Did you know that books of jokes and amusing tales were a popular staple of early modern English literature? In addition to published collections, people put together their own, like the one discussed in this article. Although "teller of jokes at private dinners" may not fall in the usual image of dramatic performers, at least this article is vastly redeemed by an anecdote illustrating that ordinary women were wearing mascjuline clothing for active pursuits on occasion. And though the subject was made the butt of a joke here, the joke was not about the clothing, but hinged on a chance for sexual innuendo.
Brown, Pamela Allen. 2005. Jesting Rights: Women Players in the Manuscript Jestbook of Sir Nicholas Le Strange” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Brown - Jesting Rights: Women Players in the Manuscript Jestbook of Sir Nicholas Le Strange
“Jest books” and collections of short humorous tales were a staple of the 16th and 17th centuries. [Note: the genre has its roots even earlier, such as Walter Map’s 12th century “Courtiers Trifles.”]
This article looks at one particular example of this genre of recorded vocal performance that has far more evidence for female performance of jests than usual. The book is also unusual in the proportion of original contemporary material as opposed to “reprints” from previously published joke books.
The book was compiled by Nicolas L’Estrange, and includes an index where each anecdote is attributed to a specific person—presumably, the originator. The author’s mother, Alice, features prominently, and in all about 15% are attributed to women. [Note: that this is an unusually high proportion is telling.] Whether or not these attributions reflect authorship, or simply note “informants” (to use a sociological term) one can certainly class them as a type of “performer” on a private, domestic stage.
As noted, Alice L’Estrange is the most commonly cited, not simply among women, but overall. Much of the content is political satire with royalist sentiments (the collection having been compiled largely during the interregnum). The jokes are often scatological or bawdy, shedding interesting light on the private behavior of “respectable” women. Many make reference to class and ethnic stereotypes, and may use dialogue in dialect. Over half of Alice’s jests involve a female narrator or subject.
As an example of the type of jest source to Alice L’Estrange, I offer the following because it also has an interesting peek at contexts for women wearing male garments in the early 17th century.
The Bury Ladyes that usd [to go] Hawking and Hunting, were once in a great vaine of wearing Breeches; and some of them being at dinner one day at Sir Edward Lewkenors, there was one Mr Zephory, a very precise and a silenc’t minister, (who frequented that house much) and discourse being offered of fashions, he fell upon this and declaimed much against it; Rob[ert] Heighem a Joviall blade being there, he undertook to vindicate the Ladyes, and their fashion, as decent and such as might cover their shame: for says he, if an Horse throwes them, or by any mischance they get a fall, had you not better see them in their Breeches then Naked? [S]ayes the over-zealous man, in detestation of Breeches, O no, by no means[!] By my troth Parson, says Rob[ert] Heighem, and I commend thee for’t, for I am of thy mind too.
[My commentary: The backbone of the joke is that in his zeal for disapproving of cross-gender clothing, the uptight parson is tricked into proclaiming his desire to be an “upskirt” Peeping Tom, which the trickster then heartily supports as an outcome. Setting this aside, we have several observations. Well-born women might choose to wear breeches under their skirts when participating in horseback activities such as hunting and falconry. The implied purpose of this fashion (since the breeches would normally be hidden) is modesty in case of accident during this active pursuit. One could speculate that breeches might also enable a woman to ride astride. Women’s underpants were still a novelty in this era (perhaps more common in southern Europe). When riding side-saddle, the skirts would prevent contact with the saddle, but if riding astride, one might want breeches for comfort. But viewing this anecdote in the context of the “hic mulier” controversies around cross-gender fashions, we can see how religious disapproval of anything resembling cross-gender behavior can take no consideration of even a higher moral purpose in adhering to strict rules. Though, of course, the parson may also disapprove generally of women participating in active sports. And many of the cross-gender fashions criticized in pamphlets are clearly just fashion statements, though perhaps with an underlying layer of masculine power being fashionable.]
This takes care of the less pertinent articles in the collection. There's one more article that to post from this collection, but it has enough interesting bits to get its own day.
Smith, Bruce R. 2005. “Female Impersonation in Early Modern Ballads” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Smith - Female Impersonation in Early Modern Ballads
This article discusses the gendered aspects of ballad performance, both in terms of who is singing, and in terms of the gender of the “persona” of the song. The “female impersonation” of the article’s title refers to male performance of songs representing a female “voice.” This is connected very tangentially to the practice of male actors performing female parts on stage. Like the previous two articles, I did not consider it very relevant to my interests.
