Category: Anna Brew

Edward Kynaston, or ‘the loveliest lady I ever saw in my life’[1] was born in 1640 to Thomas Kynaston and lived extravagantly for much of his childhood. His family were ‘well-descended’, living on an estate in Shropshire. Until the age of 14 Edward (known to his friends as Ned), lived there with his father, but in July 1654 he moved to London and began work as an apprentice for John Rhodes at the Company of Drapers. Although he trained with Rhodes for nine years, this move down to London introduced him to theatre and changed the course of his adult life forever.

In 1660, six years after Kynaston’s move, Charles II came to the throne and immediately reopened the theatres. Fresh-faced 20-year-old Kynaston was lucky enough to be introduced to Thomas Betterton (a hugely famous and successful actor of the time) by his employer John Rhodes. And thus began Ned’s love of theatre.

The 1660s and Charles II brought about a new era in theatre: women could perform on stage for the first time ever (previously young men and boys had been playing the role of damsel). This large and controversial change by King Charles II was originally frowned upon by many and the theatre was deemed scandalous and improper. This may have been because it was new or because women were often sexualised within the plays, but it left a substantial lack of females willing to act. And thus came Ned Kynaston’s time to shine.

Be it Aglaura[2], Ismena[3] or Arthiope[4], he clearly had a knack for playing women: he wasn’t afraid to and he did it well. So well in fact, that it was questioned whether any female actor could play women as well as he could. At the age of 20, Kynaston was, however, one of the last remaining male actors playing females. He was youthful, beautiful and fashionable; the only giveaway was his voice[6]. As they say, all good things must come to an end, and as time wore on, age began to take its toll, making it increasingly obvious that Kynaston was a man. This, combined with the increasingly popularity of actresses meant that Kynaston’s time as a woman was coming to an end. He began playing both male and female roles – sometimes within the same show, such as in Epicoene[7], where he played a boy in disguise as a woman. By 1661, with females beginning to claim their place on the boards, he knew it was time to move on. His last performance as a female came in 1661 as Evadne[5]. But this was by no means the end of his theatrical career. In fact, it was only just beginning.

Kynaston became an incredibly diverse male lead, playing varying roles including aristocrats (Guymor [8]) leaders (Mahomet Boabdelin [9] and The Black Prince [10]) and comic leads (Peregrine [11] and Valentine [12]). This diversity as an actor was uncommon, with many males sticking to and thriving in the same type of role throughout their lives – be it a fop or rover – leaving Kynaston incredibly well respected. So respected in fact, that by the late 1690s he was earning £3 a week, ten times more than a well-paid labourer at of this period.

His involvement in scathing, political comedies is where he found his forte, though they sometimes left him worse for wear.  The satirical comedy The Heiress was even cancelled because Kynaston was ‘beaten with sticks’ leaving him ‘mightily bruised and forced to keep his bed’ by people who didn’t agree with the work’s content. His role was a satirical interpretation of Sir Charles Sedley, a dramatist and politician at the time, and although Kynaston only wanted laughs, he got a lot more than he bargained for. Luckily, he recovered from his injuries and the play went ahead, much to the disappointment of the attackers. Kynaston’s reputation for daring plays which pushed the societal boundaries and love of controversy only made him more popular with English audiences.

In his older years, he began to settle down, becoming heavily involved in the more administrative side of the acting companies. He even announced his retirement in 1677, although he didn’t actually retire for another 22 years…

His role as the Earl of Warwick in Queen Catharine is one of his last known performances in 1698 at the age of 58. With age came smaller parts, with actors often becoming the father or uncle or King, and it was no different for Kynaston. Although listed as one of the lead males, the Earl of Warwick has under a page of lines within Queen Catharine, simply assisting Edward IV and giving his advice to the Duke of Clarence. He is often on stage, although he says very little, indicating by just his presence that the Earl of Warwick is a respected man, and one that the younger males enjoy having around. This could in turn mirror Kynaston’s own social standing, as a highly respected man within theatre and society in general. This play was originally performed by very influential actors including John Verbruggen and Elizabeth Barry. The presence of these big names alongside Edward’s will have drawn many people to the theatre to watch the relatively unknown playwright Mary Pix’s play.

In 1712, 14 years after his final performance, Edward Kynaston died at the age of 72.

Kynaston lived an exciting and unusual life to the full. Be it rumours of his love affair with the Duke of Buckingham or his stopping of a performance for Charles II because he was unshaven, there was always gossip surrounding Ned. For that reason, in 2004 the film Stage Beauty was released, basing itself around his life story. The film is set in 1660, when women weren’t allowed to perform on stage by law, leaving Kynaston (played by Billy Crudup) as the central protagonist at the height of his career as a male playing females. Crudup chooses to play upon the foppish stereotype that was given to these male actors, exploring his sexuality and fame and the way in which this affected Kynaston as an actor.

