Michael+Mohun+-+Edward+France

Major M. Mohun

Personal Life

Michael Mohun (sometimes Moone, due to spelling inconsistency in the period) was born in 1616. Not much is known about his family history and background, indeed there is little information or evidence about his life prior to his joining the acting profession in 1634, achieving prominence as an actor on the London stage by 1637. (Astington) What we do know of Mohun is mostly limited to theatrical accounts and responses to the Theatre of the time, however due to Mohun’s service in the military, we can glimpse a portion of his life outside of the theatrical world. According to Historia Histrionica Mohun was one of the “Good men and true [that] serv’d their Old Master” (Wright 7) displaying that Mohun fought on the side of King Charles I in the English Civil War. Mohun achieved the rank of Captain while serving the royalist cause and subsequently went on to achieve the rank of Major, while serving in Flanders after the wars ended in England. (Wright 8) It was in his period of exile abroad, after his release from capture in 1650, that Mohun returned to the theatrical profession. He is reported to have performed in Antwerp before the future King Charles II in 1658, and then returned to England in 1660. (Astington) Mohun’s loyalty to the crown is, by this account of his service to the royal army and his personal connection with Charles II, undoubted. However, Mohun’s loyalty to the King seems not to have served him well financially, as in the later part of Mohun’s career he appears to have been in complete financial ruin along with the rest of his theatre company. Reports document Mohun “secretly pawning and selling costumes and properties belonging to the theatre.” (Miyoshi) This shows us that despite Mohun’s apparent loyalty to the crown he was offered no respite from the debt. The trouble of Mohun’s debt and the debt of the theatre he worked with reveals that the situation for theatre in the late 17th century had become more difficult, perhaps as a reflection of the changing state of values and morals of the period, that came to a head in the ‘glorious’ revolution of 1688.

Although the date of his death is unknown, Mohun was buried on the 11th of October 1684, in St Giles-In-The-Fields, the parish in which 4 of his children were already buried. (Astington) Mohun was presumably buried with the rites and rituals of the Church of England, a protestant church, but the man himself was a catholic. A letter he sent in 1678 asking to be exempt from the from an order to “banish all popish recusants 10 miles from ye Cyty [city]” (Miyoshi) Mohun suggested, in the letter, that if he left the city the playhouse would “of necessity lie still.” (Astington) Parts Performed and Performance Style

Upon returning to London in 1660, Mohun was part of a company that operated out of Drury Lane, North of the Thames and just outside the City of London in a theatre called the Theatre Royal, which opened on May 7, 1663. (Nungezer 252) The company was called “His Majesty’s Company of Comedians in Drury Lane” (Downes 2) or “The King’s Company” (Hotson) and they performed plays from before the interregnum and plays that were being written during the Restoration period. The roles from pre-civil war plays that Mohun performed were: Leonitus in The Humourous Lieutenant, Don Leon in Rule a Wife, and Have a Wife, Volpone in The Fox, True-Wit in The Silent Woman, Face in The Alchemist, Melantius in The Maid’s Tragedy, Mardonius in King and No King, Aubrey in Rollo, Duke of Normandy, Iago in The Moor of Venice, Philocles in The Maiden Queen, Belamy in Mock Astrologer and Cassius in Julius Caesar. (Downes 2-8) The roles that he performed in plays that were written during the Restoration period, while the Theatre Royal was operational, were: Emperour in The Indian Emperour, Maximin in Tyrannick Love, Old Emperour in Aureng Zeb, Clytus in Alexander the Great, Ventidius in All for Love, or the World Well Lost, the Duke of Mantua in The Assignation, or Love in a Nunnery, Mythridates in Mythridates King of Pontus, Matthias, High Priest in The Destruction of Jerusalem, Rhodophil in Marriage Alamode, Lord Burleigh in The Unhappy Favourite, or the Earl of Essex, King Edward III in The Black Prince, Abdemelech in The Conquest of Granada, Hannibal in Sophonisba, or Hannibal’s Overthrow and Pinchwife in The Country Wife. (Downes 8-15) (Astington)

Notably, it would appear that Mohun performed in the majority of the plays performed in the Theatre Royal. Of the 29 plays of The King’s Company that are given full cast lists in the Rosicus Anglicanus, Mohun appeared in 25. This figure does not include plays such as The Country Wife, which Mohun appeared in, but are not given full cast lists in the Rosicus Anglicanus. While it would not have been unusual for members of theatre companies to perform in many of the plays that were presented by the company, Mohun’s frequency in appearance, particularly in major roles and eponymous roles, does give an indication as to his popularity on the London stage. Mohun appears to have been particularly apt at playing the role of the con-artist or Machiavellian character. His performances of several of these kinds of character were well received by Downes, who describes Mohun as being “eminent for Volpone [and] Face in the Alchymist ” (Downes 17) This suggests that Mohun was renowned for his ability in the role of the con-man, or the manipulator. Downes’ report of the excellency with which Mohun played these characters go some way to tell us about the presentation of other characters that share these traits. Mohun’s success as Volpone and Face, characters devised before Mohun started performing, tells us something about a character that was penned while Mohun was performing, Pinchwife. Pinchwife is an antagonist in Wycherley’s The Country Wife (Wycherley) who exhibits similar tendencies to Face and Volpone. All three characters use manipulation to achieve arguably nefarious goals and have similarities in their disregard for other people. The three characters are also all greedy and use their manipulation to fufill their greedy villainy in the plays. Considering the renown that Mohun appears to have gained through his portrayal of Volpone and Face in Jonson’s plays, it is conceivable that Wycherley had Mohun, or at least a style of acting and character that Mohun portrayed, in mind when he penned Pinchwife’s character for The Country Wife. This provides an insight into the style of character that Pinchwife reflects, and the antagonistic nature of his character in the play. This in itself aides a potential moral argument of the play, that Pinchwife’s scheme to keep his wife locked up is cruel, manipulative and greedy.

