That Shakespeare Life

With court records of Mary Queen of Scots playing cards, as well as James I of England preferring the game Maw when entertaining royal dignitaries, we know that playing cards was not just popular for royals but a pastime at all levels of society during Shakespeare’s lifetime, and it was a relatively new arrival to England overall. Playing cards did not reach Europe until 1360, and the first mention we have of playing cards in England comes in 1463 when King Edward IV banned the import of playing cards to England in an effort to bolster the English economy by focusing production of cards at home. With the influx of French and Spanish playing cards during Shakespeare’s lifetime, along with laws trying to have cards made in England exclusively, what did the average playing card look like? There is a representation of a six of diamonds on the wall of a small Suffolk church in Hessett, near Bury St Edmunds, which dates from the 15th century and that provides one example of design, but the pack of cards which has historically come to be associated with England specifically is a pack from Rouen, France, designed by Pierre Marechal. As playing cards grew in popularity, so did their design and the invention of various games--some of which like Noddy and Maw show up by name several of Shakespeare’s plays. The suits, size of card, as well as material used to make playing cards was also widely varied in the 16th century, so how do we determine what counts as historically accurate for William Shakespeare? To find out this week, we turn to Kathryn James, Curator of Early Modern Books and Manuscripts at the Beinecke Library at Yale University. She joins us today to share about the collection of 16th century playing cards in house at the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library with some key insights on the economics, design, and appearance of playing cards from the life of William Shakespeare. 

Kathryn James is the Curator of Early Modern Books and Manuscripts at Yale’s Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library.  She is a Lecturer in the Yale History Department and the co-founder of the Yale Program in the History of the Book.  Her new book, English Paleography and Manuscript Culture, 1500-1800 (2020) is available through Yale University Press.

The first historical written reference to a separate undergarment for women is found in the wardrobe accounts of Mary Tudor. There, the records indicate Mary had

"Item for making of one peire of bodies of crymsen satin| Item for making two pairs of bodies for petticoats of crymsen satin | Item for making a pair of bodies for a Verthingall of crymsen Grosgrain"The fashion of using a "pair of bodies", which clothing historians explain is another phrase for corsets, was a staple item for women in Elizabethan England. Not all women were able to afford the bright red undergarments apparently favored by Mary Tudor, nor the silk and satin she uses in this wardrobe account either. Considering these items were part of a woman's underclothes, they were intentionally not on public display and that means, with the exception of 1-2 portraits which were rather scandalous for their time, along with only 2 surviving corsets from the time period, it takes a great deal of research to piece together the history of women's undergarments from Shakespeare's lifetime.

Our guest this week, Cass Morris, is and she has done extensive research into the history of corsets. Cass joins us today to set straight some myths about what women wore in the 16th century, as well as to share what she's learned about how Shakespeare's playing company portrayed female characters on stage, and whether items like a corset could have been used (or varied) to distinguish between the classes of women in Shakespeare's stories.

The first historical written reference to a separate undergarment for women is found in the wardrobe accounts of Mary Tudor. There, the records indicate Mary had 

“Item for making of one peire of bodies of crymsen satin| Item for making two pairs of bodies for petticoats of crymsen satin | Item for making a pair of bodies for a Verthingall of crymsen Grosgrain”

The fashion of using a “pair of bodies”, which clothing historians explain is another phrase for corsets, was a staple item for women in Elizabethan England. Not all women were able to afford the bright red undergarments apparently favored by Mary Tudor, nor the silk and satin she uses in this wardrobe account either. Considering these items were part of a woman’s underclothes, they were intentionally not on public display and that means, with the exception of 1-2 portraits which were rather scandalous for their time, along with only 2 surviving corsets from the time period, it takes a great deal of research to piece together the history of women’s undergarments from Shakespeare’s lifetime. 

Our guest this week, Cass Morris, is and she has done extensive research into the history of corsets. Cass joins us today to set straight some myths about what women wore in the 16th century, as well as to share what she’s learned about how Shakespeare’s playing company portrayed female characters on stage, and whether items like a corset could have been used (or varied) to distinguish between the classes of women in Shakespeare’s stories.