[1] Samuel Pepys,  Samuel Pepys Diary, ed. by Robert Latham and William Matthews (London: Element, 2010), Saturday August 18th, 1660.

[2] John Suckling, Aglaura, (London: John Haviland, 1638).

[3] Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, The Maid in the Mill, (London: First Beaumont and Fletcher Folio, 1647).

[4] William Davenant, The Unfortunate Lovers, (Lonodn: 1643).

[5] Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher,The Maids Tragedy, (London: Francis Constable, 1619).

[6] Samuel Pepys Diary, Saturday August 18th, 1660.

[7] Ben Jonson, Epicoene, (London: Folio, 1616).

[8]John Dryden, The Indian Emperor, (London: Henry Herrington, 1667).

[9] John Dryden, Conquest of Granada, (London: 1672).

[10] Roger Boyle, The Black Prince, (London: Henry Herringman, 1669).

[11] Ben Jonson, Volpone, (London: Thomas Thorpe, 1607).

[12] William Wycherley, Love in a Wood, (London: 1672).

Much of the world that George R. R Martin creates in Game of Thrones is based on real history, at least to some extent. Admittedly there were no fire breathing dragons or death-defying white walkers in the early modern period, but parallels can certainly be drawn between medieval England’s War of the Roses and Martin’s medieval yet fantastical Westeros.

Martin often chooses to base his characters upon real figures who lived and fought during the War of the Roses and it is also the time period in which Mary Pix’s Queen Catharine is set. Characters burst into life from the pages of history with Martin choosing their new paths.

The Lancasters are the Lannisters.
The Yorks are the Starks.

But it’s really not that clear cut. Sides were changing, allegiances were destroyed and lives were lost – all in a quest for power.

Leading figures from the Wars of the Roses appear in Queen Catharine. Versions of these figures also appear in Martin’s writing, where they go by the names of Robb Stark and Robert Baratheon; Tyrion Lannister; Sanza; Walder Frey; and, breifly, Cersei.

                              Game of Thrones                                                                War of the Roses

                Robert Baratheon/Robb Stark                                                         Edward IV

Robert Baratheon and Robb Stark display Edward IV in different stages of life and maturity (if Robert Baratheon could be called mature). Baratheon is often seen to be the character mostly directly inspired by history and with his *spoiler alert* early death in the series, Martin was able to play around with the character whilst still remaining true to history. In the words of Robert himself, he is happy to let others ‘run my kingdom while I eat, drink and whore my way to an early grave’[1], which is exactly what he did. So did Edward IV.

Although Baratheon poses more similarities to Edward IV in history, there are, in Queen Catharine, more comparisons to be drawn between the young Edward IV and Robb Stark. Edward’s opening speech presents him as a man of immense power, with friends who are ‘worthy’[2] of him, describing himself as having ‘the Force and Arm of Hercules’[3]. Although Rob is more subdued than Edward, he is brave and strong and wins every fight. These large egos are both entwined with bitterness, with Edward’s entire storyline resting upon his anger towards Queen Catharine for rejecting him. This anger comes hand in hand with shame and leads to him *spoiler alert* kill her lover Owen Tudor. This can also be seen in Robb Stark’s overarching storyline, although his reason for revenge is much more substantial: to avenge his father Eddard Stark who died at the hands of the Lannisters (or, perhaps, ‘Lancasters’). Pix depicts Edward IV as a petty man, unlike Martin, relying heavily upon other characters to do his dirty work, including the Duke of Gloucester and the Earl of Warwick. My comparison breaks down a little here as this is a contrast with Robb, who takes control and leads from the front. Yet both Robb and Edward were particularly successful in battle (much to the disappointment of their enemies), and although we don’t see Edward fighting in Queen Catharine, he is successful in his quest for revenge. Robb, on the other hand, is less successful, *spoiler alert* dying in his unfulfilled quest for revenge at the hands of Walder Frey (Earl of Warwick), who ironically is on the same side as Edward IV in Queen Catharine.

