Nativity Play at Court: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary
Line 55: Line 55:




Site created and maintained by [[Misha Teramura]], Reed College; updated 31 May 2018.
Site created and maintained by [[Misha Teramura]], University of Toronto; updated 31 May 2018.


[[category:all]][[category:Misha Teramura]][[category:Whitehall]][[category:Biblical plays]][[category:Nativity]]
[[category:all]][[category:Misha Teramura]][[category:Whitehall]][[category:Biblical plays]][[category:Nativity]]

Revision as of 12:49, 4 July 2018

Anon. (1631)

N.B. This lost play is untitled. The title offered here for convenience is that used by Wiggins.

Historical Records

Correspondence of Thomas Tuke

10 February 1632. To Sir William Armine.

The common fame is that the Queen has not been at masse this month: sure it is she was not at their play at midnight on Christmas eue, when they acted the Virgin's deliuery & bringing to bed, & the birth of Christ, & his lying ith manger etc. Which made some of her French followers pout. (Somerset Record Office, DD/FJ 25, fol. 1v; qtd. REED: Lincolnshire, 352)

Tuke (1580/1-1657) was the vicar of St. Olave Jewry and an author of numerous religious tracts.


Theatrical Provenance

Performed at Whitehall Palace on Christmas Eve, 1631.


Probable Genre(s)

Biblical.


Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues

Presumably, the Gospel accounts of the Nativity.


References to the Play

None known. (Information welcome.)


Critical Commentary

Wiggins (#2352) notes that the fact Queen Henrietta Maria's absence was remarked upon might indicate that King Charles was present.


For What It's Worth

Queen Henrietta Maria had herself given birth to a daughter, Mary, on 4 November 1631.


Works Cited

Site created and maintained by Misha Teramura, University of Toronto; updated 31 May 2018.