The medieval religious drama of England: a new concept of the York plays and their creators.

Abstract

An anonymous critic of the late fourteenth century charged...since these players of miracles take in jest the serious works of God, there is no doubt that they scorn God, as did the Jews who mocked Christ; for they laughed at his passion, as these laugh and poke fun at the miracles of God. By his harsh treatment of the players, this early critic denounced, as well, the plays and their creators. Similar cries of discontent have been alleged against the miracle plays for centuries, culminating in the traditional view that they are crude, artless works set forth by unskilled, "parrotingll writers. In short, the miracles simply have not been considered dramatic forms, nor have their creators been viewed as artists. Some thirty years ago, George R. Coffman sought to disprove some of this criticism, by making a plea for the study of the Corpus Christi plays as drama. However, his suggestion was Virtually ignored by most medieval scholars. Only a perceptive few, such as Frederick M. Salter (Mediaeval Drama in Chester) and Waldo F. McNeir (liThe Corpus Christi Passion Plays as Dramatic Art"), investigated the plays themselves' and discovered them to be more artistic than was preViously supposed. These works, then, were the beginnings of the re-evaluation of the cycle plays and their authors which is now being thoughtfully pursued by a number of medieval scholars. A more recent study is Eleanor Prosser's Drama and Religion in the Enelish J,trstery Plays. in which the plays are approached from the viewpoint of the medieval audience. Prosser analyzes several recurring characters from the various cycles. depicting them in reference to the basic religious doctrines of the day. As a result of this comprehensive study. many of the plays are revealed as skillful. dramatic interpretations of the original fixed themes. Regrettably. Prosser's enlightening work was not available to this writer until after the present investigation had been completed. and thus. served primarily as reassuring evidence that the task of re-evaluating the English miracle plays and their authors continues. Discrediting the traditional claims against any form of art is a monumental undertaking vThich may be accomplished only in degrees over a long period of intensive research. Generally. the broader area (in this instance, the religious plays of medieval England) must be narrowed to only one phase of study before any valuable contributions may be made to tho total concept. Therefore, tho present investigation involves only a limited number of the cyclic plays of medieval England, the forty-eight York Cycle plays. Each play was examined primarily for evidences of secularization. seemingly the most logical indications of the artistic talents of the various writers and the dramatic value of the plays. The necessary background material concerning the development of religious drama in England during the ~iddle Ages was obtained from the skillful works of such scholars as Hardin Craig, English Religious Drama of the ~iddle Ages; Karl Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church; Sir E. K. Chambers, The Medieval Stage; Lyle M. Spencer, Corpus Christi Pageants in :Snglond; Sidney M. Clarke, The r,:iracle Play in England; and Glynne Wickham, Early English Stages 1300 to 1660. In addition, G. G. Coulton's Kedieval Panorama proved to be most helpful as an intriguing and sweeping account of the Age in which the miracle plays flourished. Lucy Smith's edition of the York Cycle manuscripts, (York Plays: The Plays Performed ~ the Crafts ~ 1~steries of York on the Day of Corpus Christi in the 14th, 15th, and 16th Centuries), was the source for the plays under examination; and John Wycliffe's translation of the New Testament was consulted in reference to the Scriptural sources therein. However, the Biblical comments throughout the study are based primarily upon the King James version of the Eoly 3ible, since it verbally closely parallels the Wycliffe translation.