Interesting, but not pertinent to my present purposes.
Howard, Jean E. 2005. “Staging the Absent Woman: The Theatrical Evocation of Elizabeth Tudor in Heywood’s If You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, Part I” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Part V Beyond the “All Male”; Howard - Staging the Absent Woman: The Theatrical Evocation of Elizabeth Tudor in Heywood’s If You Know Not Me, You Know Nobody, Part I
This article examines the symbolic and philosophical implications of the exclusion of female bodies from the English professional stage, while presenting female characters, as seen through the lens of how Queen Elizabeth I was depicted on stage. Such depictions of women in general relied on stereotypical signifiers. This would apply ever more strongly for depicting a queen as queen (since obviously, there was no actual queen on stage). Though interesting, this article is also out of the scope of my interest.
Margaret Cavendish is a fascinating person and even has her own tag in the Project. but this article isn't directly relevant to my interests.
Crawford, Julie. 2005. “’Pleaders, Atturneys, Petitioners and the like’: Margaret Cavendish and the Dramatic Petition” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Crawford - ’Pleaders, Atturneys, Petitioners and the like’: Margaret Cavendish and the Dramatic Petition
Margaret Cavendish was known as a playwright—though for reading consumption rather than stage performance—but not as a theatrical performer herself. But both her plays and her political activity can be seen as having significant overlap in communicating her views and promoting her husband’s positions. Both served as petitions for the ear of those in power to convince them of her opinions and wishes. However, as with the previous article, I feel like this one stretches the scope of the collection beyond what is of interest to my purpose.
I did warn folks that there are a handful of articles in this collection that both strain the book's premise and aren't pertinent to the background research for the "Stage and Actresses" tropes episode. This is one of them. In fact, I think I'm just going to throw up a handful today and get them out of the way.
Parolin, Peter. 2005. “The Venetian Theater of Aletheia Talbot, Countess of Arundel” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Part IV Beyond the Stage; Parolin - The Venetian Theater of Aletheia Talbot, Countess of Arundel
This article frame is the legal defense of the Countess of Arundel against espionage charges in Venice as a sort of theatrical performance. As context for this, the author reviews the countess’s experience performing in masques at the court of James I. The article feels like it’s stretching the premise of the collection a bit, and feels fairly speculative, using the phrases “might have,” and “must have” a bit too often for confidence.
This article points out that the position "women didn't act on the English stage until the Restoration" leans heavily on some very specific definitions of "act" and "stage." In particular, it erases non-commercial performances such as masques performed by ladies of the court.
Gough, Melinda J. 2005. “Courtly Comédiantes: Henrietta Maria and Amateur Women’s Stage Plays in France and England” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Gough - Courtly Comédiantes: Henrietta Maria and Amateur Women’s Stage Plays in France and England
When we think of dramatic performance by courtiers, masques tend to be the first image, but this article examines the performance of stage plays by the English court under Henrietta Maria, Queen to Charles I. The queen was French and imported French attitudes and expectations to the sphere where she could set the rules. In particular, she greatly increased women’s performance on the court stages, and amateur women’s theatricals became a regular feature of the court.
But to understand that dynamic, we must look at the French court’s interactions with professional actresses, including those from Italy. Henrietta Maria’s background was rooted in the court of her mother, Marie de Medici, in which young women of the court participated in theatrical performance as part of a broadly cultured and cosmopolitan social context.
Unfortunately, we have a little direct evidence for the specifics of her theatrical activities there. As an example—though one, Henrietta Maria was too young to have participated in herself—the article looks at the 1611 performance at the French court of Bradamante, directed by and starring Henrietta Maria’s older sister Elizabeth, who was 9 years old at the time. Elizabeth modeled her performance on that of celebrity Italian actresses, who regularly toured France. These precedents enabled aristocratic women performers to be praised for their performance skills, rather than being criticized for immodesty. They were seen as adding to the prestige and magnificence of the court.
Elizabeth was the instigator of the staging of Bradamante, not simply assigned the role. This was no casual “showing off the kids.” Her mother, the queen, only permitted the performance with the requirement that Elizabeth know and perform her part suitably. (Bradamante is an Amazon character featured in Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso.) The title role included androgynous cross-dressing, and the performance included girls playing male parts, all familiar tropes from Italian commedia.
