Part 54

=The Facts of Porter's Life.=--_The Two Angry Women of Abington_ is the only extant production of Henry Porter. In 1841 Mr. Collier, who was then editing Henslowe's _Diary_, supplied Mr. Dyce with what purported to be all the materials in that journal relative to this dramatist; and these, with the exception of one of August 23, 1597, connecting him with Nashe, which has been shown to be a forgery, are copied from Dyce's Percy Society edition of the _Two Angrie Women_ by Mr. H. Ellis for the preface to the Mermaid edition of the play. The statement is there made that "the foregoing extracts--extending over the brief period of a single year ... contain all the definite information which has reached us concerning Henry Porter." An examination of Collier's Henslowe's _Diary_ will show, however, that Mr. Ellis omits about a dozen entries[1580] affecting our poet which, though inaccessible to Dyce in 1841, have been available since 1845. A complete list of such notices in their chronological order has not been set before the public. I, therefore, subjoin the following, inserting an additional memorandum (No. 8) of January 17, 1598-9, from another source, and eliminating the suspicious Henslowe entries which Mr. George F. Warner[1581] has branded as Collier forgeries. The references are to the first volume of the _Diary_.

1. P. 77. Dd unto Mʳ Porter, the 16 of desembr 1596 vˡⁱ

2. P. 77. Lent unto Mʳ Porter, the 7 of march 1597 iiijˡⁱ

3. P. 124. Lent unto the Company, the 30 of maye 1598, to bye a boocke called love prevented, the some of fower powndes, dd to THOMAS DOWTON. Mʳ Porter[1582] iiijˡⁱ

4. P. 126. Lent unto Cheattell, the 26 of June 1598, in earnest of a boocke called the 2 pte of blacke Battman of the north; and Mʳ Harey Porter hath geven me his worde for the performance of the same, and allso for my money xxˢ

5. P. 131. Lent unto the company, the 18 of Aguste 1598, to bye a Boocke called hoote anger sone cowld of Mʳ Porter, Mʳ cheattell, and bengemen Johnson, in fulle payment, the some of vjˡⁱ

6. P. 141. Lent unto thomas Dowton, the 22 of desembr 1598, to bye a boocke of harey Poorter called the 2 pte of the 2 angrey wemen of abengton vˡⁱ

7. P. 144. Lent unto harey Porter, the 17 of Janewary, 1598[-9] at the request of Richard Alleyn and Wᵐ Birde the some of xxˢ

8. An acknowledgment of the transaction (No. 7) in the Bodleian. See note prefixed to Malone's copy (Malone, 184): as follows,

"An acknowledgement of a debt of 20 _s_. owing to Philip Henslowe, dated Jan. 17th, 1598[-9], and bearing the autograph signature of Henry Porter, formerly lying loose in this volume is now to be found in MS. Eng. Hist. C. 4, fol. 15. (Signed) W. H. A., June 8, 1885."

9. P. 143. Lent unto Thomas Dowton, the 31 of Janewary 1598[-9], to bye tafetie for ij womones gownes, for the ij angrey wemen of abengton, the some of ixˡⁱ

10. P. 145. Lent unto Thomas Downton, the 12 of febreary 1598[-9], to paye Mʳ Poorter, in fulle payment for his boocke called the 2 pte of the angry wemen of abington, the some of ijˡⁱ

11. P. 145. Lent unto Thomas Downton, the 12 of febreary 1598[-9], to bye divers thinges for the playe called the 2 pte of the angrey wemen of abington ijˡⁱ

12. P. 146. Lent unto harey porter, at the Requeste of the company, in earneste of his boocke called ij mery wemen of abenton the sume of forty shellings; and for the Resayte of that money he gave me his faythfull promysse that I shold have all the boockes which he writte, ether him selfe or with any other, which some was dd the 28 of febreary, 1598[-9]. I saye xxxxˢ THOMAS DOWNTON, ROBERT SHAWE[1583]

13. P. 146. Lent unto Harey Cheattell, the 4 of marche 1598[-9], in earneste of his boocke, which harey Porter and he is a writinge, the some of, called the Spencers xˢ

