Event Comment: Mr Berry dy'd (Cross). Receipts: #170 (Cross). British Chronicle; 8 Jan. 1760. (Winston MS 8): Died Mr Edward Berry in Russel St., Covent Garden, 53 years one of the comedians of tr dl. On this Sunday the body was interr'd in the Cemetery of St Martin's Church. The loss of so worthy a man was expressed by those present. His only daugher is to [....] with the following inscription to his memory, to whom he has left his fortune worth about #1000: @Epitaph@Here lies the remains of@Edward Berry@Who lived@With public applause and private esteem@The former he acquired as@An Excellent Comedian, the latter as an@Honest Man. 8 Jan 1760 Aet 5s.@Light lie the turf, what tho' no breathing Bust@Of mimic Marble dignifie thy dust?@Yet filial sorrow pays the Dudeous Tear@And heartworn Friendship heaves a Sigh sincere.@Pleas'd may thy shade these humble rites receive@The last sad tribute gratitude can give@

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of this performance, which coincides with the opening of the playhouse in Lincoln's Inn Fields by Betterton's Company, is established by Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 43-44: [Betterton, Mrs Bracegirdle, Mrs Barry, and others] set up a new Company, calling it the New Theatre in Lincolns-Inn-Fields; and the House being fitted up from a Tennis-Court, they Open'd it the last Day of April 1695, with a new Comedy: Call'd, Love for Love....This Comedy being Extraordinary well Acted, chiefly the Part of Ben the Sailor, it took 13 Days Successively. Three songs in the play were published separately: I tell thee, Charmion, the music by Finger, sung by Pate and Reading, is in Thesaurus Musicus, 1696, The Fifth Book. A Nymph and a Swain, the music by John Eccles and sung by Pate; and A Soldier and a Saylour, the music by John Eccles, and sung by Dogget, are in Thesaurus Musicus, The Fourth Book, 1695. Cibber, Apology, I, 196-97: After we had stolen some few Days March upon them, the Forces of Betterton came up with us in terrible Order: In about three Weeks following, the new Theatre was open'd against us with veteran Company and a new Train of Artillery; or in plainer English, the old Actors in Lincoln's-Inn-Fields began with a new Comedy of Mr Congreve's, call'd Love for Love, which ran on with such extraordinary Success that they had seldom occasion to act any other Play 'till the End of the Season. This valuable Play had a narrow Escape from falling into the Hands of the Patentees; for before the Division of the Company it had been read and accepted of at the Theatre-Royal: But while the Articles of Agreement for it were preparing, the Rupture in the Theatrical State was so far advanced that the Author took time to pause before he sign'd them; when finding that all Hopes of Accomodation were impracticable, he thought it advisable to let it takes its Fortune with those Actors for whom he had first intended the Parts. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 10: Ramble: You know the New-house opened with an extraordinary good Comedy, the like has scarce been heard of. Critick: I allow that Play contributed not a little to their Reputation and Profit; it was the Work of a popular Author; but that was not all, the Town was ingag'd in its favour, and in favour of the Actors long before the Play was Acted. Sullen: I've heard as much; and I don't grudge 'em that happy beginning, to compensate some part of their Expence and Toil: But the assistance they receiv'd from some Noble Persons did 'em eminent Credit; and their appearance in the Boxes, gave the House as much Advantage as their Contributions. Ramble: Faith if their Boxes had not been well crowded, their Galleries wou'd ha' fallen down on their Heads. Sullen: The good Humour those Noble Patrons were in, gave that Comedy such infinite Applause; and what the Quality approve, the lower sort take upon trust. Gildon, The Lives and Characters (ca. 1698), p. 22: This Play, tho' a very good Comedy in it self, had this Advantage, that it was Acted at the Opening of the New House, when the Town was so prepossess'd in Favour of the very Actors, that before a Word was spoke, each Actor was clapt for a considerable Time. And yet all this got it not more Applause than it really deserv'd. An Essay on Acting (London, 1744), p. 10: The late celebrated Mr Dogget, before he perform'd the Character of Ben in Love for Love, took Lodgings in Wapping, and gather'd thence a Nosegay for the whole Town

Event Comment: On this date the officers of the Duke's Company and the King's Company entered into agreements to merge the two companies. For details, see Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 271; Fitzgerald, A New History, I, 154-58; and Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 296-97. See also Langhans, New Restoration Theatre Accounts, p. 122, for evidence that the union had been effectively made by 13 May 1682. See page 123 for evidence that the company probably acted continuously to 7 August 1682, then closed until early October. But see 10 August 1682

