Somerset is a large, diverse county in southwest England, bordered by Devon, Dorset, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, and the Bristol Channel. Before the onset of the Reformation in 1532 Somerset became prosperous as its agriculture, industries, and coastal trade all flourished in the relative cultural stability and coherence that characterized that earlier period. By the start of the Civil War in 1642, the unified culture present in the 1530s had given way to a fragmented society. Those conflicts and changes are abundantly illustrated in the many records of Somerset entertainments surviving from that tumultuous period. Somerset's diverse dramatic records span a period of time from 1258 to 1642. In the introduction James Stokes surveys the social and economic history of towns for which dramatic records survive and provides a commentary on the major kinds of entertainments represented in the collection. These include traditional drama, custom, and game, among which are Robin Hood play, skimmingtons, baitings, pageants, and shows; and performance by travelling professional entertainers, including players, minstrels, waits, puppeteers, and others. Topics discussed include, `women and performance,' `entertainments in schools,' `playing places and staging conventions,' and `patterns of travel by performers.' The Records of Early English Drama volumes make available historical transcripts that provide evidence of early English drama, music, ceremonial, dance, and other forms of communal public entertainment in Britain from the Middle Ages to 1642, together with the necessary interpretative introductions and notes to explicate the materials for the reader. Somerset, in two volumes, is the twelfth publication in the series. These records are an invaluable addition to the scholarship of early drama, establishing as they do part of the total context of the great drama of Shakespeare, his predecessors, and his contemporaries.

Monarchy is an enduring institution that still makes headlines today. It has always been preoccupied with image and perception, never more so than in the period covered by this volume. The collection of papers gathered here from international scholars demonstrates that monarchical image and perception went far beyond cultural, symbolic and courtly display – although these remain important – and were, in fact, always deeply concerned with the practical expression of authority, politics and power. This collection is unique in that it covers the subject from two innovative angles: it not only addresses both kings and queens together, but also both the medieval and early modern periods. Consequently, this allows significant comparisons to be made between male and female monarchy as well as between eras. Such an approach reveals that continuity was arguably more important than change over a span of some five centuries. In removing the traditional gender and chronological barriers that tend to lead to four separate areas of studies for kings and queens in medieval and early modern history, the papers here are free to encompass male and female royal rulers ranging across Europe from the early-thirteenth to the late-seventeenth centuries to examine the image and perception of monarchy in England, Scotland, France, Burgundy, Spain and the Holy Roman Empire. Collectively this volume will be of interest to all those studying medieval and early modern monarchy and for those wishing to learn about the connections and differences between the two.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Explores the important aspects of popular cultures during the period 1550 to 1750. Barry Reay investigates the dominant beliefs and attitudes across all levels of society as well as looking at different age, gender and religious groups.

It is long overdue that someone took a closer look at the brilliant Mary Sidney. I have a suspicion that Mary Sidney’s life, and especially her dedication to the English language after her brother’s death, may throw important light on the mysterious authorship of the Shakespeare plays and poems. —Mark Rylance Actor; Artistic Director of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, 1996–2006; Chairman of the Shakespearean Authorship Trust For more than two hundred years, a growing number of researchers have questioned whether the man named William Shakespeare actually wrote the works attributed to him. There is no paper trail for William Shakespeare—no record that he was ever paid for writing, nothing in his handwriting but a few signatures on legal documents, no evidence of his presence in the royal court except as an actor in his later years, no confirmation of his involvement in the literary circles of the time. With so little information about this man—and even less evidence connecting him to the plays and sonnets—what can and what can’t we assume about the author of the greatest works of the English language? For the first time, Robin P. Williams presents an in-depth inquiry into the possibility that Mary Sidney Herbert, the Countess of Pembroke, wrote the works attributed to the man named William Shakespeare. As well educated as Queen Elizabeth I, this woman was at the forefront of the literary movement in England, yet not allowed to write for the public stage. But that’s just the beginning . . . The first question I am asked by curious freshmen in my Shakespeare course is always, “Who wrote these plays anyway?” Now, because of Robin Williams’ rigorous scholarship and artful sleuthing, Mary Sidney Herbert will forever have to be mentioned as a possible author of the Shakespeare canon. Sweet Swan of Avon doesn’t pretend to put the matter to rest, but simply shows how completely reasonable the authorship controversy is, and how the idea of a female playwright surprisingly answers more Shakespearean conundrums than it creates... —Cynthia Lee Katona Professor of Shakespeare and Women’s Studies, Ohlone College; Author of Book Savvy