When reading Open City: London 1500-1700, listening to Kathleen Lynch’s podcast, and reviewing the interactive London map myself, it is not surprising that the years between 1500 and 1700 brought changes to the city of London. However, what is interesting is that the changes that occurred within the religious, trade, and theatre realms are all interconnected. For example, the author notes that the Dutch and the English were partners in trade and religion. Similarly, Henry VIII shut down monasteries using a religious order in quite the same way as theatres were shut down. Religion played a huge role in theatre and trade as well as in the changing of different religions.
Looking at the interactive map, the majority of buildings were used for entertainment, religion, or trading purposes. Often times, the three were intermingled. For example, the map shows that plays were done at the palace, that trade happened at cathedrals, and that the proximity between many of the popular churches and trading centers were very close together. London is still a bustling city, full of theatre and trade, but it is clear that the centuries between 1500 and 1700 marked turning points for religion, trade, and theatre.
As one might assume, Henry VIII played a massive role in transforming London’s churches between 1500 and 1700. According to Open City: London, religious institutions were prevalent in London’s early history; however, this all changed with Henry VIII’s 1533 Act of Supremacy, which named the king as the Supreme Head of the English Church. Following this act came the First Act of Suppression in 1536, which closed the smaller monasteries, and then came the Second Act of Suppression, in which the king explained that the monasteries had been surrendered voluntarily. Interestingly enough, Open City describes “detractors” of these early religious institutions as “centers of greed and hypocrisy,” which seems to reflect Henry VIII’s reasoning behind passing these acts and gaining control of England’s religion. The Acts that Henry passed were repealed by future monarchs, thus allowing Henry VIII to continue to affect history, as explained by Encyclopedia Britannica and Luminarium: Anthology of English Literature.
St Paul’s Cathedral was considered the “symbolic heart of London,” according to Open City: London; the author also states that London, during this time period, could be distinguished as either pre- or post-1561 according to the spire of St. Paul’s, as it was struck by lightning in 1561 and not repaired until after 1666.Londoners felt that the cathedral had to be repaired as it symbolized so much of their city. After raising over 100,000 pounds in contributions for the repair, and after a civil war broke out, finally the cathedral was completed in 1710. Henry VIII shook up the country with his new religion, imposing divine right on his subjects, which set the path for future monarchs to rule with religion. This therefore connects Henry VIII’s impact on London’s religion and the restoration of an important part of London’s culture. While religion has always seemed to play a role in England’s culture, especially between 1500 and 1700, these two specific instances mark extraordinary changes in the culture surrounding religion in London during these two centuries.
The author of Open City: London notes that in 1569, in an attempt to become a player in international trade, London created the Royal Exchange. This exchange was commissioned by Sir Thomas Gresham, a member of the Mercers’ guild. The author decides to note here that “the Dutch and the English were partners in both trade and religion,“ which is interesting as these are two important aspects of London’s culture that changed and evolved between 1500 and 1700. In addition, the thought of religion playing such a role in politics is hard to fathom today, which is why it is interesting to note that, in Open City: London, the author notes that Londoners viewed St. Paul’s as the heart of the city; however, a German merchant, when traveling through Europe, noted that he viewed “the Royal Exchange as ‘the ornament of the city,’“ which offers us the contradiction between how natives view their city as compared to visitors. It seems that, because monarchs placed such a large emphasis on divine right and the importance of religion, that Londoners might think that it is the most important part of their culture, something to preserve and cherish even as time moves forward. On the contrary for other countries, however, as shown by this German visitor’s thoughts on the Royal Exchange, other countries seem to view trade as a more important aspect of London. Kathleen Lynch explains that the Royal Exchange was the first building of its kind found in London. Before it was built, all trading was done in the streets, on Paul’s Walk, on loading docks, and similar locations. This new Exchange became the first place for trade in London, and it demonstrated London’s ability to compete internationally. This is why it was located so centrally; it was meant to replace these trades that would happen in the streets. The biggest change that occurred during 1500 and 1700 for trade was the creation of the Exchange. It not only shifted trade from streets and alleys to one central location, but it created a name for London internationally.
Theatre was used to protest political, and therefore religious, aspects of life. According to Open City, people would dress up as religious leaders in the streets of London in order to mock the pope. However, it was also used as it is today, for entertainment. Open City: London explains that “people from all walks of life” enjoyed the theatre, as tickets were often cheap enough for everyone to afford. Unfortunately, those who were strict Protestants or Puritans felt that theatre was immoral. They not only complained about acting itself, which Open City explains that “the pretense of being someone else” was immoral, but also about the type of people that the theatre attracted, who enjoyed fighting and drinking, according to Elizabethan-Era’s History of the Globe. This website explains that these religious people complained to the church, which went to the government. Finally, in 1596, the government of London began to close down these theatres. This is why, according to Kathleen Lynch, the Rose Theatre, opened in 1587, was just outside of London’s jurisdiction. Actors had previously been criminalized as vagrants and were subject to arrest if found acting. Were it not for religion, it stands to reason, theatre might not have been criminalized during this time period.
It is very interesting to learn that these three aspects so central to London’s history, religion, trade, and theatre, were all interconnected during these important two centuries.