14. P. 146. Lent unto Robart Shawe, the 22 of marche 1598[-9], to paye unto Mʳ porter, in full paymente of his playe called the Spensers the some of vˡⁱ xˢ

15. P. 147. Lent unto Harey Porter, at the apoyntment of Thomas Downton, the 7 of aprell 1599, the some of xxˢ

16. P. 151. [A note for the same in Porter's handwriting]--Borrowed of phillip Henchlowe, xxˢ, the vijth of Aprill, anno. dom. 1599. (Signed) HENRY PORTER

17. P. 148. Lent unto Thomas Downton, the 9 of Aprell 1599, to bye dyvers thinges, as 4 clothe clockes, and macke up a womones gowne, the some of--For the Spencers xˡⁱ

18. P. 94.[1584] Lent Harey Porter, the 11 of aprill 1599 the some of ijˢ vjᵈ

19. P. 148. Lent unto Thomas Downton, the 14 of Aprell 1599, to macke divers thinges for the playe of the Spencers, the some of xvˡⁱ

20. P. 148. Delyvered unto Thomas Downton boye, Thomas parsones, to bye divers thinges for the playe of the Spencers, the 16 of aprell 1599, the some of[1585] vˡⁱ

21. P. 94. Lent Harey Porter, the 16 of aprell, 1599, the some of xijᵈ

22. P. 261. Harey Porter tocke a somsete of me, Phillipe Henslowe, the 16 of Aprell 1599, upon this condition, that yf I would geve him xijᵈ at that instant, for that xijᵈ he bound hime seallfe unto me in xˡⁱ of corant Inglishe mony, for this cawse to paye unto me the next daye folowinge all the money which he oweth unto me, or els to ferfette for that xijᵈ tenn powndes; which deate wase unto me xxvˢ, which he hath not payd acordinge to his bonde, and so hath forfetted unto me: wittnes to this a sumsette, JOHN HASLETT, Va[ul]ter Mᴿ KYNGMAN, the Elder.

[This entry which seems to refer to No. 21, would naturally be made on the 18th of April, 1599, but in the _Diary_ it occurs at the end of a confused sequence running March 25, 1598, November 16, 1599, August 9, 1598, September 18, 1602, September 19, 1602. Between it and the next entry, undated but probably of February, 1601-2, leaves are missing or mutilated. According to Dyce, whose information came from Collier, the entry on p. 94 "is struck through, the money having been repaid." But Collier does not record the payment of the xijᵈ in his edition of the _Diary_; nor, according to p. 261, was Porter released from the "deate of xxvˢ" or the "forfette of xˡⁱ."]

23. P. 94. Lent Harey Porter, the 5 of may 1599 the some of ijˢ 6ᵈ

24. P. 94. Lent Harey Porter, the 15 of maye 1599, the some of ijˢ 6ᵈ (Signed) HENRY PORTER

25. P. 94. Be it knowne unto all men, that I, Henry Porter, do owe unto Phillip Henchlowe the some of xˢ, of lawfull money of England, wcʰ I did borrowe of hym the 26 of maye, aº dom. 1599. HENRY PORTER[1586]

=Other Early Notices.=--Meres, in the _Palladis Tamia_, 1598, names our dramatist as one of the best for comedy among us, and places him in good company: Lyly, Lodge, Gascoigne, Greene, Shakespeare, Nashe, Thomas Heywood, Munday, Chapman, Wilson, Hathaway, and Chettle. It is perhaps worthy of remark that, beginning with Nashe, all these playwrights were at the time Porter's associates in the employ of Henslowe and the Admiral's company, and that in this list our poet rubs shoulders with Chapman and Wilson. Much less flattering are the references in Richard West's _Court of Conscience or Dick Whipper's Sessions_, 1607,[1587] to "ruffianly Dick Coomes" (Poem to _Prophane Swearers_) and "Nimble-tongued Nicholas as the Proverbe saith" (Address to _Liers_), which are undoubtedly allusions to our play[1588]: for although Porter's Nicholas is not a liar, his Coomes is, in the extreme, ruffianly and profane. The context of _The Court of Conscience_ would indicate, however, that West was availing himself, to some extent, of nicknames proverbial among the vulgar, such as Suckblood, Tom Taylor, Money Monger, and Nicholas Newfangle. That Porter's play was still in circulation as late as 1661 is shown by its inclusion in Kirkman's Catalogue of that date.