There is a discussion of the evidence for various Italian troupes playing at the French court of Maria de Medici, as well as other mentions of performances by court ladies. This would be part of an array of entertainments presented for special occasions. (Ariosto was popular source material for short plays and interludes.)
Why were Italian actresses the inspiration for performance by court women rather than French actresses? French actresses had been participating on local stages as early as the 15th century (there is documentary evidence of a tradesman’s daughter performing in a mystery play in 1468), and by at least 1545 there is evidence for professional performance by women. But women did not regularly perform professionally in Paris until the 1610s. This difference may be related to genre distinctions, with Paris focusing on bawdy farce, which was more hazardous to an actress’s reputation. The introduction of women to the Parisian professional stage accompanied the performance of more elevated works. Even so, Parisian actresses didn’t achieve the same respect and status as Italian ones, well into the mid-17th century. Therefore court women looked elsewhere for models that would situate them as part of an intellectual tradition, rather than one associated with loose morals.
Correspondence by foreign visitors to the French court note Henrietta Maria’s theatrical performances at a time when it must have been part of “showing her off” for potential suitors in the 1620s. There’s a reference to Henrietta Maria later staging a performance for Charles I’s birthday of a play she had previously performed in Paris. The plays she staged as queen were typically performed by her ladies-in-waiting (and herself). Women performing in court masques and visiting foreign actresses had been part of the English performance scene since the reign of Elizabeth I. Queen Anna (wife of James I) was particularly active in promoting a female masquing tradition at the court.
Though masques typically involved dance and acting but not verbal performance, a rare early example of female vocal performance in masques was a 1617 performance by a girls’ school in honor of Queen Anna. So the change that Henrietta Maria brought was not formal performance as such, but an expanded scope and variety of the types of roles and performances women engaged in.
The article details various performances that Henrietta Maria directed and participated in. As the queens “troupe” were all female, these performances often involved cross-dressed roles. English commenters tend to overlook the actual skill of the performances and instead grumbled about the propriety of women—to say nothing of the queen—appearing on stage at all. In contrast, foreign correspondents in England made more favorable comments. (This contrast may speak to why historians have tended to treat Henrietta Maria’s performances as trivial and amateurish, taking their tone from stuffy English disapproval.)
Henrietta Maria sometimes used plays as political activism or commentary, choosing subjects, and even the language of performance as a message to political rivals or allies. She demanded professional standards from her troupe, delaying performances if they were not up to snuff, and bringing in well-known stage actors to coach them.
So I picked up Women Players in England for the general background on the history of women in theater, but it does have one article directly touching on female homoeroticism on stage. And how Shakespeare's Twelfth Night is a pale echo of the Italian material that inspired it.
Poulsen, Rachel. 2005. “Women Performing Homoerotic Desire in English and Italian Comedy: La Calandria, Gl’Ingannati and TwelfthNight” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Poulsen - Women Performing Homoerotic Desire in English and Italian Comedy: La Calandria, Gl’Ingannati and TwelfthNight
Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night draws on two prominent motifs of Italian theater: a cross-dressed heroine who provokes female desire, and the ideal of the Italian actress, who combined beauty and rhetorical skill. Shakespeare and other English playwrights backed off somewhat on the lesbian eroticism, but retained the image of a female character claiming power through performance and improvising, as manifested in Viola/Cesario’s ambiguous teasing banter with Olivia.
The central dramatic motif (cross-dressing and F/F desire) appears from the early 16th century in Italian plays, such as La Calandria and Gl’Ingannati (commonly seen as the most direct inspiration for Twelfth Night). When I first introduced, the Italian precursors—like Shakespeare’s performances— would have been performed by all-male companies. But by the time Shakespeare was creating Twelfth Night, female performers were a mainstay of Italian theater. This shift changed the transgressive and erotic potential of cross-dressed characters. The cross-dressed woman plot was often combined with a twin plot, such that the female lead (and sometimes her male twin) is not simply taking a random male disguise, but taking on the sibling’s role. Their similarities and equivalence are emphasized.
The Italian plays are far more overt about the possibility of the disguised heroine to stand in for her brother sexually as well as socially. Where Shakespeare’s cross-dressed heroines often emphasize their conventional feminine natures and desires, the Italian heroines focus more on the social constraints and expectations of gender roles, and the potential legal consequences of carrying the role into another woman’s bed. In these plays, the homoerotic tension is resolved via the “convenient twin brother” motif, but also by creating a familial bond between the two women, typically mediated by marriage of one to the other’s relative. Homoerotic desire is not repudiated, but is diverted to an acceptable form. (The article notes tangentially that, although it focuses on two specific Italian plays, the central motif of cross-dressing and resulting homoerotic desire is present in many other 16th century plays in Italy, France, and Spain.)
