CONTENTS. First introduction of Females on the English Stage- CHAPTER III. UNTIL the time of Charles the Second, there were no women actors in our Theatres. Female characters were performed by boys, or young men. Even after the Restoration, this custom was not all at once discontinued; and we hear of Kynaston, the last beautiful youth who figured in petticoats on the stage, having been carried about in his theatrical dress by ladies of fashion in their carriages. This was an unseemly spectacle, and we can forgive the Puritans for objecting to see "men in women's clothing." But, against this impropriety, the Puritans ought to have appealed to common sense and decency, instead of quoting a text from the Book of Deuteronomy, which forbids H the appearance of men in female attire: for, though it is true that the Jewish law has interdicted the assumption of women's dress by men, yet it should be remembered that the Levitical law is not binding upon Christians. The restorers of our theatres, without troubling themselves about the Puritans, followed the custom of the continent, in bringing women upon the stage, putting a stop to the impersonation of queens and heroines by he creatures, who had sometimes to be shaved before they acted. Yet this admission of women among the players, though a great natural improvement, occurred in times and circumstances that made it appear at first rather an unfavourable change for the moral character of the stage. Since the death of Shakespeare, and during the latter part of James's reign, the Drama had grown more and more licentious. The speeches which stage-heroines had to hear and utter were so gross, that the Puritans pronounced it impossible for any woman who was not a courtesan to tread the boards; and Charles the Second, who had re-opened the theatres, and was effectively the manager of one of them, seemed as if he strove for a wager to make good the words of the Puritans. Considering the profligacy of the age, it is more wonderful that a few actresses, and these the best, were unexceptionable private characters, than that the stage gave its contingency to Charles's seraglio.* Though, even in those times, the lives of Mrs. Betterton and other actresses belied the * Among Charles's mistresses, his "Loves of the Theatre" were the least expensive and unpopular. Nell Gwynne, it is true, had 15007. a year; but the Duchess of Cleveland had 47007.: the Duchess of Portsmouth had still more. The latter were hated by the whole nation; while Nelly, who was called the "Poor Man's Friend," was literally a general favourite, and not undeservedly for, bred as she had been, as an orange-girl, |