dailynewsnblog
Photo Credit: Peter C.G. Jacksona series looking at everyday things
with surprising royal connections.
We take it for granted these days
that female roles in movies, shows,
and theater are played by women.
This was not always the case and
England actually allowed actresses
somewhat later than neighbouring
France (although all of western
Europe allowed them by the 1700s).
The reasons for this reach back into
antiquity when the association of
actresses and prostitution were very
strong. When Emperor Justinian of
Byzantium married an actress it
caused a bit of a scandal due to just
this association. Fast forward to
England in the 1500s and female parts were still being played
by boys. All of those Shakespearean plays about love? There
was not a single women on the stage during their original
run.
Things Get Worse Before They Get Better
The 1600s were not a peaceful time in England and disputes
between King Charles I and Parliament led to civil war and
the king’s regicide. The resulting republic was controlled by
Puritans who sought to eliminate anything they saw as being
‘frivolous’ or ‘ungodly’. Christmas and Easter were banned for
being too rowdy and a ‘threat to Christian belief’. Football,
make-up, music, colourful clothes, and even pubs were all
banned. Theater’s ancient association with prostitution
(at this point mostly a stereotype) meant it wasn’t escaping
the ban hammer.
The Merry Monarch
republic fell into chaos and King Charles II was invited to take
the throne. For his part the king promised to be lenient with
everyone except those who had ordered his dad’s execution
(which is completely fair). The King saw that after a long
period of strife and oppression the people needed a return to
normalcy. The old restrictions were lifted and in the case of
theater the king went further and legalized female actors – and
hence the first actresses. Its probable the king did so after
seeing actresses performing in France (which had allowed
them for several decades at that point) while exiled there. This
opened up a new career path for women and by 1665
actresses, such as Nell Gwyn, were celebrities in their field.
The king was also a great patron of the arts and funded the
creation of two new theaters in London. This general return to
fun is why King Charles II is nicknamed ‘the Merry Monarch’.
It is arguable that without royal support it would have taken
far longer for theater to regain its standing after the Puritan
ban. This would have had knock-on effects. Shakespeare’s
plays survived in a haphazard fashion even in our own
timeline. A timeline where either the Puritan’s republic
persisted, or Charles II didn’t make restoring theater a
priority would have likely seen more of his works become lost.
And that would have been a real tragedy.
Loyally Yours,
A Kisaragi Colour
