What was shakespeares acting company like?

Answer 1

We don't know the exact details, because we do not have account books for the Burbages in the way that we do for Philip Henslowe. But the financial situation of theatrical companies then was basically the same as it is now: out of the take at the box office you pay for the script, and the venue, and the props, and the costumes, and paying off any hired people, then you divide the rest among the partners. In the case of Shakespeare's company, it was a fixed deal that the company would buy Shakespeare's scripts (as well as those of Middleton and other authors), and presumably he got paid off the top for that. The payment for the venue also went to members of the company: the Burbages up to 1599 and later to the Burbages and other shareholders in the Globe and Blackfriars. If their arrangement was the same as Henslowe's, it would appear that the theatre-owner took a share: Henslowe kept close watch on the proceeds of the companies using his Rose Theatre and recorded a fluctuating share, depending on the house.

Props and costumes would have to be paid up front by the company, as would wages for hired actors, the living costs of the apprentices, and any expenses to clean and repair the costumes. It is not clear what part of the budget was paid to advertising, if any. Advertising, and the running of the box office and management of the theatre company generally, seems to have been the job of Richard Burbage's brother Cuthbert.

As for rehearsals and direction, we have insufficient information. We know that performances in the outdoor theatres were in the early afternoon. There were also performances at night in indoor theatres and private venues like country houses. That suggests that rehearsals were held in the mornings. Henslowe's diary suggests that performances took place six days a week, with a different play every day. A new play was introduced every two weeks or so. The actors had to spend some time in getting the new play rehearsed and it would seem that they did that in the mornings.

There is small indication that they had directors in the way we have now, or stage managers. However, the amateur actors in A Midsummer Night's Dream do clearly have a director (in the person of Peter Quince) who was also the author of the play. Is this a reliable model of the way acting companies operated? The playing company in Hamlet seems to be run by the principal actor (Richard Burbage in Shakespeare's company) whereas the one in Dream is not.

Answer 2

In 1594, Shakespeare became a partner in the acting company The Lord Chamberlain's Men. When you are a partner, you are no longer an employee; you are working for yourself and your other partners.

But before 1594, Shakespeare did work for acting companies and he was an employee. Actors who were unable to afford a partnership were hired men, wage-earning actors. Shakespeare may have been a hired man with Lord Strange's Men, The Earl of Pembroke's Men or The Earl of Derby's Men. We have no records and so cannot say for sure. He might have been hired by the Lord Admiral's Men even.
We don't know. We know that Shakespeare belonged to the company called the Lord Chamberlain's Men, but he was a partner. He did not work for the company as the hired actors did.

However, Shakespeare was a hired actor before he was able to buy a partnership in the Lord Chamberlain's Men. The problem is that we don't know who hired him: it could have been Pembroke's Men, or Derby's Men or Strange's Men.

Answer 3

Very good; they were one of the three top acting companies in England at the time, the other two being the Lord Admiral's Men and Lord Worcester's Men.

Answer 4

They employed actors, over and above the actors who were partners in the company. There are a lot of other things which are also true, but they would comprise several books.