gance, making the play more like a kaleidoscope than a drama of normal human beings. The horrible "black room" scene in The Conspiracy, the "mummy" scene in Sacrifice, the scene in The Royal Mischief in which Osman is shot off in a cannon, and the scene of Bajazet beating out his brains in Tamerlane and Sacrifice are examples of this exaggeration. Suicide of Mohammedans, moreover, is even more prevalent than in Elizabethan drama, revealing the same ignorance of a fundamental religious belief that characterizes the earlier period. 28 Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the Restoration dramatist knew much more than did his predecessor about the life, customs, beliefs, and characteristic surroundings of the Oriental, and that he chose to exhibit this knowledge in strikingly vivid and concrete ways, even to the point of abusing his opportunity.

What now are the conclusions to be derived from this consideration of the Oriental on the Restoration stage? In the first place, we have seen that the very considerable number of plays and their wide distribution among the dramatists of the period, including practically all of the prominent playwrights except some writers of comedy, indicate a greater and broader interest in the Orient than has hitherto obtained. As in the case of Elizabethan drama this interest inclined to the production of serious plays, with the introduction of the new and important class of heroic plays. The sources drawn upon were, as in the earlier period, mostly histories, but a new source, that of French drama and romance, was only second in importance and perhaps greater in significance. Accuracy in the employment of sources, however, is less evident than in the earlier period, particularly as regards character portrayal. The range of scene presented is very much wider than heretofore, and the nationalities portrayed are of greater variety-the whole of the continent of Asia being drawn upon for setting and character. Turkey and the Turks are still predominant, but the Chinese, the Hindus, and others come in for their share of interest, and the lands of the

2 See, for a discussion of this matter, Mod. Phil., XII: 443.

Mediterranean give way to the farther countries of Asia proper. In one important particular, the accurate portrayal of character, the Restoration falls short of the Elizabethan period, with the heroic drama largely to blame for this defect. In the portrayal of customs, however, the Restoration drama is superior, showing more knowledge and more inclination to exhibit it. Combining these conclusions, we may say that so far as external matters were concerned, matters of scene, rites, observances, etc., the Restoration period shows an advance towards a more intimate knowledge of the Orient, but that as regards the fundamental character of the Oriental himself, though Restoration Englishmen may have known more than their predecessors, they at least did not choose to reveal this knowledge in their plays. For this distinction it is not too much to say that the influence of the heroic play, emphasizing the external at the expense of the internal, was at least largely to blame.

A HISTORY OF COSTUMING ON THE ENGLISH

STAGE BETWEEN 1660 AND 1823

LILY B. CAMPBELL

The principles of modern stage costume were determined when the 1823 performance of King John under Kemble's management and Planché's immediate direction gained such popularity as to necessitate its reforms being made general. Between the time of the return of the actors after the Restoration and the time of this performance the stage had changed a disordered and unconsidered presentation of plays to a welldefined production on the basis of recognized artistic laws. The Romantic Movement had been manifest in the matters of stage costume just as in every other aspect of the life and art of the time; and though the epochs marking the progress of changes in theatrical costume are less definitely separated than are those which outline the progress of other expressions of Romanticism on the stage, yet stage costume did advance towards the artistic goal set by the Romantic Movement and was consciously determined by the philosophic principles as well as by the popular interests that controlled the course of the whole movement. That these Romantic theories and interests are evident in matters of stage costume even when they produced mere incongruities and inconsistencies in their early manifestation, I hope to show in this paper.

With the reopening of the theatres after the Restoration there came a time, as was to be expected, of rather chaotic management. It is not surprising, then, that the costuming of the plays presented was at first for the most part a matter of chance or accident and was generally unhampered by theories of correctness or appropriateness. The records of the time, indeed, seem to indicate that the costumes for a theatrical performance were managed much as are the cos

tumes for charades in the average household today. The property-box was a sort of attic, under the control of the property manager, and each actor took what he liked or wished, choosing any costume which he thought suited to himself or to the character he was about to present.1 The leading actresses were, perchance, given enough salary to afford to own a few good dresses for acting, but these dresses were worn for various characters. In general, such a state of affairs continued far into the eighteenth century, though modifications leading to a final establishing of order gradually crept in.

