Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2002 :: November ::
Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 13.2187  Sunday, 3 November 2002

[1]     From:   R. A. Cantrell <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 31 Oct 2002 11:39:26 -0600
        Subj:   Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary (Titus Andronicus)

[2]     From:   Imtiaz Habib <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, 31 Oct 2002 21:51:06 -0500
        Subj:   Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary (Titus Andronicus)


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           R. A. Cantrell <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 31 Oct 2002 11:39:26 -0600
Subject: 13.2178 Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary
Comment:        Re: SHK 13.2178 Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary
(Titus Andronicus)

>I am sure that others can suggest likely
>candidates.

Sounds Collieresque.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Imtiaz Habib <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, 31 Oct 2002 21:51:06 -0500
Subject:        Re: Recent Discovery of T. Jenkins' Diary (Titus Andronicus)

John Briggs' response to Huang's query about the reported discovery of
the diary entry of Thomas Jenkins that such a "discovery" is
problematic, is partly valid on the matter of the dates involved: the
theatres were closed until "the feast of St michaell" [sic] by the Privy
Council order of June 23 1592,  for worries about plague and disorderly
public conduct.

But, while it is true that by Sep. 28 the prohibition still hadn't been
lifted, and was still in effect by the beginning of December, the
lifting of the order was surely imminent by that month (it was lifted by
late December since by Dec 29 Henslowe is again recording payment
receipts for performances, including three times in January for Titus).
In other words, expectations about the resumption of public playing in
London must have been imminent even though during the period of the
prohibition Strange's men were probably touring the provinces.
Furthermore, even if the theatres were closed, could Shakespeare & co
(i.e. the figures assumed to be the  participants in the conversation
about Titus supposedly recorded in that diary) not have been around in
London at the time (in December), particularly in the expectation that
the theatres were going to be reopened any day ? The discussion about
Titus, in that supposedly recorded conversation, becomes even more
probable in view of the play's repeatedly successful performances
(judging by Henslowe's fat takings) three times in January 1593, that
is, as soon as the theatres reopened. Of course, whether the
"titus/tittus" recorded by Henslowe for January 1592 is Shakespeare's
Titus Andronicus is still, necessarily uncertain. But Shakespeare's
involvement in the production of that play is highly probable, even if
we assume he fashioned his own play out of it (and I don't make that
assumption, since to me it is much more probable that this
"titus/tittus" is his play).

As such, the casual dismissal of the validity of the Jenkins diary entry
maybe hasty and premature. I, for one, would like like to know more
about this finding.

Imtiaz Habib
Associate Professor of English
Old Dominion University

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.