a mistake, therefore, to suppose that fifteenth-century acting was an
unstudied art. Similarly, caution must be used in ridiculing the
stage-properties of that day. One has only to peruse intelligently one
of the bald lists of items of expenditure to discover that a placard
bearing such an inscription as 'The Ark' or 'Hell' was not the accepted
means of giving reality to a scene. The Ark was an elaborate structure
demanding a team of horses for its entrance and exit; while Hell-mouth,
copying the traditional representations in mediaeval sculpture, was a
most ingenious contrivance, designed in the likeness of gaping jaws
which opened and shut in fearful style, emitting volumes of sulphurous
smoke, not to mention awesome noises. The 'make-ups' too were far from
being the arbitrary fancies of the wearers. True, they possibly bore no
great resemblance to the originals. But that was due to an ignorance of
history rather than to carelessness about truth. The probability is that
in many cases the images and paintings in the churches were imitated, as
being faithful likenesses. One has merely to call to mind certain
stained-glass windows to guess what sort of realism was reached and to
understand how it came about that Herod appeared in blue satin, Pilate
and Judas respectively in green and yellow, Peter in a wig of solid gilt
(with beard to match), and Angels in white surplices.

For the stage a high platform was used, beneath which, curtained off
from sight, the actors could dress or await their cues. Above the stage
(open on all four sides) was a roof, on which presumably an 'angel'
might lie concealed until the moment arrived for him to descend, when a
convenient rope lent aid to too flimsy wings. Contrariwise, the devil
would lurk in the dressing-room, if Hell-mouth were out of repair, until
the word came for him to thrust the curtains aside, dart out, pull his
victim off the stage and bear him away to torment. The street itself was
quite freely used whenever conditions seemed to require it: messengers,