Event Comment: Christopher Rich's Company. The date of the resumption of playing is not certain, for Cibber (see below) beclouds the issue by referring to Easter-Monday in April, whereas the first Monday following Easter fell on 25 March 1694@5. Nevertheless, Monday 1 April 1695 seems the likely date of the resumption of playing, with Rich's Company ready to perform before the seceding company under Thomas Betterton was fully organized. A new song for Abdelazar, Lucinda is bewitching fair, the music by Henry Purcell and sung by "the Boy" (Jemmy? Bowen), is in Thesaurus Musicus, The Fourth Book, 1695. Cibber, Apology, I, 195: [The Patentees] were not able to take the Field till the Easter-Monday in April following. Their first Attempt was a reviv'd Play call'd Abdelazar, or the Moor's Revenge, poorly written, by Mrs Behn. The House was very full, but whether it was the Play or the Actors that were not approved, the next Day's Audience sunk to nothing. However, we assured that let the Audiences be never so low, our Masters would make good all Deficiencies, and so indeed they did, till towards the End of the Season, when Dues to Ballance came too think upon 'em. [See I, 195-96, for Cibber's account of his Prologue.] A Comparison Between the Two Stages, 1702, p. 7: But in my Opinion, 'twas strange that the general defection of the old Actors which left Drury-lane, and the fondness which the better sort shew'd for 'em at the opening of their Newhouse, and indeed the Novelty it self, had not quite destroy'd those few young ones that remain'd behind. The disproportion was so great at parting, that 'twas almost impossible, in Drury-lane, to muster up a sufficient number to take in all the Parts of any Play; and of them so few were tolerable, that a Play must of necessity be damn'd that had not extraordinary favour from the Audience: No fewer than Sixteen (most of the old standing) went away; and with them the very beauty and vigour of the Stage; they who were left behind being for the most part Learners, Boys and Girls, a very unequal match for them who revolted. According to a statement made in litigation, the company in Drury Lane acted 84 times between 25 March 1694@5 and 7 July 1695; and the Young Actors played 68 times from 6 July 1695 to 10 Oct. 1695 to 10 Oct. 1695. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 308

Event Comment: Post Man, 5-8 Sept. 1696: At Mr Barns's Booth in Southwark Fair, near St Georges Church, will be seen the only English, Dutch, Spanish, High German and Indian Companies of Rope-Dancers, who are all five joined together, and will perform such variety of Dancing, Walking, Vaulting and Tumbling; the like was never seen in England before. 1st, You will see the famous Indian Woman and her Company. 2. You will see the High German Company. 3. You will see the Spanish Company dance excellently well on the Low Rope. 4. You will see the two famous Dutch Children, who are the wonder and admiration of all the Rope Dancers in the World of their Sex and Age. 5. You will see the two famous Englishmen, Mr Edward Barns of Rederiff, and Mr Appleby, who are the only two Master Ropedancers and Tumblers in the old world; also you may see Mr Edward Barnes dance with a Child standing on his shoulders, and with 2 children at his Feet, in Jack-boots and Spurs, and cuts Capers a yard and a half high, and dances a Jig on the Rope with that variety of steps, that few, or no Dancing Masters can do the like on the ground: He likewise walks on a slack Rope no bigger than a penny Cord, and swings himself 6 or 7 yards distance. Afterwards you will see the famous Indian Woman Vault the High Rope with great dexterity. Likewise you will see the famous Mr Appleby, who is the only Tumbler in all Europe, fling himself over 16 mens heads, through 12 Hoops, over 14 Halbards, over a Man on Horseback, and a Boy standing upright on his Shoulders. You will likewise the entertained with good Musick. The merry Conceits of Harlequin and his Son Punch. You will see the English and Dutch Flag on the top of the Booth. Vivat Rex. We shall play in this place 12 days

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. London Post, 28 June-1 July 1700: Yesterday the Play called the Tempest was acted at the Old Play-house; and that called Love for Love at the new, both for the benefit of the poor English Slaves, &c. and I am told, that the sum arising thereby, amounted to about 250 #. It being put on the Playhouse Bills on Friday last, That each Company were to Act that day, and the whole Profits to go to'ards the Redemption of the English now in Slavery at Machanisso in Barbary, we are credibly informed, That, pursuant thereunto, the Treasurers of the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, did on Saturday last pay into the hands of the Churchwardens of St.@Martin's the sum of 20 #. out of the Receipts of the Play acted by that Company, towards the Relief of those our Natives from Slavery, which good example 'tis hoped, may move others to be speedy and generous in their Charity for the same purpose. What the other Company gave I do not yet hear

