The Development of Acrobatic Theatre in Tudor England

The Development of Acrobatic Theatre in Tudor England

Daniela  Figliano

Professor: Dr. Matthew Sergi

ENG331

April 1 2014

Keywords: Ioculator, Mynstrall, Auspice, Tumblar, Tomalaiers

The Records of Early English Drama (REED) document numerous accounts of performances that contained acrobatics and physical feats from 1377 to 1630.  These performances relied heavily on skill and agility to captivate audiences in a manner that was disparate from the performances of players and “mynstrallls”. Thus, it is clear that the primary objective of these acts was to entertain by means of physical talent and spectacles. In these performances, the focus on “ioculators”, tumblers or “tomalaiers”, and the later introduction of novelty acts such as sword handling and tight-rope walking reveal a perceivably common form of entertainment during this period. Despite the presence of this particular form of drama during the 14th century, I will argue that a strong expansion and diversification of acrobatic performance is visible during the reign of the Tudor dynasty from 1485 to 1603. Extant documents that chronicle the numerous performances of Queen Elizabeth I’s Tumblars and King Henry VII’s Jugglers indicate a strong presence of acrobatic acts during the Tudor reign and thus, the preservation of these documents indicates both the frequency and the significance of these displays, as there exists copious accounts of acrobatics performed for Tudor royalty. In this paper, I will explore the expansion, elaboration and mobility bestowed on acrobatic performances in regards to performance, location and audience during the Tudor reign in England. As a result of this growth in acrobatic drama, changes in the art form are prevalent and the lasting effect of these changes is evident proceeding the Tudor reign, indicating a lasting influence on physical performances and acrobatics.

During the reign of the Tudor dynasty, inherent developments were made in acrobatic performances. Early accounts in REED originating during the reign of the House of York commonly display a single juggler in the homes of lords or in religious households. Thus, the function of a juggler at this time was to entertain elitists of society and members of the clergy in a closed setting. An example of this is found in Kent in 1377, in which a juggler performed under Lord Cobham in a religious house (807), one of the only accounts prior to 1485. Consequently, acrobatic performances originated as a simplified form of entertainment in comparison to the elaborate tumblers and players of Henry and Elizabeth Tudor. Although payments to jugglers of approximately i s. viij d. was normative throughout both reigning dynasties, it is notable that the first Yorkist instance of a tumbler is depicted on Christmas day in a guildhall for Edward Plantagenet (Devon 34). Being the first extant document of a tumbler, it is crucial to acknowledge that this event occurred on christmas, a celebratory event in Catholicism. This notion is revelatory of both the importance of this holiday prior to the break with the Catholic church in 1537, making this the only document chronicling acrobatics on Christmas, and also the presence of tumblers pre-existing the reign of Elizabeth. Thus, she cannot be seen as the innovator of tumbling performances, but a facilitator that allowed the form of drama to flourish and occur on regular occasions. Furthermore, Henry VII popularized the practice of jugglers as entertainment. Copious amounts of records indicate Henry Tudor’s use of jugglers in performances from 1511-1538 (Devon 132, Oxford 77, Kent 427), and it is apparent that tumbling became popularized proceeding his death by Elizabeth Tudor from 1588-1590, as recorded. Through this succession, the development of acrobatic performance is visible through the shift from juggling to tumbling and the further enhancement to tight rope walking and sword playing. Evidently, simple juggling therefore changed to “a display of martial dexterity exhibiting prowess at manipulating swords” (Sussex 272), invoking danger and further intrigue in these shows. The significance of this shift in performance dynamic is evident since it is clear that the changes made to performance during the Tudor reign were built on after 1603 by James Stuart and thus proceeded Elizabeth and Henry’s deaths and can arguably be attributed to modern-day circus acts.

