The restructuring of the court bureaucracy saw the duties of the Revels office reduced dramatically. The Office of the Works was given most of the Revel's previous roles with the exception of lighting. The responsibility of the Revels for supplying the players with clothing and props had lessened with the opening of the public play houses. The majority of the clothing was kept for when the nobility and guests needed them for masques, though the Royal Wardrobe took care of the monarch (Astington 12). Yet while the duties of the office were reduced, those of the Master rose.
The control of the players, the playing companies, and the plays themselves had become a chief cause of concern for officials, especially the city council. With no standing police force the city maintained a tenuous peace and any mass gathering of people was problematic at best. In fact, the oft quoted passage concerning the playhouses--
we verely think [stage plays] to be the cheef cause, aswell of many other disorders & lewd demeanors which appeer of late in young people of all degrees, as of the late stirr & mutinous attempt of those fiew apprentices and other servauntes, who wee doubt not driew their infection from these & like places. (Chambers Elizabethan Stage, IV 317, 318)--were in response not so much to the playhouses in general but the riots of 1592 , the feltmakers' apprentices; 1593, the anti-alien; and 1595 (Dutton 83-84). The playhouses were also of great concern whenever the plague infested London. Any gathering of people seemed to expand the deadly grip of plague on the populace. The plays themselves were considered scandalous by the Puritan leaders of the day, many of whom were on the city council. Then there was the question of censorship: how far was too far? On the other side of this controversy was the court. All of the major playing companies were de facto if not de jure livered servants of members of the Privy Council and any affront to the players was an affront to their patrons. In fact, plays often became an extension of the debates occurring in the council (see Dutton chapters 2-4).
This was the situation when Tilney became Master in 1579. For the first two years Tilney reorganized the office according to its lesser mandate at court. He convinced Thomas Benger to stay as clerk, reduced the inventory, and tried to get out of as many debts as possible (see Chambers Notes, 62-8). It is after this initial restructuring that Tilney received his real power and the solution to the problems of the day. The first of two major changes occurred on 24 December 1581 when Tilney was given authority:
to warne commaunde and appointe in all places within this our Realme of England, aswell within francheses and liberties as without, all and every plaier or plaiers with their playmakers, either belonging to any noble man or otherwise, bearinge the name or names of usinge the facultie of playmakers or plairs of Comedies, Tragedies, Enterludes or whatever other showes soever, from tyme to tyme and at all tymes to appeare before him with all such plaies, Tragedies, Comedies or showes as they shall in readiness or meane to sett forth, and them recite before our said Servante or his sufficient deputie, with whom we ordeyne appointe and aucthorise by these presentes of all suche showes, plaies, plaiers and playmakers, together with their playing places, to order and reform, auctorise and put downe, as shalbe though meete or unmeete unto himself or his said deputie in that behalf. (Chambers ES IV 285-88)The second occurred in two years later in 1583 when he was ordered to create the equivalent of an all-star team of performers to be called the Queen's Men (Astington 22-3). The latter seems to have occurred to eliminate the problems of having to choose performances based on patron rather than play quality. They did not, however, have a monopoly over court performances as will be seen.
The first change was an attempt to ensure that it was the crown and not the city that controlled the players. Creating an actual position in the court bureaucracy gave the appearance that the court controlled the players. In theory, Tilney could censor the plays as much as he felt necessary. The players had to come to St. John's of Jerusalem, where the Revels was located, and perform the play before him. He would then approve or disprove of the play as a whole, or select certain parts to be removed or changed. In addition, he acted much like Shakespeare's Philostrate from A Midsummer Night's Dream (5.1.32-84). While viewing the plays for content he would also select a number of plays. He would then present them to the Queen who would chose which she wished to view for the evening's entertainment. Yet despite these powers, Tilney never seems to have gone out of his way of censor the plays. (For a detailed examination of Tilney's role as censor, or lack thereof, see Dutton chapters 2-4.)
The relationship between Tilney and the playing companies was based on reciprocity. Tilney's authority relieved the players of the major hassles presented by the city. If their plays were good enough to be performed before the Queen, the city could hardly object to the content. They were also helped by the fact that they could then be seen as the Queen's servants, obviating general objections about playing. After all, they had to practice. Since Tilney chose who performed at the major festivals, primarily the twelve days of Christmas, the companies made sure to stay on his good side and to pay any fees necessary. Tilney, on the other hand, needed them for money. Since his post remitted him only £10 per annum, this new power also became the chief source of his income. Henslowe's diary indicates that he would pay Tilney 7s. to have a play "allowed" and, though not necessarily in his jurisdiction to do so, from 40 to 60 s. license the theatres themselves (Chambers, Notes 79). The price had to be low enough to let the companies bring as many plays as they wanted to perform yet high enough to support Tilney and the office. Too high a price would have made the companies more selective in what they decided to attempt to have allowed. The players also had as good court connections as Tilney did. The Lord Admiral, patron of the Admiral's men, was also the head of the Howard family, making him patron to both Tilney and the players. Since Tilney's position was based on patronage he had to be careful not to seriously offend anyone important.
The Revels Office stayed at St. John's of Jerusalem throughout Elizabeth's reign. Its situation changed in 1608 when James gave St. John's to his cousin Esmé Stuart for a London residence. Tilney was 71 years old at this time and, though still active in the allowing of plays, was having a harder time with the more physical duties of the office. Sir George Buc held the reversion to the post and, though he had no duties until after Tilney's death, took it upon himself to find new quarters for the office. The major assumption is that he did it for a long-term investment rather then philanthropic reasons. They moved into a temporary location at the Whitefriar's district until 1612 at which point Buc gained access to a house on St. Peter's Hill owned by Sir Michael Hicks, a colleague of Buc from the 1597 parliament (Dutton 151). This position was the best location for the office. It was very close to the players, especially the King's Men who were only a few blocks away at the Blackfriars. It was also just south of St. Paul's Cathedral where the book trade was flourishing and in which Buc became involved.
-- Michael Davis, 2000