During the life of William Shakespeare, plain water was often unclean and filtration, while available, was rudimentary at best. It was not safe to drink the water of the Thames river, and in order to compensate for a general lack of fresh drinking water, the most popular beverage in Elizabethan England even for regular meal times, was beer or ale. Drunkenness was a common occurrence, as was the consistent consumption of large amounts of alcohol. There are court records showing the monarchs of England often celebrated festivals, parties, and visiting dignitaries with the serving of excessive amounts of alcohol, at times amounting to hundreds of barrels of wine, beer, or ale. One of Shakespeare's most enduring characters is a drunken knight, and even Shakespeare's own death is shrouded in a mystery involving excess drink. With all of this drinking going on in the life of William Shakespeare, what was the opinion and response to drunkenness? Our guest this week, Rebecca Lemon, included an entire chapter on beer and addiction to alcohol in her latest publication titled Addiction and Devotion in Early Modern England. Dr. Lemon joins us today to explain some of the most common alcoholic beverages, the state of alcoholism in the 16th century, and what understanding these facts about the cultural relationship to alcohol can tell us about Shakespeare's characters whose personalities were specifically inclusive of drunken behavior like Falstaff and Prince Hal.

During the life of William Shakespeare, plain water was often unclean and filtration, while available, was rudimentary at best. It was not safe to drink the water of the Thames river, and in order to compensate for a general lack of fresh drinking water, the most popular beverage in Elizabethan England even for regular meal times, was beer or ale. Drunkenness was a common occurrence, as was the consistent consumption of large amounts of alcohol. There are court records showing the monarchs of England often celebrated festivals, parties, and visiting dignitaries with the serving of excessive amounts of alcohol, at times amounting to hundreds of barrels of wine, beer, or ale. One of Shakespeare’s most enduring characters is a drunken knight, and even Shakespeare’s own death is shrouded in a mystery involving excess drink. With all of this drinking going on in the life of William Shakespeare, what was the opinion and response to drunkenness?

Our guest this week, Rebecca Lemon, included an entire chapter on beer and addiction to alcohol in her latest publication titled Addiction and Devotion in Early Modern England. Dr. Lemon joins us today to explain some of the most common alcoholic beverages, the state of alcoholism in the 16th century, and what understanding these facts about the cultural relationship to alcohol can tell us about Shakespeare’s characters whose personalities were specifically inclusive of drunken behavior like Falstaff and Prince Hal.

Throughout Shakespeare's lifetime one of the most widely circulated and reported on current events was the state of the Holy Roman Empire. Ruled for much of Shakespeare's lifetime by an eccentric named Rudolf II, who secluded himself in Bohemia to the neglect of his Empire. Rudolf II and his weird choice to isolate himself in Bohemia would have been enough to make Shakespeare's references to Bohemia in his plays make sense, but on top of Rudolf II there was also Don John of Austria, the half brother to King Philip II of Spain and a threat to the English throne, with many in England concerned he might take over England should the Spanish Armada have succeeded in 1588. For historians, we can look back and see that the Spanish Armada was defeated, but for 28 year old William Shakespeare, that outcome was far from a certainty. Later when William Shakespeare was 49 years old, the eldest daughter of James I, named Elizabeth, married the Frederick V, a senior prince of the Holy Roman Empire, who would go on to become the King of Bohemia--and the irony of that situation could hardly have been lost of William for whom the entirety of his life had been spanned by upheaval in the Holy Roman Empire and an odd relationship to Bohemia. We see glimpses into the contemporary mindset of England and the politics abroad with the Holy Roman Empire as Shakespeare as well as his contemporaries comment on the threat of Don John, the war between the Spanish and Dutch, and even the oddities of the strange, isolated, King of Bohemia, Rudolf II, in plays like King John, which was written the same year Rudolf II died, and Jonsons' The Alchemist which specifically calls out, and insults, the Hapsburg family with his multiple references to Austrian princes. Here to help us unpack this veritable mountain of history packed into just a few lines of text, and introduce us to the life of Rudolf II, the Hapsburg family, and this part of 16th century current affairs is our guest, Peter Wilson.