=Conjectural Identity.=--Malone, Collier, and Dyce give no clue; in fact they do not exhaust the materials in Henslowe. Langbaine mentions only the printed play. Hunter, in his _Chorus Vatum Anglicanorum_[1589] says "it can hardly be doubted that this is the same Henry Porter of Christ Church who was made Bachelor of Music in July, 1600 (_Alumn. Oxon._ III. 1182). Wood says that he had seen some of his compositions, but thinks none were extant when he wrote. This Henry Porter was father of Walter Porter, Master of the Choristers at Westminster, who had friends in Sir Edward Spencer and Edward Laurence. He was related to Dr. John Wilson." Foster in the _Alumni Oxonienses_, tells us, in addition, that Walter became gentleman of the Chapel Royal of Charles I. This information is all traceable to Wood's _Fasti_,[1590] but Wood does not attempt to identify Henry Porter the dramatist with Henry Porter the musical composer. Of the latter we learn, from the _Register of the University of Oxford_,[1591] that he had studied music for twelve years and had "composed" before he took his degree, July 4, 1600. There is no record of a degree in arts, nor of matriculation, at Christ Church; this musical activity would seem, however, to have occupied the career of the future bachelor of music from a date eight years before Porter the dramatist appeared in Henslowe's employ to a date after our poet had borrowed his last half-crown from that employer. "The statutable conditions for the degree of Mus. Bac." at that time, say Boase and Clark,[1592] "were that the candidate should have been seven years _in re musica_, and that he should compose and cause to be sung in the university a _canticum quinque partium_, giving three days' notice of the performance of this exercise." That a student like Porter of Christ Church, who had proceeded leisurely through his course in music, taking twelve years instead of the seven prescribed, and who, meanwhile, was composing canticles on elevated and, probably, sacred themes, should be a man of maturity and acknowledged worth is only natural to suppose. And such was the esteem in which Porter of Christ Church was held by an Oxford undergraduate of that day, who addresses him in the following verses, published in 1599:[1593]--

"AD HENRICUM PORTER

Porter I durst not mell with sacred writ, Nor woe the mistris fore I win the maide; For my yong yeres are taskt; its yet unfitte, For youth as eld is never halfe so staid. Thy selfe which hath the summe of Art and Wit Thus much I know unto me would have said; Thy silver bell could not so sweetly sing If that too soone thou hadst begun her ring."

The Porter thus apostrophized by John Weever has set sacred writ to music, but only after careful discipline leading to the musical art; and his wisdom has been proved by the result: "Thy silver bell" of music, says his admirer, "could not so sweetly sing, If that too soon thou hadst begun her ring." Mr. Havelock Ellis,[1594] to whom these verses were communicated by Mr. Bullen, understands them to refer to Porter the dramatist, and concludes therefrom, that he was "at the period of his _dramatic activity_ a man of mature age."

But there is nothing in Weever's verses applicable to the dramatist as we know that personage: his extant play is anything but sacred, it presents no particular evidence of mature authorship, betrays no interest in musical affairs, yields no bell-tones of style or verse. While Weever was writing his _Epigrams_, 1596 to 1599, the dramatist was pursuing anything but a staid and silvern course at the Rose Theatre on the Bankside. The slowly matured composer of canticles, on the other hand, was completing a leisurely discipline at Christ Church, and to such a student Weever's eulogy admirably applies.[1595] In all probability the composer stuck to his _metier_. He was of a musical family: his son obtained recognition from Court for his musical attainments; and a kinsman, Dr. John Wilson, "a very eminent musician of whom there is a long notice in Wood," was professor of music at Oxford in 1656.[1596]

The familiarity with Oxford and its surroundings displayed in the drama of the two angry women who meet in the neighboring village of Abington is, however, indicative of Oxonian authorship, and we are again driven to the registers of the university in search of some available Henry Porter. There is, I find, but one capable, in point of chronology, of fulfilling the conditions:

"Matriculations: 19 June, 1589, Brazenose, Porter, Henry; Lond., _gen. f._ 16."[1597]

Concerning the academic career of this Henry Porter there is no information to be gathered from the records of university or college--why he was not admitted B.A., or why or when he left his college. I am apprised, however, by Mr. C. B. Heberden, the Principal of Brasenose, who at my request kindly instituted the requisite search, that such absence of information is not unusual, for the College Register was very imperfectly kept in the sixteenth century. If this was our Henry Porter, the author of the _Pleasant History of the Two Angry Women_, he was born in 1573, the son of a gentleman of London, he kept an uneventful term or so at Brasenose, and was perhaps still there in 1592 when his future associate in Henslowe's employ, John Marston, was matriculated. After his return to London he must have taken speedily to play-writing, for he was not more than twenty-three years of age when we find him selling his dramas to the Admiral's company for distinctly reputable sums. A modest straw in favour of the supposition that this was our dramatist is the explicit statement in both editions of our play to the effect that its author was Henry Porter, _Gent_. We have no proof that the Porter of Christ Church, who took his only degree after our play was printed, had any right in 1599 to sign himself Gentleman.

=Dramatic Career.=--Although, as I have said, only one of Porter's plays is extant, the entries in Henslowe, and their context, enable us to form some conception of his relation to the contemporary drama. They indicate that between December 16, 1596, and May 26, 1599, he was associated as a writer of plays with the Admiral, the Earl of Nottingham's company of actors, and that after February 28, 1599, his services were pledged to that company alone. It is possible that he had also acquaintance among the Earl of Pembroke's men, who were acting at The Rose for a short time during October and November, 1597, in partnership with the Admiral's company; but of this we cannot be certain, for we have no record of Porter's actions between March 7, 1597, and May 30 of the ensuing year.

The payment of December 16, 1596, is not in loan nor "in earnest of a boocke," but _delivered_ as for a play then completed; and the sum, even if it were not a final instalment, would in itself indicate a play of some promise, for £6 or £7 was as much as Henslowe usually gave for a production even by an author already distinguished. If the payment was for a completed "boocke," the play would, according to the procedure of the Admiral's men, have been ready for presentation within a period of ten days to six weeks after the date of purchase. The following were the new plays presented by this company during that period: _That Will Be Shall Be_, December 30, 1596; _Alexander and Lodowick_, January 14, and _Woman Hard to Please_, January 27, 1597. Of these _Alexander_ was the most successful, and _That Will Be_ next.[1598] It is possible that the third play was the work of Heywood who had been recently paid 30s.--for a "boocke."[1599] As to _Alexander_, it is mentioned two years later as the property of Martin Slater,[1600] and there is reason to conjecture that it was written by him. But, even if these attributions were conclusive, we should not be justified in assuming--that the book remaining unassigned, _That Will Be Shall Be_, was the property for which Porter was paid on December 16, 1596. It is not, however, impossible that his first production was one of the three most popular plays put upon the boards at The Rose that season. That Henslowe's loan to Porter on the following March 7 had any connection with a play of December 16, 1596, is most unlikely. Henslowe was not by way of disbursing £9 for one "boocke." The date is also too remote from May 30, 1598, to permit of our connecting this loan with the payment for _Love Prevented_, there mentioned, let alone the objection that if the entries of March 7, 1597, and May 30, 1598, refer to the same play, the author was paid the unusually high sum of £8. But though we cannot prove that Porter made much out of Henslowe and the Admiral's men, it would seem that they made a good deal out of him. For after certain purchases from Porter and during the period within which the first performances of his plays must naturally have occurred, the theatre receipts increased appreciably. The play of May 30, 1598, for instance, would, according to custom, have been presented some time between June 10 and June 30. The only other new play that could during those weeks have assisted to swell the profits of the theatre was the First Part of _Blacke Battman of the North_, by distinguished authors, to be sure, but not extant. Henslowe's weekly receipts from "my Lord Admerall's mean" during the month before June 10 had averaged £3 16_s._ 3_d._; during the period between June 10 and June 30 they rose to an average of £5 4_s._ 4_d._; the week after June 30 they fell again to £2 11_s._ 6_d._[1601] That Porter was at that time held in respect by Henslowe is shown by the transaction of June 26, when the crafty manager took his surety for the performance of a literary and pecuniary obligation by Chettle, than whom no one could have been habitually more in arrears. And that Porter's plays were worth having is proved by Henslowe's engaging, in February of the next year, everything that he might write, whether in partnership or alone. That this appreciation of his plays was shared also by the company appears from the unusual sums which they expended for the apparel and properties necessary to their presentation.[1602]