That costumes and scenery were, however, not altogether unconsidered even in the years immediately following the Restoration is evidenced in Downes's Roscius Anglicanus. For the years 1662-1665 are chronicled:

The Adventure of five Hours, Wrote by the Earl of Bristol, and Sir Samuel Tuke: This Play being Cloath'd so Excellently Fine in proper Habits, and Acted so justly well.'

King Henry the 8th, This Play, by Order of Sir William Davenant, was all new Cloath'd in proper Habits: The King's was new, all the Lords, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Doctors, Proctors, Lawyers, Tip-staves, new Scenes: Every Part by the

great Care of Sir William, being exactly perform'd; it being all new Cloath'd and new Scenes; it continued acting 15 days together with general Applause.'

For the years 1670 and 1671 we find chronicled likewise : The Tragedy of Macbeth, alter'd by Sir William Davenant; being drest in all its Finery, as new Cloath'd, new Scenes, Machines, as flyings for the Witches; with all the Singing and Dancing in it:

That the property manager was sometimes guilty of partiality is evident in the account of the rivalry of Mrs. Barry and Mrs. Boutel and of their common desire for a certain veil which the property man awarded to Mrs. Boutel. In the ensuing quarrel Mrs. Boutel was wounded by her enraged rival. See Betterton, History of the English Stage, pp. 2022.

Roscius Anglicanus. A facsimile reprint of the rare original of 1708, London, J. M. Jarvis and Son, 1886, p. 22.

the first Compos'd by Mr. Lock, the other by Mr. Channel and Mr. Joseph Priest; it being all Excellently perform'd, being in the nature of an Opera, it recompenc'd double the Expence, it proves still a lasting Play."

From scattered accounts it is to be seen, also, that one post-Restoration custom was generally accepted-the giving or lending of garments or equipment to the actors by their patrons. Downes records of the years 1662-1665:

King Henry the 5th, Wrote by the Earl of Orrery. This Play was Splendidly Cloath'd: The King in the Duke of York's Coronation Suit: Owen Tudor in King Charles's: Duke of Burgundy, in the Lord of Oxford's, and the rest all New.

We find recorded also:

The Play called Love and Honour, written by Sir William D'Avenant, was Acted before the Court, and very richly Drest. The King gave Mr. Betterton, who played Prince Alvaro, his coronation Suit, And to Mr. Harris, who played Prince Prospero, the Duke of York gave his Suit. And to Mr. Price who acted Lionel, Duke of Parman, the Lord Oxford gave his Cloathes.'

Another instance frequently noted is that when the players (of the Duke's company) were commanded by the King to Dover when he met his sister, the Duchess of Orleans. The actors played Shadwell's The Impertinents or Sullen Lovers. Downes says:

This Comedy and Sir Solomon Single, pleas'd Madam the Duchess, and the whole Court extremely, the French Court wearing then Excessive short Lac'd Coats; some Scarlet, some Blew, with Broad Wast Belts; Mr. Nokes having at that time one shorter than the French Fashion, to Act Sir Arthur Addle in; the Duke of Monmouth gave Mr. Nokes his Sword and Belt from his Side, and Buckled it on himself, on purpose to Ape the French: That Mr. Nokes lookt more like a Drest up Ape, than a Sir Arthur: which upon his first entrance on the Stage, put the King and Court to an Excessive Laughter; at which the French look'd very Shaygrin, to

$ Ibid., 33.

Ibid., 27, 28.

'Betterton, Thomas, The History of the English Stage from the Restoration to the Present Time (London, 1741), p. 91. Also recorded by Downes, 1. c., pp. 21, 22.