Records of Early English Drama: Shropshire by J. Alan B. Somerset (review)

Reviews J. Alan B. Somerset. Records of Early English Drama: Shropshire. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994. 2 vols. Pp. xi + 833. $175.00. The importance of the REED project establishes itself ever more firmly with the publication of each new volume, not least because the potential to yield important material and new perspectives on the drama and related activities is repeatedly demonstrated for geographical areas outside the first ranks of prominence for early theatrical culture. In the case of Shropshire, the appeal of the compilation is enlivened by the intrinsic qualities of the evidence, several pieces of which make extremely engaging reading. Among these are the few letters in the volume such as that of the touring Edward Alleyn to his wife in 1593 or of Lady Brilliana Harley to her son in 1642, though the interest in both these cases could perhaps be considered more human than theater-historical. However, the general liveliness of much of the substance might be ascribed to the editorial principle that, where a range of material effectively duplicates documentation of the same event, that which is most close to and revealing about it is selected for inclusion. While not in any real sense diminishing the value of the records as research material, this requirement of economy imbues them with a valuable energy and readability. The compiler's judgment in making selections is clearly of crucial importance in a project that exists to publish as much viable research material as possible within the constraints of the space available. Given that, the declared tendency of Somerset to want to include rather than exclude is reassuring. An illustration of this is his preference, in transcribing civic accounts, for providing extended passages rather than printing ellipsis marks for entries that are positioned near to each other. He would also have chosen to include the Shrewsbury Fragments had he not been prevented from doing so by REED guidelines which, probably advisedly, prohibit the inclusion of material easily available through publication elsewhere. The impression gained from the selection is thus one of reasonable comprehensiveness. In fact, at times Somerset appears to err somewhat in the other direction, as where lengthy documentation arguably yields relatively little of great importance. Instances are the ten pages of records of a trial for the use of a communion carpet as a morris dance flag in Clee St. Margaret in 1619, or the three pages devoted to a trial for theft at a bear baiting in Ludlow in 1622. However fully reproduced, the records are often frustratingly or tantalizingly silent. It is a recurrent problem in trying to uncover early evidence of quotidian cultural enterprise that most goes unrecorded in the period. Frequently what documentation there is exists only because of a fortuitous connection or juxtaposition of these activities with other extraordinary or transgressive occurrences; and obviously this is parti282 Reviews283 cularly the case with material drawn from judicial records. One instance —not from court proceedings but from a local chronicle—is a brief reference to the accidental deaths of two young men in 1549 that provides a suggestion of hocktide celebrations, otherwise unmentioned in civic and other records. At other times the more standard records provide glimpses into customs which were probably more regular than the evidence suggests, such as isolated payments for Robin Hood festivities in Bridgnorth, Shrewsbury, and Ludlow in the latter part of the sixteenth century. Somerset has carefully thought through problems of the silence of records. Where civic payments do not specifically refer to activities designated by REED guidelines, he could not include them in the main body of the text, but he has retained certain of them in an appendix because he was aware from eyewitness accounts that civic celebrations did in fact take place and the expenditure would have accommodated these even when this is not explicitly stated; he cites the 1581 St. George's celebration in Shrewsbury and the investiture ceremony for Prince Charles in Ludlow in 1616. This not only makes apparent the editor's desire to be as comprehensive as possible but also illustrates an intelligent awareness of the potential that exists in making connections between diverse material. At several points the records appear...