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 116. This was the King's Company (under Killigrew), split off from the United Company. According to Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 2) the roster included: Theophilus Bird, Hart, Mohun, Lacy, Burt, Cartwright, Clun, Baxter, Robert Shatterel, William Shatterrel, Duke [Marmaduke Watson], Hancock, Kynaston, Wintersel, Bateman, Blagden. (But see also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 295.) According to the articles of agreement, 5 Nov. 1660 (Herbert, Dramatic Records, pp. 96-100), the Duke's Company (under Davenant) included Thomas Batterton, Thomas Sheppey, Robert Noakes, James Noakes, Thomas Lovell, John Moseley, Cave Underhill, Robert Turner, Thomas Lilleston

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner I went to the theatre, and there saw Love's Mistress done by them, which I do not like it some things so well as their acting in Salsbury Court. [Although Pepys saw this play on 2 March 1660@1 at Salisbury Court, done by the Duke's Company, here he appears to indicate a rival performance of it by the King's Company in Vere St.]

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. If the run of The Wits occurred as it is outlined above, this would presumably be the first day of Hamlet. Pepys, Diary: To the Opera, and there saw Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, done with scenes very well, but above all, Betterton did the prince's part beyond imagination. Downes (p. 21): The Tragedy of Hamlet: Hamlet being Perform'd by Mr Betterton, Sir William (having seen Mr Taylor of the Black-Fryars Company Act it, who being Instructed by the Author Mr Shakespear) taught Mr Betterton in every Particle of it; which by his exact Performance of it, gain'd him Esteem and Reputation, Superlative to all other Plays...No succeeding Tragedy for several Years got more Reputation, or Money to the Company than this

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Sir W. Pen, my wife and I to the Theatre, and there saw The Country Captain, the first time it hath been acted this twenty-five years, a play of my Lord Newcastle's, but so silly a play as in all my life I never saw, and the first that ever I was weary of in my life. Herbert (Dramatic Records, p. 118) lists Love's Mistress for this date for Vere St., but the item is out of the normal order of the entries. To move it to 26 Oct. 1662 would place it on a Sunday. The play had been given previously (2 March 1661, 11 March 1661, 25 March 1661) by both the Duke's Company and King's Company. Possibly Herbert entered it on the wrong day. On Herbert's list, following Love's Mistress, are two plays, The Contented Collinell [Brenoralt] and Love at First Sight, each listed without a date. The former, under the title Brenoralt, had been acted at Vere St. on 23 July 1661; the second was soon to be acted there on 29 Nov. 1661

Event Comment: A play, unidentified, was given at the Middle Temple. Since the Duke's Company acted at the Inner Temple, the King's Company probably Played here. The company received the usual fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 170

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: I to the Cockpitt, with much crowding and waiting, where I saw The Valiant Cidd acted, a play I have read with great delight, but is a most dull thing acted, which I never understood before, there being no pleasure in it, though done by Betterton and by Ianthe [Mrs Saunderson], and another fine wench [Mrs Norton] that is come in the room of Roxalana [Mrs Davenport]; nor did the King or Queen once smile all the whole play, nor any of the company seem to take anyPleasure but what was in the greatness and gallantry of the company

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. As Evelyn saw it on 27 April, it seems likely that it was first performed before Easter (April 10). It was not licensed for printing until 8 July 1664. Preface to edition of 1664: I Cou'd not have wish'd my self more fortunate than I have been in the success of this Poem:...The Acting of it has lost me no Reputation. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 25: @Sir Nich'las, Sir Fred'rick, Widow and Dufoy, Were not by any so well done, Mafoy.@ The clean and well performance of this Comedy, got the Company more Reputation and profit than any preceding Comedy; the Company taking in a months time at it #1000

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. L. C. 5@139, p. 125, lists it for 3 March, but as this date falls on Sunday, it is probably an error in dating. The play was licensed on 22 May 1667. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke's playhouse...and I in and find my wife and Mrs Hewer, and sat by them and saw The English Princesse, or Richard the Third; a most sad, melancholy play, and pretty good; but nothing eminent in it, as some tragedys are; only little Mis. Davis did dance a jig after the end of the play, and there telling the next day's play; so that it come in by force only to please the company to see her dance in boy's clothes; and, the truth is, there is no comparison between Nell's dancing the other day at the King's house in boy's clothes and this, this being infinitely beyond the other. Downes (p. 27): Wrote by Mr Carrol, was Excellently well Acted in every Part;...Gain'd them an Additional Estimation, and the Applause from the Town, as well as profit to the whole Company

