Drama in Early Tudor Britain: 1485-1558,

This volume addresses some aspects of a period of drama that is still very much under investigation, despite enormous advances in the past decades. In five sections the author treats popular dramatic traditions; contemporary views of drama; the secularization of the morality play; the development of comedy; and the emergence of tragedy. Of these the second and fifth offer the most fruitful areas of thought.

Norland investigates the impact of Erasmus which pervaded the area of education. Through him came influence upon More, the subject here of a thoughtful chapter which addresses More's interest in the drama. This cannot be doubted, and it remains surprising that he did not apparently become more involved. Perhaps the plays of his son-in-law, John Heywood, complemented his interest. It is, however, one of the bigger disappointments of this book that Norland does not address the main body of Heywood's work. He does discuss Johan Johan, but even here there is little consideration of the ideological aspects of this translation/adaptation, and these could be matched with the religious approach made manifest in the other plays.

Similarly in the case of the other major dramatist of the period, Norland discusses only Bale's King Johan. Such a broader consideration is especially desirable because both Heywood and Bale present differing aspects of one of the chief problems in which Norland shows a continuing interest, the relationship between didacticism and entertainment. This topic is likely to be part of the criticism of all early drama. Norland emphasizes the didactic role of mysteries, moralities, interludes, comedies and tragedies, though I think there is room for greater discrimination about exactly what is being taught. Besides "teaching" the Bible, do they not also, and perhaps more fundamentally, teach attitudes and interpretations, as well as embody worship?

Beyond this, one must also question the importance of entertainment. Since the performance truly makes the play, the issue we have to examine more and more in these early plays (whether amateur or professional) is the way in which they embody a myriad of opportunities for performance which are just as important as the didactic aspect for performers and audiences alike.

Norland displays considerable scholarship in his approach to tragedies by Watson, Christopherson, and Grimald, placing their concepts of tragedy in terms of religious preoccupations. He shows that educationally these concepts are dominated by the classical theorists, as mediated by Donatus. There is still some difficulty, however, in envisaging the opportunities these plays offered in performance.

In his consideration of other plays, Norland usefully draws attention to the importance of Aristophanic influence in Roister Doister, and addresses the politicization of the morality play, though here he does not show familiarity with a good deal of recent research. He rightly draws attention to the importance and achievement of the author of Respublica especially in political terms, but there is still room for an analysis of the play's delicate ideological balance.

In the case of Skelton, it seems that Norland underestimates the importance of French farce and the impact of the theory of folly (which was also explored thoroughly by Erasmus in the Encomium Moriae).

In general, the author has raised a number of valuable insights into the drama of the period, and for this his book will be a good resource; but as his concluding chapter shows, his achievement is mainly a thoughtful review of well-established points of view.

PETER HAPPE University of Southampton