Throughout Shakespeare’s lifetime one of the most widely circulated and reported on current events was the state of the Holy Roman Empire. Ruled for much of Shakespeare’s lifetime by an eccentric named Rudolf II, who secluded himself in Bohemia to the neglect of his Empire. Rudolf II and his weird choice to isolate himself in Bohemia would have been enough to make Shakespeare’s references to Bohemia in his plays make sense, but on top of Rudolf II there was also Don John of Austria, the half brother to King Philip II of Spain and a threat to the English throne, with many in England concerned he might take over England should the Spanish Armada have succeeded in 1588. For historians, we can look back and see that the Spanish Armada was defeated, but for 28 year old William Shakespeare, that outcome was far from a certainty. Later when William Shakespeare was 49 years old, the eldest daughter of James I, named Elizabeth, married the Frederick V, a senior prince of the Holy Roman Empire, who would go on to become the King of Bohemia--and the irony of that situation could hardly have been lost of William for whom the entirety of his life had been spanned by upheaval in the Holy Roman Empire and an odd relationship to Bohemia. We see glimpses into the contemporary mindset of England and the politics abroad with the Holy Roman Empire as Shakespeare as well as his contemporaries comment on the threat of Don John, the war between the Spanish and Dutch, and even the oddities of the strange, isolated, King of Bohemia, Rudolf II, in plays like King John, which was written the same year Rudolf II died, and Jonsons’ The Alchemist which specifically calls out, and insults, the Hapsburg family with his multiple references to Austrian princes. Here to help us unpack this veritable mountain of history packed into just a few lines of text, and introduce us to the life of Rudolf II, the Hapsburg family, and this part of 16th century current affairs is our guest, Peter Wilson.

Famously, William Shakespeare's Globe burned down from canon fire in 1599 and several of Shakespeare's plays mention guns, gunpowder, and bullets. While we think of Shakespeare's era as one of romantic sword battles, duels with a rapier in the streets, and even the massive naval battles with the Spanish Armada, for the life of William Shakespeare everything was under constant strain and a theme of developing the new. The development of new weapons technology was no exception as the late 16th century saw England replace the serpentine, culverine, and demi-canon, with smaller more portable hand canons, pistols, and muskets. While the average person on the street would not have carried these weapons regularly, we know from the burning of The Globe theater that canons, at least, has a place in 16th century theater, so does that mean guns and gunpowder did as well? Here to help us explore the advent of the hand gun and portable firearms that took place in England during the life of William Shakespeare is our guest, Grace Tiffany.

Famously, William Shakespeare’s Globe burned down from canon fire in 1599 and several of Shakespeare’s plays mention guns, gunpowder, and bullets. While we think of Shakespeare’s era as one of romantic sword battles, duels with a rapier in the streets, and even the massive naval battles with the Spanish Armada, for the life of William Shakespeare everything was under constant strain and a theme of developing the new. The development of new weapons technology was no exception as the late 16th century saw England replace the serpentine, culverine, and demi-canon, with smaller more portable hand canons, pistols, and muskets. While the average person on the street would not have carried these weapons regularly, we know from the burning of The Globe theater that canons, at least, has a place in 16th century theater, so does that mean guns and gunpowder did as well? Here to help us explore the advent of the hand gun and portable firearms that took place in England during the life of William Shakespeare is our guest, Grace Tiffany.

After a long, and tense back and forth of letters, threats, offers of sisterhood, and ultimately betrayal, Elizabeth I ordered Mary Queen of Scots to be executed in 1587, when William Shakespeare was 24 years old, right in the middle of what is called Shakespeare's Lost Years, because historical records leave a gap here in the timeline of the bard about exactly what he was doing in these years of his life, but looking at broader history, it turns out much of England was confused about what, precisely, was happening for anyone.

Mary's death was polarizing for England as it was a culmination of tensions between Catholics vs Protestants, and a strong statement about the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Mary Queen of Scots had a strong claim to the throne of England, and she exerted her might forcefully to try and achieve that role. Famously known for her swift and decisive action against any action, or person, who hinted at treason or a threat to her throne, Elizabeth I was not only surprisingly tolerant of Mary, inviting her to England on terms of peace, but Elizabeth would go on to appoint James I as her successor after Elizabeth died. As the son of Mary Queen of Scots, James I took the throne in 1603, was it ultimately a victory for Mary? Our guest David Schajer is the author of a series of books on the intersection between Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth I, and James I, the lives of which contained so much real life drama that their impact spilled over onto the stage of William Shakespeare, where many moments in his plays like Hamlet, Titus Andronicus, and Merchant of Venice which seem to belie the the thoughts of the moment, like time capsules offering a glimpse into what it was like to live through this pivotal moment in history.