The Role Of Boys Companies In Elizabethan England

Many children dream of being an actor or a singer, however, that was not the case during the 16th and 17th century. During this era, children's companies, or boys’ companies were formed. A boys’ company consisted of a group of eight to twelve boys ranging from various ages (Jokenin). The boys served one purpose: to entertain as actors in Elizabethan England. The masters of the boys’ companies trained the boys in both singing and acting, along with rhetoric and grammar. Masters also served the sole purpose of being directors, managers, and designers in order to keep their companies functioning successfully (Children’s).
For the fact that these boys would perform many would assume that the theater life was entertaining. Not everything

revolved around glory and fame. These boys experienced the horrors of abuse within this industry. What could possibly be more terrifying than being separated from loved ones against one’s will? That is exactly what ‘child catchers’ did in essence. Child catchers, roamed the streets of London in search of young boys to snatch that were on their way to school. The unfortunate victims who were kidnapped, were obligated to perform on stage. The stages these boys would perform on were far from luxurious; they were described as shabby and were primarily for the excitement of male audiences (Exploitation). Why would anyone allow these boys to be kidnapped and placed to work in boys’ companies? -Hardly anyone tried to intervene; and those who did failed nevertheless. Queen Elizabeth I, served as a direct link in the formation of the boys’ companies. She signed warrants which allowed theatre bosses to capture boys for their companies. Aside from this, the Queen also signed commissions that would allow theaters to kidnap the boys where they were then obligated to perform under the threat of being whipped (Exploitation).
The Queen’s commissions provided theater owners a boost in their confidence believing that they had sufficient authority to take any boy that they wished throughout the streets. The warrants were actually designated so that the boys would be taken for service in the Chapel Royal, for religious services. The public knew the truth of how the Chapel Royal was used as an acting company but since the Queen never intervened, nothing changed.
As if abuse from threats, being kidnapped, and obligated to perform if not get whipped, these boys also experienced exploitation. The boys were robbed of their innocence the moment they were placed into the boys’ companies. The exploitation of these boys was explicitly sexual on many occasions. The boys would often act in theaters with dim lighting where the audience consisted of males as opposed to the public theaters with a variety of audience members (Jokenin). For instance, the playwright and poet Thomas Middleton, described one of the boy’s companies as a “nest of boys able to ravish a man,” (Exploitation).
There were many different companies: each company could be classified into one of three categories.

The three different troupes were: students of grammar schools, choir boys of private chapels, and choir boys of ecclesiastical institutions. (Shapiro 2-7). Most of the grammar schools provided dramatic productions to be performed by the students. The purpose behind this was to make the children fluent in colloquial Latin. Aside from this, students would benefit from proper and elegant diction, poise, appropriate gesture, and graceful body movements. There was a major emphasis on boldness that would later transfer over into the performances. This audacity of boldness provided immense joy for adult spectators where the boldness would emit as sauciness, parody, and satire on stage (Hillebrand

2-3).
To insure a steady supply of choirboys, alms lodged in the almonry maintained them. These boys typically entered at the age of seven or eight where they would serve as choristers until their voice broke around the age of puberty (thirteen or fourteen). The choir schools provided impeccable music education, the boys were taught to play instruments such as organs, virginals, viols, and recorders (Shapiro 11).
Many of the boy company players during the sixteenth century were performed at St Paul’s.

The children of St. Paul's owed their prominence to early choir masters: John Redford who was succeeded by Sebastian Westcote after Redford’s death in 1547. Westcote served as the heart and soul since he guided all theatrical activities for the next thirty-five years. He specifically insured that the boys performed plays at court every Christmas (Shapiro 14). Although they were just boys, the boy actors of St. Paul's could be compared to the adult companies of Burbage’s Theater since both playhouses staged plays meant for fee-paying audiences (St. Paul). Indoor boy companies on the other hand, would put together shows that were targeted for wealthy audiences. Local law students would take time from their studies to go catch a new

show.
The boy companies were viewed with great respect. The boys performed less frequently than the adult companies, and hardly had a reputation for crowd troubles. The content found within the plays at the Blackfriars and St Paul’s could be labeled as highly erotic and homoerotic even though the boys were seen as relatively harmless. This resulted in wit which was found to be entertaining resulting in normal boundaries within the drama (Hillebrand 7)..
Audiences only get to witness the on stage production once it is all put together. They do not get to see the hard work that goes into the making of it all. It is said that only one child out of fifty children could cause enough disturbance by not picking up the content as quickly as others. Falling behind reduces materially the amount that can truly be fulfilled during a rehearsal (Fisher 114). Another common challenge was the fact that the younger children would not keep up or understand how to fully work with the older ones. This caused tension between the different age groups. Children at the pre- school age were especially difficult to work with they did not understand the concept of obedience at rehearsals. The need to constantly stop to correct minor behaviors or provide an explanation would set the entire group behind and would require countless hours of rehearsals (Fisher Pg 27). When some of the cast members were not present during rehearsals and another child or the director had to personally read their lines hardly anything was accomplished that day. Frequent absences would reoccur due to illness or conflicting lessons –the play would take twice as long to produce since the entire production was basically put on hold (Hillebrand 15).
Every costume had to meet certain credentials for the production it was being exhibited for. The first requirement was that the costume had to be historically correct. The costume had to pertain to the century and location the production was taking place in. It also had to suit the actor both fit wise as well as the design aspect. Just as clothes, the costume had to bring out the best and hide the worst features of the actor. The boys should have been able to feel one with the part he was portraying through the costume being worn (Fisher 122-123). As opposed to the adults, the boys being that they were children, were very concerned about the costumes they would wear during plays. They asked many questions such as: the color of it, the material it was made of, and if any props such as swords or interesting hats came along with the costume.
Then costumes would primarily reflect the mood of the play especially when working with children in particular. It was important to incorporate multiple colors for children’s costumes to replicate a colorful spectacle throughout the play. A simple costume was the most logical approach when designing the costumes for the fact that it was more effective as opposed to over crowding small costumes with intricate details (Fisher 124). Costumes would cover the arms and legs of those boys who were growing and were at the peak of adolescence to eliminate awkwardness.
What would a costume be without any makeup or hair details? The boys would show up to their makeup tables with clean skin and hair arranged in a normal manner. Overall, the same makeup ideals applied to both the boys and adults except for grotesqueries which were specifically used only upon children for special effect purposes (Shapiro 34). The fact that children had a smaller face, implies that a greater attention to care and detail needed to be the primary focus to maintain the boys’ features distinct from afar. Only those with experience were capable of getting the job completed. Those who lacked experience would simply smear the makeup and create a sloppy look. –Smeared makeup was considered to be worse than having no makeup at all (Fisher 130).
A well done makeup job not only would boost the confidence of the boys when acting but it would also help them resemble the character they were playing a lot better. The boys were not allowed to play with makeup during production time. When there was time and there was an individual willing to teach them, an interested group of boys were taught how to apply their makeup properly. This skill would ultimately come in handy when the boys grew older. Practice makes perfect, that being said, if the boys practiced enough –over time they could become skillful artists themselves and assist during production time. (Fisher 132).
Just like everything in life, there were both positive and negative aspects to the boys companies. Some may consider these innocent boys were robbed of their innocence but at least they became independent while learning how to successfully perform. They probably discovered talents that were put to use that they never knew existed such as acting and singing.