The article explores the multi-valent nature of the audience reception (including other characters in the plays as audience). Is the audience aroused by the depiction of superficially m/f erotics? By the underlying “true” f/f erotics? (Or in English theater by the sex of the male actors playing the parts?) Is the transgressive nature of the f/f encounter undermined via the disguise or is it deliberately played for the titillation of a (presumed) male audience? The article notes that the performance of Gl’Ingannati was produced and dedicated to a primarily female audience. So scenes of f/f eroticism must have been expected to entertain and please women. And some scenes in the play imply that f/f eroticism could be accepted and excused.
In both plays, the women initially cross-dress for the safety and mobility it affords them, or even in support of heterosexual desire, which gives them a realistic and excusable motivation. The plays embrace both tragic and comedic potential in the motivations and consequences. The desiring women of the Italian plays express more physicality, where Shakespeare’s heroines feel a more diffuse, romanticized yearning. English spectators of Italian plays, often commented on the “wantonness” of the female characters (and by extension, the actresses playing them). In Gl’Ingannati Isabella, in her desire for the disguised Lelia, is described as being “in heat”, not merely restless, but masturbating when thinking of her beloved. F/f erotics are treated more openly in Italian theater, but are more closely policed in Italian culture and law, giving them a clear vocabulary and substance. English society and law expressed anxieties about cross-dressing and gender roles, but shy away from acknowledging female homosexuality. [Note: And had no laws specifically addressing it.]
But another difference is that Shakespeare’s Olivia has far more social power and freedom than her Italian counterpart. Olivia has power over her potential suitors, while Isabella (in Gl’Ingannati) is under others’ control and seeks her goals through deceit. In the Italian plays, the cross-class nature of the forbidden relationships is more highlighted than the cross-dressing. Thus the Italian cross-dressing comedies are transferred for an English audience in a variety of ways, while still retaining the central motif and ambiguous f/f desire.
A bit tangential to the reasons I'm blogging this collection -- although not as tangential as some of the later articles will be. Stay with me.
Campbell, Julie D. 2005. “’Merry, nimble, stirring spirit[s]’: Academic, Salon and Commedia dell’arte Influence on the Innamorate in Love’s Labour’s Lost” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Campbell - ’Merry, nimble, stirring spirit[s]’: Academic, Salon and Commedia dell’arte Influence on the Innamorate in Love’s Labour’s Lost
The premise of this article is that Shakespeare’s Loves Labors Lost is inspired by, and reflects, the prominence of women in Italian theater and in French salons who—as in the play—treated serious philosophical questions via banter and wit. Thus, even with no actual women on stage, Loves Labors Lost creates a strong female presence in English theater. The “French salon culture” of this era refers to the courts of Marguerite de Valois and Catherine de Medici, and predates the era most closely associated with the term “salon” beginning in the later 17th century.
The importance of Italian commedia actresses, participating fully in the improvisational bantering humor of that genre, can be seen in the introduction of Shakespearean characters such as Beatrice, Rosalind, and Viola, but is less commonly acknowledged to be present in Loves Labors Lost. In Loves Labors Lost the philosophical interests of the court ladies and the disorderly assertive nature of female commedia roles are combined in a comedy that declines to resolve in tidy marriages.
The body of the article expands on these points, and on the reception of both continental theater, and what was perceived as the more risque behavior of French and Italian court women that supported the plausibility of the play’s plot.
This may have been my favorite article in the whole collection. Not only were actresses hitting it big on stage in Italy in the 16th century, they took the show on the road and influenced the reception of women on stage across western Europe.
Katritzky, M.A. 2005. “Reading the Actress in Commedia Imagery” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Part III Beyond the Channel; Katritzky - Reading the Actress in Commedia Imagery
Actresses were an integral part of the early modern Italian stage, though the focus in theater history on commedia masks has tended to sideline that point. But female stage participation in Italy, not only transformed theater there, but had ripple effects elsewhere, including England.