As a result of the popularization and development of acrobatic performances, the mobility of jugglers and tumblers is evident within REED. Accounts of jugglers and tumblers can be extrapolated in every volume of the records, and consequently it is evident that this variation of drama was prevalent throughout the country. For example, the King’s Jugglers under Henry Tudor performed 47 shows throughout England. As a result of his documented presence at these events, it is evident that these juggling performances took place during court processions. According to REED, jugglers were travelling artists; however, it is clear that Henry Tudor maintained the same juggler named Thomas Brandon from 1517 to 1536, and he performed in numerous towns, halls and monasteries throughout the country (Devon 132, Oxford 77, Kent 427).  It is evident that acrobatic theatrics were held in high enough regard for the King to provide food, provisions and allow an ioculator to process with the royal court. Consequently, the growth of acrobatic performance is apparent on a country-wide scale, as masses of elitists are able to view the acts during the court’s stay in a region. For example, extant documents present a concentration of performances in Kent (807), York (71), and Devon (34) prior to Tudor rule and a vast increase in regions with these performances is visible after 1485, expanding throughout the country. Although it is crucial to acknowledge that a small quantity of documents fails to indicate whether or not performances occurred, the contrast between such a small amount of documents during the rule of York versus the amount during the Tudor reign holds credibility. Furthermore, the expansion of acrobatic performances grew not only regionally, but they additionally became increasingly accessible to audiences of lower economic and social classes during the Tudor reign. This is apparent through a shift from mayoral households and monasteries to performances in colleges and guildhalls, and the shift of auspices from monastic to civic. According to REED, the guildhall was the premier centre for performance, and it held large bodies of the general population (Bristol XXXVI). This expansion of audience is documented in York, in which the doors of the hall were damaged due to overcrowding (581). Thus, it is notable that during Tudor power performances moved to increasingly public locations until 1618, in which players were paid to refrain from displaying their talents in the streets. (Kent 810). Through this change in location from the private to the public sphere, acrobatic theatre was heightened because of its move to larger halls and increased accessibility in terms of audience.

A diversification of audiences is visible with the ability of an increased number of patrons to view shows as a result of tours and processions of acrobatic displays. A large contribution to this is the absence of scripts or direction for these performances. This suggest that there is was intended message or conveyance, and thus, the impromptu nature of these shows necessitated sheer performance and theatrics for the sole sake of entertainment. This lack of a documented plot line or script highlights the absence of messages within the performances, however, it is necessary to note that REED accounts contain payments to minstrels alongside the jugglers. Thus, assuming that the acts were performed in tandem, the absence of words during a juggler’s display strengthens the notion that the objective of juggling was solely for entertainment. With the aspect of entertainment in mind, it becomes apparent that these shows could have been performed while the audience participated in other activities at the same time, as these performances did not demand complete focus or commitment of the mind. Thus, because of their presence in the homes of lords or mayors, in the addition to accounts of wine and bread in documents, acrobatic performances may have accompanied feasts or gatherings that did not necessitate a performance that demanded the patron’s full attention. An instance of this occurred in 1543 in which charges for candles, bread and wine are documented in expenses (Sussex 18). Also, the performance of acrobatic drama to patrons from lower classes and members of guilds allows the shows to be easily comprehended because of their lack of intricate content. Furthermore, as a consequence of rapid expansion of audiences during the Tudor reign, many shows of acrobatic and physical nature were abolished by mayors of the town. According to REED, players were sometimes paid to stop performing (Bristol 216),  and the desire for Mayors to avoid shows that were not expressive of virtue to be performed to large audiences is clear.  The shift in audience during the Tudor reign, specifically under Elizabeth I and her tumbling troupes “which tumbled before them at the ffree schole” (Bristol 135), displays a diversification among classes and society in which guildhalls and larger performance venues replaced small household and monastic displays.

The Records of Early English Drama indicate the expenses and the presence of acrobatic and novelty performances prior to and during the Tudor reign. Contrasting the pre-Tudor era with 1485, it is evident that drastic changes were made under the power of Henry VII, Edward VI and Elizabeth I. Although there is a noticeably lesser amount of compiled documents during Edward VI’s kingship, the alterations in acrobatic performance during the Tudor reign as a whole mirror the concentration of Tudor power and its influence on theatre. This is because they utilized an elitist form of entertainment and expanded it among the country in a similar manner to their influence as a dynasty. Due to the development of the art form from juggling to tumbling and novelty tricks, the spread of displays throughout Europe and the widening of audiences, acrobatic performances flourished from 1485-1603. The importance of this expansion is visible due to the increased escalation of physical performances under James Stuart following 1603 and the fall of the Tudor family. Thus, the Tudor reign’s emphasis on acrobatics and novelty performances affected medieval drama in its totality, as it propelled performance forward in a manner that was innovative and accessible to many. 

Works Cited

Elliot, John R. Jr and Alan H Nelson. ed. Alexandra F Johnston and Diana Wyatt. Records of Early English Drama: Oxford. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 2004.

Gibson, James ed. Records of Early English Drama: Kent, Diocese of Canterbury.  Canada: University of Toronto Press, 2002.

Johnston, Alexandra F and Margaret Rogerson ed. Records of Early English Drama: York. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1979.

Louis, Cameron ed. Records of Early English Drama: Sussex. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 2000.

Pilkinton, Mark C. ed. Records of Early English Drama: Bristol. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1997.

Wasson, John ed. Records of Early English Drama: Devon. Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1986.