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and Mercer and I away to the King's play-house, to see the Scornfull Lady; but it being now three o'clock there was not one soul in the pit; whereupon, for shame, we would not go in....[After attending lif] to the King's house, upon a wager of mine with my wife, that there would be no acting there to-day, there being no company: so I went in and found a pretty good company there, and saw their dance at the end of the play

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: [After looking in at lif], and so to the King's house: and there, going in, met with Knepp, and she took us up into the tireing-rooms: and to the women's shift, where Nell was dressing herself, and was all unready, and is very Pretty, prettier than I thought. And so walked all up and down the house above, and then below into the scene-room, and there sat down, and she gave us fruit: and here I read the questions to Knepp, while she answered me, through all her part of Flora's Figary's which was acted to-day. But, Lord! to see how they were both painted would make a man mad, and did make me loath them; and what base company of men comes among them, and how lewdly they talk! and how poor the men are in clothes, and yet what a shew they make on the stage by candle-light, is very observable. But to see how Nell cursed, for having so few people in the pit, was pretty; the other house carrying away all the people at the new play, and is said, now-a-days, to have generally most company, as being better players. By and by into the pit, and there was the play, which is pretty good

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: It being almost twelve o'clock, or a little more, and carried [Mercer, Mrs Horsfield, and Mrs Gayet] to the King's playhouse, where the doors were not then open; but presently they did open; and we in, and find many people already come in, by private ways, into the pit, it being the first day of Sir Charles Sidly's new play, so long expected, The Mulberry Garden, of whom, being so reputed a wit, all the world do expect great matters. I having sat here awhile, and eat nothing to-day, did slip out, getting a boy to keep my place...And so to the play again, where the King and Queen, by and by, come, and all the Court; and the house infinitely full. But the play, when it come, though there was, here and there, a pretty saying, and that not very many neither, yet the whole of the play had nothing extraordinary in it, at all, neither of language nor design; insomuch that the King I did not see laugh, nor pleased the whole play from the beginning to the end, nor the company; insomuch that I have not been less pleased at a new play in my life, I think. And which made it the worse was, that there never was worse musick played--that is, worse things composed, which made me and Captain Rolt, who happened to sit near me, mad. So away thence, very little satisfied with the play, but pleased with my company. [For Bannister's setting a song for Mrs Knepp for this play, see 7 May 1668.

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Epilogue, which was printed in A Collection of Poems Written upon several Occasions by several Persons, 1673, pp. 29-32, and reprinted by Noyes, Ben Jonson on the English Stage, pp. 247-48, by its references to Lent seems to indicate a Lenten revival. As this play was allotted to the King's Company ca. 12 Jan. 1668@9, it has been assigned to that company. The revival may have occurred in March 1670, perhaps not until later

Event Comment: The King's Company. This day marks the resumption of acting by the King's Company after the disastrous fire at Bridges Street, Drury Lane; the players turned to the theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields which the Duke's Company had recently left. The Prologue was printed in Covent Garden Drollery, 1672. Sloane MS. 4455 folio 26 verso: The Prologue of a Play entitled Witt without Money-Spoken at the Dukes old Theatre (after the Kings was burnt) by the King's players, Feb. 26 1671. The Curtaine being drawne up all the Actors were discover'd on the stage in Melancholick postures, & Moone [Mohun] advancing before the rest speaks as follows, addressing chiefly to ye King then [present]. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 216): Wit Without Money: a Comedy which I have seen acted at the Old House in little Lincolns-Inn-Fields with very great Applause: the part of Valentine being Play'd by that compleat Actor Major Mohun deceas'd. This was the first Play that was acted after the Burning the King's House in Drury-lane: a New Prologue being writ for them by Mr Dryden

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. It is uncertain whether this performance and those for 13 and 28 March belong to 1670@1 or 1671@2. They are on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2 (see also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347), but VanLennep's discovery of an L. C. list for the Duke's Company covering March 1670@1 but not including these plays led him to believe that they Pertain to March 1671@2. See VanLennep, Plays on the English Stage, p. 19. On 9 March 1670@1 or 1671@2 Henry Herbert qranted permission to the Duke's Company to act The Lady Errant. See The Plays and Poems of William Cartwright, ed. G. Blakemore Evans (Madison, Wisc., 1951), p. 85