, did not know its name. On the other hand, it is also just conceivable that for a short period the Rose, or some other building at the north end of the Rose site, had a renewed life as a place of public entertainment. Alleyn was paying 'tithe dwe for the Rose' in 1622. And Malone cites Herbert's 'office-book' for a statement that after 1620 the Swan and the Rose were 'used occasionally for the exhibition of prize-fighters'.