Tyrion Lannister                                                                       Richard III

Both Tyrion and the future Richard III (known as the Duke of Gloucester in Queen Catharine) are described as being ‘monstrously deformed’[4] and are easily cast as villains. Richard III was even written about by Shakespeare, where he is depicted as being one of the foulest villains in English history. They are both figures whose real lives are unclear due to the lies and rumours that were spread about them. They were despised by their respective countries and unloved by their families, with Richard having two large uprisings against him during his reign and Tyrion switching allegiances, they led difficult lives. Richard may have been more fitted to the stereotype of a power-hungry, scheming man than Tyrion, as displayed in Queen Catharine when he calls Edward ‘Godlike’[5] and offers to dispose of Owen Tudor, simply to gain the approval of Edward and be seen as his ‘faithful Brother’[6]. Richard was clearly hated, as he was buried in an unmarked area in Leicester after his death in battle and although Tyrion is still alive and many viewers’ favourite character, his rebellion against his own family may gain him the same respect as Richard in death: none.

Perhaps the similarities between Tyrion and Richard lie only in their described appearances, as although both are seeking power, Richards self-centred scheming way of doing so contrasts Tyrions morally correct ‘for-the-people’ attitude.

Walder Frey                                                                                Earl of Warwick

Although fans have made comparisons between Walder Frey and the Earl of Warwick, the similarities are few and far between when it comes to the depiction of Warwick in Queen Catharine. In real life, both were only out to gain power (an overarching theme in both Game of Thrones and Queen Catharine it seems), but this isn’t the Earl of Warwick intention within the play, arguably because he has reached old age (hence Edward Kynaston playing him).  Both the Earl and Walder Frey are small parts but where they do get involved damage and loss seems to follow.  Walder Frey is a power hungry character shown particularly in his lead in arguably the most shocking Game of Thrones episode – the Red Wedding. Walder Frey commits the ultimate betrayal switching from Stark to Lannister and in doing so *spoiler alert* kills multiple members of the Stark family. The Earl commits the same betrayal during the War of the Roses. During Queen Catharine the Earl is still in allegiance with the Yorks, indicating that the play is set before his betrayal (but Queen Catharine is arguably not historically correct). He is present for much of the action and involved in the central focus of the plot unlike Walder Frey who is often sidelined and features rarely. Both the Earl and Walder Frey are ignored many times as they give unwanted advice, with Warwick saying ‘you were offered… aid, which you despised’[7] and Walder Frey stating ‘they’re laughing at us!… right down to King’s Landing, they’re laughing’[8]. Walder Frey is more bitter than the Earl of Warwick, but their shared need to be on the winning side shows how petty and similar these characters really are.

   Sanza                                                                               Isabella

Both of these passive females are traded around for political gain.  Isabella is an altogether weaker character than Sanza, however, as she is reliant on people who have more power than her: Queen Catharine and the Duke of Clarence. This weakness is epitomised in her forced marriage to Sir James Thyrolld, where it would ‘never have come to this’ if her ‘Beauty was no greater than [her] politicks’[9].  Sanza, in much the same manner is forced to marry Joffrey and Ramsey Bolton, who are arguably the two most evil characters in Game of Thrones. Each time, though, Sanza *spoiler alert* overpowers them, whether purposefully or not; Isabella, on the other hand, dies a lost cause.

               Cersei Lannister                                                                      Margaret of Anjou

Although she doesn’t make an appearance in the play itself, Margaret is mentioned several times in reference to her power and authority, in much the same way as Cersei. Both of these strong female figures use their weaker-willed royal husbands (Robert Baratheon and Henry VI) to gain more power than they are entitled to as women.  It is seemingly unclear as to who is in charge, with Owen Tudor stating ‘lead your forces to the Camp of Henry or Margaret, I know not what to call it’[10] and Cersei stating herself ‘I should wear the armour and you the gown’[11]. These two ruthless females’ only redeeming quality lies in their motherly nature, with their immense love for their children being their only sign of humanity.  Both of these women defy the passive female stereotype which is employed throughout their respective periods of history, taking their fates into their own hands, and often being more successful than the men.

The Wars of the Roses were an unpredictable time of betrayal, love and war, and now many see in it a way to determine the future of Game of Thrones. George R. R Martin on the other hand, says:

It’s exciting because I can change history, I can decide who’s going to win and who’s going to die.

[1] Game of Thrones, dir. by Tim Van Patten (HBO, 2011). Season 1, Episode 1.
[2] Mary Pix, Queen Catharine: or, The Ruins of Love, a Tragedy’ (London, 1698), p. 1.
[3] Pix, ibid.
[4]Jeffrey R. Wilson, ‘Richard III’s Deformities’ in Harvard University Online (The President and Fellows of Harvard College, Harvard Univeristy, 2018).
[5] Pix, p. 5.
[6] Pix, ibid.
[7] Pix, p. 25.
[8] Game of Thrones, dir. by Jack Bender (HBO, 2016). Season 6, Episode 6.
[9] Pix, p. 42.
[10] Pix, p. 19.
[11] Game of Thrones, dir. by Daniel Minahan (HBO, 2011). Season 1, Episode 6.