- Home
- Search
- Settings
- Top Contributors
- Help Center
Answer:
Elizabeth was never Shakespeare's patron although she paid for some of his works to be performed at court (the place) for her. She did this also with many other playwrights. His company was called the Lord Chamberlain's Men and was funded, like all theatrical companies of the time, by the profits they made, not by the Lord Chamberlain, and certainly not by not the queen. In fact, the Queen was the patron of her own theatrical company (The Queen's Men) which was in competition with the other companies, including the Lord Chamberlain's Men, although she did not take much of an interest in it.
Although laws protecting theatrical companies by allowing them to exist if they had a noble patron were passed in Elizabeth's reign, it is reported that she herself had small interest in the theatre. In this respect she differs from her successor James who was an active supporter of the theatre as were most of the members of his family.
Although laws protecting theatrical companies by allowing them to exist if they had a noble patron were passed in Elizabeth's reign, it is reported that she herself had small interest in the theatre. In this respect she differs from her successor James who was an active supporter of the theatre as were most of the members of his family.
First answer by ID1183022223.
Last edit by Bolognaking.
Contributor trust: 239
[recommend contributor
recommended].
Question popularity:
2
[recommend question].
Who ended the Cambodia genocide?
In: Genocide
Answer it!
What are threats to spider crabs?
In: Spiders
Answer it!
What episodes of family guy have nudity?
In: Family Guy
Answer it!
Is copper wire a insulating wire?
In: Metal and Alloys
Answer it!
» more