Of the playwrights at that time attached to the Admiral's company, the most intimately associated with Porter would appear to have been Chettle; and, through him, our poet must have been brought into close relations with Robert Wilson, who was Chettle's colleague in that _Second Part of Blacke Battman_, for the completion of which Porter went surety,--also with Dekker and Drayton, who had assisted in the writing of the First Part, and were, maybe, interested in the Second. In fact, Chettle, Dekker, Drayton, Wilson were boon companions in productivity and the 'marshallsey': to go bail for one of them was presumably to pay for all. With Ben Jonson, who was just then coming into notice as a dramatist, Henry Porter must have drained many a flagon. In August, 1598, these two have just finished writing a play in company with Chettle, _Hot Anger Soon Cold_, and are paid a fair price for it by Henslowe, who seems to regard Porter, however, as the principal author, for he enters his name first in the record. But if the returns from this play are included in Henslowe's receipts of the next two months, it cannot have been more than an ordinarily successful production.[1603]

During the latter part of 1598 our dramatist is engaged upon a play called by Henslowe the _2 Pte of the 2 angrey women of abengton_. This was rehearsed during January and February, 1599, and by February 12, the day on which final payment was made to Porter, £11[1604] had been expended on properties for the performance. It was probably ready for presentation at that time, and its success may have assisted the sudden leap in Henslowe's share of the receipts from £7 10_s._, for the week ending February 18, to £15 3_s._, for the ten days ending February 29,[1605] 1599. This play paid Porter £7, a higher figure than _Hot Anger_ had brought. Some two weeks later he is under contract to produce a sequel, the _ij mery wemen of abenton_, and only four days later still, March 11, he is engaged in a new partnership with Chettle to produce a play entitled _The Spencers_, or _Despencers_, a magnificent and tragic subject perhaps suggested by the reprinting of Marlowe's _Edward II._ during the preceding year.[1606] _The Spencers_ was finished by the 22d of the same month. That it was looked upon as a play of great promise appears from the large amounts which, as already stated, were expended in its preparation for the stage. It was first acted some time after April 14. On the 16th Henslowe enters a final small disbursement for properties, of which perhaps the need was perceived during the first performance. His receipts for the week ending April 15 rise to £13 7_s._, four times as much as for the week before; while the entry, £13 16_s._, for the week next ensuing, during which the play was surely on the stage, is, with the exception of those of February 29, already mentioned, and of June 3,[1607] the largest that year. Perhaps by April 22 the novelty of _The Spencers_ had begun to wear off, for there is again a drop in Henslowe's receipts, to £11 5_s._, the week ending April 29.[1608] This partnership with Chettle existed, by the way, in the year when _Every Man in his Humour_ was in course of composition, and it ended just about a month before 'Bengemen' passed a rapier through Gabriel Spenser in Hoxton Fields.

Beside the playwrights already mentioned, Porter must have known in varying degrees of intimacy Heywood, Haughton, Day, Munday, Chapman, Hathaway, and, perhaps, Rankins, who were then writing for the company; also Samuel Rowley and Martin Slater, who appear to have been serving as actor-dramatists. With the players Downton, Richard Alleyn, Robert Shaw, and the polyonymous William Bird, Porter was associated in various business negotiations. Of course he knew the above-mentioned Gabriel Spenser, and Henslowe's son-in-law, Edward Alleyn, and the two Jeffes, and Towne and Singer, and the other active members of the company.