Stage actresses are first recorded in Italy around the 1560s. Here we focus on women as members of professional troupes. Indeed, they were not simply participants, but celebrities and a major attraction for the audience. The nature of commedia, which relied on outline scenarios, elaborated by improvisation and stock characters, as well as works performed from full scripts, means that visual depictions are important in researching demographics. Pictorial evidence is the focus of this article.
Commedia derived from a blending of the traditions of humanist comedy and popular entertainment, such as carnival and mountebank performances, resulting in a variety of performance types. The earliest formal record of women in commedia is a contract of 1564 in which Lucretia of Siena and six men joined to form an acting company in Rome. This era saw mixed gender companies arising across Europe. For example, the earliest known French record is from 1545 for one Marie Ferré.
(The article includes a large selection of images from 16th century sources, showing scenes from performances that include women in various roles. In addition to the Italian material, there are works by German, French, and Dutch artist, though, in some cases they may be depicting the Italian stage.)
The premier female role was the "inamorata” requiring a skilled, beautiful, elegant performer, who could declaim, sing, dance, and jest. (Women were also writers and troupe leaders.) Leading actresses might also gain fame as poets, in addition to writing plays.
Although Italian theater had its roots in carnival, by the later 16th century, theater was popular enough to supply a year-round living. In addition to performing for general audiences, troupes would be hired by nobles to perform at court or in private houses, as part of elaborate spectacles for weddings or holidays. Mixed troupes existed alongside the older tradition of all-male casts during this period. Mixed-gender Italian troupes traveled throughout Europe to perform in England, France, Spain, and the Low Countries, though some criticized them as “shameless” and derided actresses as little better than courtesans. In general, English writers considered women on stage to be unusual and noteworthy, even when viewing them on the continent. A comment in 1608 by an English traveler mentioned an Italian actresses playing the part of a boy on stage.
Italian productions, often featured song and well-known actresses were generally accomplished singers. Acceptance of women on stage was variable, even within Italy, and some performances are noted as being required to be all male. Religious leaders in particular often censured the use of actresses, considering them a hazard to morals. These visiting troupes put women on professional stages in England well before English troupes added female actors. Looking more broadly for female performers, female acrobats are noted as performing in Germany, Italy, England, etc. in the mid-16th century. But by around 1600, women were an expected part of the Italian stage.
Interpreting pictorial evidence for women on stage is not entirely straightforward, even once the provenance of the work has been established. The regular use of cross-dressing means that the gender of a depicted character can’t always be assumed to be the gender of the player. Apart from this, illustrations are created for purposes, and are not candid snapshots of reality.
The article then does a deep-dive analysis of various artistic depictions that include women on stage, sometimes making up a substantial proportion of the troupe being depicted, and in a variety of stock rules: the inamorata, wives, servants, courtesans. The women in these images may be labeled by character role, or they may be identified as a specific named actress, emphasizing the “celebrity culture” aspect of Italian theater.
Far more numerous are depictions of unnamed players. Sometimes the costuming and staging can help identify the dramatic characters being depicted, although this can be more difficult than for male stock roles that he had highly stereotyped depictions, usually involving exaggerated masks. Women players fall in four main groups of costume, though this isn’t a sure guide to the roles: elegant upper-class clothing, indicating a respectable position; plain and simple clothing, indicating a servant; sexually provocative outfits indicating a courtesan; and costumes indicating the character is a foreigner, or is in disguise, often using “Oriental” features. The article discusses the features of these costume groupings, and the overlap with depictions of non-commedia performers of various types.
Cross-dressing was a regular motif on stage, especially for courtesan characters, mirroring the references to courtesans in real life sometimes wearing male outfits. Costumes indicating disguise were often drawn from Turkish or Romani (the article uses g*psy) clothing styles, and Turkish inspired outfits were also popular as female Carnival wear. The depictions of actresses in Romani outfits points out of the complex relationship between Romani participants in public performance, and their status as aliens embedded in the culture.
In contrast to male commedia characters who were associated with stereotyped masks, specific to the role, female characters were more rarely and inconsistently masked. It can be questioned whether the black velvet half-mask sometimes worn by the inamorata or courtesan roles is a “character mask” or simply a reflection of ordinary female dress accessories. But women’s theatrical masks could be more extensive than the everyday accessory.
In summary, although Italian women had previously been performing in less “professional” contexts, or in background functions, over the 16th century women actors became common and celebrated, especially in commedia, displacing the older tradition of men and boys playing female roles that was part of more literary theater. With the growing prominence of women actors, plays begin to focus more strongly on women-centered stories.
