When Richard Hosely and C. Walter Hodges began looking into the design of the Globe Theatre, they were working with a few basic assumptions that had been generally accepted as being true of the theatre.
- It was a timber framed structure
- It was round, or more likely polygonal in shape
- It had three stories, or galleries
- It had one central yard
- At least part of the yard was open to the weather
Beyond these few assumptions, nothing was definite. A model was created based on the sources described above and a drawing made by Wenceslas Hollar c. 1638 of the second Globe. Though this drawing was of the second theatre, current building regulations and government surveys have shown that the second theatre was built on the foundations of the first, thus allowing measurements of the original Globe to be determined from this drawing of the second Globe.
One of the most significant questions about the design of the new Globe was about the determination of the size of the original theatre. The Fortune was 80 ft across, and 33 ft high, but the Fortune was square. A square with a diameter of 80 ft has much more area than a circle with a diameter of 80 ft. Thus, it is likely that the diameter of the Globe was actually larger. The height of 33 ft, on the other hand, was believed to be a standard for all theatres at the time, and thus was determined to be the height of the Globe. In order to determine the width of the Globe, Hosely turned to the Hollar drawing (Figure 22). Hollar drew the Globe with an approximate 3 to 1 ratio of width to height, thus Hosely argued that the width must be 100 ft. However, further inspection showed that the ratio on the drawing was actually 3.3 to 1, leading to a width of 109 ft. This seemed to be too wide for the theatre, and resulted in questions about the integrity of Hollar's drawing.
Figure 22: Hollar's drawing of the Globe c. 1638 (Smith, Plate 12)
When John Orrell began to work on the project, he started by taking a closer look at the Hollar drawing. Orrell noted that there were precise pencil marks in specific locations on the drawing, evidence of the use of a drawing frame. Using the locations of buildings in the drawing, Orrell was able to pinpoint the location at which the drawing was drawn, the St. Savior's Cathedral (now the Southwark Cathedral). From atop this building, the locations of buildings could be matched to sight lines on the drawing to produce the exact frame of reference that Hollar used. In the drawing, the proportions of intervals between buildings and landmarks were not as they were seen by the naked eye, but were consistent. Orrell reasoned that Hollar had used an optical device such as a topographical glass. With such a device, a sketch is made which has perfect linear perspective. If one can fix the location of the observer, the drawing can be analyzed trigonometrically, and each component within the drawing can be measured. Since the observation point was known, Orrell was able to complete these calculations. He found that both large intervals between buildings in the background and smaller intervals, such as the width of the nearby Winchester House, were accurate within + 2%. Thus, he determined that the Globe width must have been 102.35 ft + 2% and height 31.97 ft + 2 ft. Orrell then reasoned that after allowances for imprecision in the original drawing, the width of the Globe was between 99.34 ft and 105.39 ft. This was later verified by the uncovering of the foundations of the Globe, when the exact width of the Globe was determined to be 100 ft.
Another aspect of the Globe that needed to be considered early on was the number of sides that the theatre contained. Since the Fortune contract mentioned bays with a width of 11 ft, and a yard with a width of 55 ft, Hosley argued that there must have been four ranges of five bays, plus an additional bay on each corner, resulting in a total of 24 bays, 24 sides. Furthermore, the Swan drawing appeared to show exactly half of the theatre, and clearly had 12 bays. However, further analysis showed that, in fact, the Fortune could not have had corner bays, because the jetties of the structure could only have been accommodated by diagonal framing in the corners. Again, the excavation of the Globe site revealed the answer, 20 bays.
The question of the orientation of the theatre lead to an experiment all of its own. When Theo Crosby drew his original sketches of the new Globe, he set the stage to the South, in order to place the service entrance along Skin Market Place. However, Hollar clearly placed the stage roof Southwest at a 48-degree angle East of true North. In order to compare the two, Crosby set up a model with a heliodon, such that the theatre could be exposed to a representation of sunlight at various seasons, and at various orientations. At 48 degrees, Crosby found that the stage was always shaded from the sun. The effect was so perfect, Crosby made a decision to change his drawings, despite the fact that modern artists' impressions of the theatre had always shown the stage bathed in sunlight and the audience in shade
Hosley, Hodges, and Richard Southern all agreed that the heavens covered only part of the stage, and that it supported a "hut" which housed a descent machine. Yet there was no evidence of such a structure in either the Visscher drawing or the deWitt Swan drawing. John Orrell turned to another drawing, drawn in 1600 by surveyor John Norden (Figure 23). Norden's drawing clearly showed the structure. Hollar's depiction of the second Globe showed a similar design and, thus, the Norden Roof was created (Figure 24). The roof over the stage was created to be integral with the roof of the main frame, presenting a gable end towards the centre of the yard.
Figure 23: Norden's map, Civitas Londini, 1600 (Mulryne, 58)
Figure 24: The Norden Roof, 1996 (Julian Nieman)
The refined work of the interior of the theatre is the least documented part of the original Globe. There is no documentation of this work in the Fortune, and the deWitt drawing of the Swan theatre (Figure 7) is very plain. Another drawing of an unspecified theatre also exists, but shows nothing more than a few wall hangings. Yet the Inigo Jones designs of the time consist entirely of symmetries with urns, statues, and busts. It is known that there were carved satyrs at the Fortune, and turned columns at the Hope. In addition to the mention of the painted columns at the Swan, there is evidence of similar paintwork in many of the royal palaces of the time, as well as for the arches erected by the City of London for the return of James I. Finally, further evidence of the artwork of the time can be found in the style of the tombs created by contemporary sculptors. All of this was combined with various references from the texts to come up with the styling of the stage.
|
 |
|
| Lesson 5.2 |
|
Lesson 5.4 |