This chapter provides a thorough revision of the status of boys and youths in the early modern period, attending to the neglected question of physical skill and training. It argues that attending to historically situated forms of physical expectation can shed light on how particular bodily skills are culturally cultivated, placing a more active emphasis on boys' bodies than scholars of early modern culture have typically tended to. The chapter draws on religious writings, conduct books, memoirs, apprenticeship manuals, and educational tracts in order to provide a wide-ranging picture of how boys' physical capacities were understood, improved, and manipulated in this period. Examining the ways in which boys and their bodies are situated in these works – often with an emphasis on physical labour and potential for activity – the chapter argues for a shared culture of expectation around the bodies of early modern boys in which physical movement and productivity is at the forefront. This culture, it moves to suggest, is everywhere discernible in contemporary attitudes to the early modern theatre, which articulated a pervasive fascination with the moving, working bodies of boy performers.

This chapter considers how the moving, working bodies of boy actors were depicted on stage throughout the early modern period, drawing together a number of metatheatrical instances which explicitly stage the acquisition and performance of theatrical skill. Focusing particularly on moments in plays by Ben Jonson, John Marston, and William Shakespeare, it argues for a theatre directly influenced by and representative of early modern culture's fascination with boys' physical capacities. Having established the early modern stage as a site of heightened physical display, the chapter moves to consider what bearing this culture of physical training and skill demonstration had on the careers and reputations of individual boy actors. It traces the careers of leading boy actors Nathan Field and Richard Robinson, attending to the highly physical nature of the roles these boys played, as well as how playwrights and audiences celebrated and commemorated the corporeal nature of their performances. Boy actors' physical performances, it ultimately argues, had a demonstrable impact on individual careers and reputations as well as company repertories.

The Introduction takes as its starting point the desire expressed in James Wright's Historia Histrionica (1699) to 'guess at the action' of early modern players, arguing that the 'action' of boy performers is partially recoverable from the texts that have come down to us provided that we are willing to read with physical skill in mind. It surveys the past century's critical fascination with boy actors, suggesting that a great deal of pre-existing work has neglected the embodied stagecraft required of these young performers. It additionally makes a case for the value of practice-based research in the study of early modern drama's corporeal dynamics, and maps out the book's integration of this method into its analysis of a wide range of plays from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Introduction ends with an outline of the book's structure, which explains how the chapters cumulatively build a more physically and theatrically sensitive picture of the work of boy actors in this period.

The book's Conclusion turns to a context which is seemingly unrelated to early modern drama: twenty-first-century professional football. It suggests that present-day culture's pervasive fascination with the skilled, youthful bodies of professional football players finds a corollary in early modern playwrights' and spectators' demonstrable interest in the physical skills of the boy actors who have been the subject of this book. The Conclusion recapitulates the book's central argument for the valuable physical skills boy actors developed and showcased, suggesting that an enhanced appreciation of those skills will allow us more readily to imagine their important contribution to early modern theatrical culture.

This chapter discusses how the overlapping practices of sport and theatre contributed to early modern boy actors' performances, arguing that sport and exercise formed a crucial part of boy actors' training for the professional stage. The first half of the chapter takes as its focus the educational writings and theatrical activity of the educational theorist and practitioner Richard Mulcaster, tracing the influence of his physically minded pedagogical ideals on the robustly physical Elizabethan and Jacobean boy company repertories. The second half of the chapter provides an in-depth discussion of the staging of sport in John Marston's What You Will and John Day's The Isle of Gulls, drawing on practical experiments with staging these scenes in the present-day Sam Wanamaker Playhouse to consider the processes by which a boy actor may have come to perform precise and physically challenging aspects of dramaturgy. It demonstrates that a practical approach to critically neglected plays offers new perspectives on the dramatic possibilities afforded to the first and youngest interpreters of early modern drama which keep the skilled performing body as the rightful centre of attention.

Theatrically, there is nothing amateurish about Arden of Faversham, and recognition of Shakespeare’s authorship of the middle scenes of Arden is likely to impact classroom curriculums and theatrical repertoires. Drawing on the author’s experience directing the play, this essay challenges the claim by Martin Wiggins that Arden was written by an anonymous amateur who did not understand costume requirements or the limitations of boy actors playing female roles. It shows that Arden was carefully designed to give the actor playing Alice a long rest in mid-play, and that the role was well within the range of boy actors in the late 1590s and early seventeenth century. We know less about the outstanding female impersonators of the 1580s, but Richard Burbage began his long career as a boy, and as an adolescent could have played a demanding role like Alice.