Appearance From Figure 1 (on page 1) and Figure 2 (Right) we can see that Mohun was not an unattractive man, at least at the time of sitting. He appears to be well featured, with a fair face and a healthy head of hair. It is plausible that the painter has been generous in painting Mohun as young as he looks in Figure 1, or perhaps that the portrait was painted earlier than the sitting date suggests due to the apparent youth of Mohun in his portrait, despite the sitting date placing him at the age of 44. (Danby) Nonetheless, Mohun’s attractive figure reveals to us part of the nature of the characters he performed. While Face, Volpone and Pinchwife may all have been villains, an element of charisma is required for them to be convincing manipulators in the slightest. The characters that Mohun portrayed would have shared his attractiveness contributing to their character’s deceptive manipulation.

Mohun was also, it would seem, not a tall man. Downes describes him as “little man of mettle.” (Downes 17) This would have probably added elements of comedy to his portrayal of characters such as Pinchwife, as the visual comedy of the proud Pinchwife being shorter than his contemporary and rival Horner, who is supposedly impotent. The juxtapose between the short, but supposedly powerful, Pinchwife and the tall but impotent Horner would have been telling about the true nature of Pinchwife in the play and helped aide the potential moral story of the play.

Reception Generally speaking, Mohun seems to have enjoyed a strong critical and public reception during his time with The King’s Company. As mentioned before, Mohun had repeated major roles in the plays that the company produced and his portrayal of some of these roles was described as “eminent.” (Downes 17) It would seem Mohun’s renown was not constrained to the public and critical eye either. A prominent writer at the time, whose name is now lost, claimed that “if I should write a 100 plays, I’d write a part for thy mouth” as Downes recalls. (Downes 17) Mohun’s popularty with playwrights was no doubt due to his ability to play many roles very well and, as Downes describes it, the fact that “in all his parts, he was most accurate and correct.” (Downes 17) from Downes report we can see why the “eminent poet” (Downes 17) was so ecstatic about the idea of writing for an actor as talented as Mohun, who was sure to be true to the writers intent in his performance. From this knowledge, we can also extrapolate information about the nature of Pinchwife and his attractiveness. Pinchwife’s attractiveness, as mentioned earlier, must have been an element of the character of Pinchwife, that he must have been charismatic to some respect in the play, as Mohun is renowned for his accuracy in his parts.

Samuel Pepys, one of the most notable figures in the theatrical world at the time, also speaks of the general renown and good reception of Mohun. Pepys writes, in his famed diary, that Mohun “is said to be the best actor in the world” (Pepys 109) though Pepyrs neglects to share if this is his opinion too. Pepy’s inclusion of this, however points to the huge significance of Mohun as an actor. Conclusion As we can see, Mohun’s renown and significance as an actor in the period cannot be understated, and potentially shaped the writing of some characters, as the utterance of the “eminent poet” (Downes 17) in the Rosicus Anglicanus might go to suggest. It is a strange indicator of the changing state of theatre and regard for performance at the time that Mohun died so terribly indebted, and so few documents that regard “the best actor in the world” (Pepys 109) remain today. As the nature of theatre changed in the period, perhaps the regard for Mohun’s style and plays that complimented his style and he fell out of regard. (Gaunt) Bibliography

Astington, John. “Mohun [Moone], Michael (c. 1616–1684), actor and army officer.” 23 September 2004. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 8 April 2018.

Danby, Jennifer Renee. “Portraits of Restoration Actors Michael Mohun and Edward Kynaston: New Evidence.” Theatre Notebook (2005): 2-18.

Downes, J. Rosicus Anglicanus, or, An historical review of the stage from 1660 to 1706. London: J.W Jarvis & Son, 1886.

Gaunt, Peter. The English Civil War. London: I.B Tauris, 2014.

Harding, Edward. Michael Mohun. National Portrait Gallery, London.

Hotson, Leslie. The Commonwealth and Restoration Stage. New York: Russell & Russell, 1962.

Jenstad, Janelle. The Agas Map. 1 March 2018. April 2018.

Jonson, Ben. The Alchemist. Ed. S. Musgrove. Berkeley: Univeristy of California Press, 1968.

—. Volpone, or The Fox. Ed. R.B Parker. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999.

Miyoshi, Riki. “An Unpublished Document Relating to the Restoration Actor Michael Mohun.” Notes and Queries 1 June 2015: 265-266.

Nungezer, Edwin. A Dictionary of Actors and of Other Persons associated with the public representation of plays in England before 1642. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929.

Pepys, Samuel. The Diary of Samuel Pepys. Ed. Henry B. Wheatley. New York: Random House, 1946.

Unknown. “Mohun, Michael (c.1616-1684).” 23 September 2004. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 11 April 2018.

Wright, James. “Historia Histronica.” Wright, James and Downes John. The English Stage: Attack and Defense 1577-1730. Vol. 38. New York: Garland Publishing, inc., 1974.

Wycherley, William. The Country Wife. Ed. Thomas Fujimura. Lincoln: Univeristy of Nebraska Press, 1965.