This is a fascinating article drawing connections between early modern "traveling medicine show" performers and more commedia traditions, as well as simply recognizing the mountebank tradition as a form of theater. And, of course, we're intersted in the parts women played in this profession.
Mirabella, Bella. 2005. “’Quacking Delilahs’: Female Mountebanks in Early Modern England and Italy” in Women Players in England, 1500-1660: Beyond the All-Male Stage, edited by Pamela Allen Brown & Peter Parolin. Ashgate, Burlington. ISBN 978-0-7546-0953-7
Although this collection does have one paper addressing female homoeroticism on stage, I have covered it primarily as background reading for exploring role-playing and stage theatrics as a context for romance tropes involving female couples.
Mirabella - ’Quacking Delilahs’: Female Mountebanks in Early Modern England and Italy
In the era before, women were accepted on the professional stage, they performed in less formal venues – squares, fairs, street corners, inn courtyards, and such – the venue of mountebanks. Typically, this was not as the primary performer, and therefore we must search more carefully for the evidence. The underlying purpose of these vaudeville-like mountebank performances, was to sell non-professional, medical treatments: folk or “quack” remedies. [Note: in this write-up I’m going to use “quack” to cover the entire range both of products and vendors, but the term had a broader sense of “traditional medicine” rather than the specific implication of fake and ineffective cures that it has today.]
Performance had the multifaceted role of drawing and holding potential customers, convincing customers of the efficacy of treatment, and offering spectacles of cures as entertainment. Performances could include dancing, music, acrobatics, and (always) glib patter. It might include faked illnesses or injuries, healed before the audience, and even spectacles such as snake handling. [Note: Also toad-eating, whence, by analogy, the term toad-eater, or toadie for a fawning, obedient follower.] Mountebanks usually traveled and performed in groups, and women are depicted participating as dancers, musicians, and participants in physical comedy.
Mountebanks (by various names) were common throughout Europe – the word mountebank coming from Italian montimbanco “to mount the stage”. (This article covers research into mountebanks in both England and Italy, so some observations may apply only to one or the other.) They made their living by selling quack cures, but part of the audience might buy them, not for their efficacy, but in exchange for the performance. Sometimes the sales portion of the event would be followed by a play. In Italy, there was overlap between mountebank performances, and Commedia dell’ Arte, both in personnel/context and in dramatic content, with commedia plays often using the themes of quack doctors and cures.
The popularity of the Italian commedia/mountebank performances was due in part to the presence of female performers. One famous performer La Vettoria is described as dancing and doing acrobatics “dressed like a trim and neat boy”. Female performers were – in popular thought – considered to sideline as whores, using the sales portion of the event to set up assignations. In turn, male mountebanks were considered to turn their glib tongues to seduction as well as sales. But female participants were not always treated as sex-workers on the side. The aforementioned La Vettoria went home under escort after performances to protect her from her fans.
Other women are described simply as performing, or in some cases, as selling their own quack cures, as well as serving as sales personnel for a male quack. In some cases, a husband and wife team formed the core of a mountebank troupe. There are cases of a mountebank’s widow continuing the trade on her own. Female sellers were especially useful for a female clientele, offering advice and cures for gynecological issues, as well as cosmetics and cures for bad breath, and “the ill scent of the arm pits”. (There is a discussion of how women’s economic and social activities have been erased in much scholarship, which treats them as accessories to their husbands rather than equal partners.)
Civic authorities treated quack doctors and mountebanks as an essential part of the healthcare landscape. Acts were passed authorizing them, and local authorities permitted and licensed their performances. At the same time, medical professionals criticized their trade, and legal penalties for traveling performers were applied to unlicensed mountebanks. Legal records thus provide another source of data for identifying specific female quack/performance.
Both the public image and the reality of mountebanks ranged from knowledgeable folk healers to harmless entertainment to dangerous fraud. Women were, of course, excluded from the formal medical professions so, however knowledgeable and efficacious they might be, they were automatically classified with mountebanks and quacks. Female practitioners came in for especially vicious criticism from professionals, as they not only infringed on the medical profession, but on male spheres of authority.
In addition to traveling mountebanks, some providers of quack or folk remedies offered similar performances in the context of a fixed shop, or from their homes. A fixed location provided the opportunity for more elaborate “stage dressing” for the performance, including anatomical displays of skeletons and such.