The Case(s) of Thomasine Ostler: Gender, Fiction, and Theatre History in Common Law Court Records

Abstract This article asks what theatre historians can (and can’t) learn from the records of Thomasine Ostler in the court of King’s Bench between 1615 and 1619, during which period Ostler filed suit not only against her father, the actor John Heminges, but also the son of Walter Raleigh. Ostler’s name is not unfamiliar to scholars, but neither she nor the enrolments of her suits have been examined in detail, and both have been misunderstood or simply overlooked. The article hinges on a new way of working with the plea rolls of England’s common law courts, whose Latin entries have long been seen as limited repositories of ‘essential facts’ to be extracted from ‘smokescreens of formalism and legal fiction’. This article argues instead that plea rolls should be understood as sites of fiction-making, and uses Ostler’s suits to show why their constitution of character and plot should matter to theatre historians. The article thereby casts light on not just the ownership of playhouse shares contested by Ostler and Heminges, but the actions, motivations, and interpersonal relationships of all three parties in Ostler’s suits. It also challenges scholars to re-think the value of plea rolls as sources for women’s lives and stories.