Attitudes to the theatre (AQA GCSE History): Revision Notes
Attitudes to the theatre
During Elizabeth I's reign, theatre became an incredibly popular form of entertainment, but it also sparked significant controversy. Different social groups held vastly different attitudes towards theatrical performances, creating a complex web of support, opposition, and regulation that shaped the theatrical landscape of the era.
Why Elizabethan theatre became so popular
The theatre's explosive popularity during this period stemmed from several key factors that made it accessible and appealing to a broad range of society. Most importantly, theatre provided cheap entertainment that ordinary people could afford. For just a few pennies, anyone could stand in the yard and watch a performance, making it one of the most affordable forms of entertainment available.
Theatre also appealed to all social classes in a unique way. Even those who couldn't read or write could follow the stories, as performances were designed to be visually engaging and easy to understand. Some plays were even performed in inns and taverns, bringing entertainment directly to local communities. Purpose-built theatres, designed by innovators like James Burbage, featured galleries that accommodated both the wealthy and the common people, though in separate areas.
The innovative design of purpose-built theatres was revolutionary for its time. These circular or octagonal structures could hold up to 3,000 people, with the stage projecting into the yard where groundlings stood. This design created an intimate atmosphere where actors could interact directly with their audience.
The variety of theatrical offerings meant there was something for everyone's taste. History plays, such as Shakespeare's Richard III and Marlowe's Edward II, satisfied those interested in royal drama and English heritage. Comedies like Middleton's A Chaste Maid in Cheapside provided humour and social satire, while tragedies such as Marlowe's Doctor Faustus offered deep psychological drama. This range ensured that theatre could cater to different interests and educational levels.
Perhaps most significantly, Elizabeth I herself enjoyed acting and actively encouraged the development of theatre both at court and throughout the kingdom. This royal patronage gave legitimacy to theatrical activities and helped establish theatre as a respected art form, despite the opposition it faced from other quarters.
Social groups and their theatre experiences
The Elizabethan theatre reflected the strict social hierarchy of the time, with different classes having markedly different experiences and levels of access to performances.
The royal court and nobility occupied the most privileged position in theatrical culture. Although Elizabeth I never actually attended public theatre performances, she regularly watched plays at court and maintained a group of professional actors for royal entertainment. The nobility could afford seats directly on the stage itself, which allowed them to display their fine clothes, wealth, and social status to the entire audience. Many nobles also funded acting companies, which enhanced their reputation and demonstrated their cultural sophistication.
The gentry and merchant classes represented a growing and influential theatre audience. These groups could afford to purchase boxes in the theatre - small, separate seating areas with excellent views of the stage that typically accommodated 3 to 5 people. From these elevated positions, they could enjoy the performance while also conducting business and socialising with their peers, making theatre attendance both entertainment and networking opportunity.
Theatre Box Definition: A theatre box is a small separate seating area with a good view of the stage, for a limited number of people (usually around 3 to 5). These boxes were positioned around the sides and back of the theatre, providing both excellent sightlines and social prestige.
The poor and working classes, known as 'groundlings', formed the largest portion of theatre audiences. They paid minimal admission fees to stand in the yard close to the stage throughout the entire performance. While they lacked the comfort and prestige of seated areas, their proximity to the action often made them the most engaged and vocal part of the audience, frequently interacting with performers and influencing the energy of the show.
The social structure of Elizabethan theatre was a microcosm of society itself. The physical positioning of different classes - from nobility on stage to groundlings in the yard - literally reflected the social hierarchy of the time, with wealth determining both comfort and proximity to the performance.
Interestingly, many theatres doubled as bear-baiting pits and also housed brothels and gambling establishments, creating entertainment complexes that catered to various interests and social levels, though this multi-use nature would later contribute to moral objections against theatrical venues.
Opposition to theatre
Despite its popularity, theatre faced significant opposition from various groups who viewed it as morally dangerous and socially disruptive.
Puritan opposition formed the most vocal and persistent criticism of theatrical entertainment. Many Puritans believed theatre encouraged sinful behaviour, particularly because plays often contained references to sex, drunkenness, and witchcraft. They argued that attending theatre promoted immoral habits such as prostitution and corrupted the moral fabric of society. The theatrical world's association with disreputable characters - many actors lived on the margins of respectable society - reinforced Puritan concerns about the corrupting influence of dramatic performances.
Puritan Moral Concerns: Puritans viewed theatre as fundamentally incompatible with Christian values. They believed that the very act of pretending to be someone else (acting) was a form of lying, and that the content of plays actively promoted vice and immorality among audiences.
Public order concerns also fuelled opposition to theatre. Large crowds of people from different social classes gathering in one place created opportunities for theft, violence, and civil unrest. Wealthy property owners near theatres often complained about the noise, crowds, and criminal activity that theatrical venues attracted. The mixing of social classes in theatre spaces challenged traditional hierarchies and created situations where normal social controls might break down.
Economic opposition came from various business interests who saw theatre as competition or as attracting undesirable elements to their neighbourhoods. Some merchants and property owners believed that the presence of theatres, with their associated gambling, drinking, and prostitution, harmed legitimate business activities and property values.
The location of theatres often contributed to opposition. Many were built in areas like Southwark, south of the Thames, where they operated alongside bear-baiting arenas, brothels, and taverns. This association with "low" entertainment reinforced negative perceptions among respectable citizens.
Government regulation and control
The government's attitude towards theatre reflected a complex balance between supporting a popular art form and maintaining social order and political control.
Initially, authorities worried that theatrical content might encourage political rebellion or challenge royal authority. Under Elizabeth I, strict regulations were implemented to control what could be performed. Political and religious subjects were forbidden on stage, and from 1572, all published plays were required to obtain a government license before publication or performance. This licensing system allowed authorities to review and censor potentially problematic content before it reached audiences.
1572 Licensing Requirements: This was the first major government intervention in theatrical content. All published plays now required official approval, giving authorities the power to censor anything deemed politically or religiously dangerous.
The government's concerns intensified as theatre's popularity grew. In 1574, the Common Council of the City of London issued an official statement condemning theatre for bringing about "corruptions of youth and other enormities" and causing "great disorder." This document reflected growing official anxiety about the social impact of theatrical entertainment and its potential to undermine traditional authority structures.
The situation reached a climax in 1596 when all theatres were completely banned from presenting plays within the City of London. This dramatic action forced all theatrical companies to relocate their operations south of the River Thames, effectively creating a theatre district outside the direct control of London's municipal authorities. This geographical separation allowed theatre to continue while addressing some of the concerns about its impact on city life and order.
1596 Theatre Banishment: This complete ban from the City of London was the most severe government action against theatre. It forced all companies to relocate south of the Thames, creating the famous theatre district in Southwark where Shakespeare's Globe Theatre would later be built.
Timeline of key events
- 1572: Government requires licenses for all published plays
- 1574: Common Council of London officially criticises theatre for corrupting youth and causing disorder
- 1596: All theatres banned from performing within the City of London, forcing relocation south of River Thames
Key Points to Remember:
- Theatre was popular because it was cheap, accessible to all social classes, and offered entertainment variety for different tastes
- Social hierarchy was reflected in theatre seating: nobility on stage, gentry/merchants in boxes, poor as groundlings in the yard
- Puritans opposed theatre for promoting immoral behaviour, while government worried about public order and political rebellion
- Government regulation increased over time, from licensing in 1572 to complete banishment from London in 1596
- Elizabeth I's personal support for acting helped legitimise theatre despite significant opposition from religious and civic authorities