Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner Sir Tho. Crew and my Lady to the Playhouse to see The Silent Woman

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@147, p. 361: The King at ye Mistress. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351. There is no indication as to whether this performance was the premiere. As the play was licensed on 24 May 1687, the premiere may have been as late as 12 May, but possibly was earlier. Sir George Etherege to Will Richards, 19 May 1687: I have heard of the success of The Eunuch, and am very glad the town has so good a taste to give the same just applause to Sir Charles Sedley's writing, which his friends have always done to his conversation (Letterbook, ed. Rosenfeld, p. 212). Sir George Etherege to Middleton, 2O June 1687: I saw a play about ten years ago Called the Eunuch, so heavy a lump the players durst not charge themselves with the dead weight, but it seems Sir Charles Sedley has animated the mighty mass and now it treads the stage lightly (ibid., p. 227). [See also 26 March 1687 and season of 1676-77.] Thomas Shadwell, The Tenth Satyr of Juvenal (licensed, 25 May 1687.) Dedication to Sir Charles Sedley: Your late great obligation in giving me the advantage [presumably the third day's gain] of your comedy, call'd Bellamira, or the Mistress, has given me a fresh subject for my Thanks; and my Publishing this Translation affords me a new opportunity of owning to the world my grateful resentments to you. I am heartily glad that your Comedy (as I never doubted) found such success, that I never met with any Man of Sence but applauded it: And that there is abundance of Wit in it, your Enemies have been forced to confess....For the Judgment of some Ladies upon it that it is obscene, I must needs say they are Ladies of a very quick apprehension, and did not find their thoughts lye very much that way, they could not find more obscenity in that than there is in every other Comedy. A song, Thyrsis unjustly you complain, headed A Song in Bellamira, or, the Mistress. Set by Mr Tho. Shadwell, is in Vinculum Societatis, 1687 (licensed 8 June 1687)

Event Comment: PPublic Advertiser: As I saw in the papers that the tragedy of Phaedra is shortly to be acted at Covent Garden, I thought that the following lines, written upon Mrs Woffington's performance of the character in Ireland would not be unacceptable to you, or to your readers. They fell casually into my hands. If you think them worth inserting, they are at your service [a poem of 104 lines follows]: @Oft has the poet sweetly sung in vain@When tasteless actors chaunt the heavenly strain... Woffington seems reserved to play the part magnificently. The analysis, tho' fettered to the couplet, is more specific as to her gestures and expression, and tone, than most such commentaries

Event Comment: This Play tho' all new dress'd and had Fine Scenes did not seem to give ye audience any great plasure, or draw any applause (Cross). Written by Shakespear. Never Acted there. New Habits, Scenes, and Decorations. Nothing under Full Prices will be taken during the Performance. No Gentleman can possibly be admitted behind the Scenes, or into the Orchestra on account of the Music, Decorations, and number of Performers which are necessary to the Representation (playbill). [See "Garrick's Presentation of Antony and Cleopatra," RES, Jan. 1937. The following characters appear in Capel's acting text, 23 Oct. 1958, Maecenas-Atkins; Proculeius-$Austin; Soothsayer-$Burton; Mardian-$Perry; Seleucas-$Burton.] Receipts: #200 ($Cross); #193 14s. (Winston MS 8)

Event Comment: Benefit for Miss Young. Afterpiece: Not acted in 20 years. Music by Dr Arne. [See John Lockman's Reflections concerning Operas, &c." in his introduction to his edition of Rosalinda (London, 1760), p. iv: 'A gentleman, well known for his musical compositions, is of opinion, that the reason why the Opera Rosamond tho' adorned with all the graces of lyric poetry, does not please from the stage, so much as might be expected, is owing to a circumstance that forms a beauty in the drama itself; I mean the suppos'd poisoning of Rosamond at the end of the second act, and her appearing no more upon the stage. Whilst this sheet was at press, I was told that Mr Arne has reduc'd this opera into one act, and set the whole anew; and so managed matters, that Rosamond appears throughout the whole drama. Tis said that the music of this new Rosamond is as delightful as that of another performance of Mr Arne's which now affords the town so agreeable an Entertainment."

Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Pritchard. Part of pit laid into boxes. House charges #61 4s. [Profit to Mrs Pritchard #68 8s.] Lent to Mr Johnston, Prompter, by order #2 2s.; Paid to James Aickin on his note #40; Paid Poor's rate (1!2 year for St Martin's) #20 4s.; Salary list #294 2s. 8d. (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #129 12s. (Treasurer's Book). Went to see Macbeth for Mrs Pritchard's Benefit. Got a good seat in the Pit, which was not full for half an hour after I went, tho part of it was laid into the boxes. Read the Public Advertiser of Today' and part of London Chronicle before the play began...Dance of the Furies in the 4th Act, and end of the Play (Neville MS Diary)

Event Comment: TThe Jovial Crew, as advertised for this Day cannot be perform'd on account of the indisposition of Miss Brent. Positively the last time of the company's performing this season. Boxes #5 17s. 6d. Paid Younger a bill for writing parts #2 12s. Paid Ross in full to make his sallery #300 for the season: #60. The Account Book indicates a deficit this night of #1240 12s. 4d. after all salaries are paid. This deficit was reduced by #301 18s. 8d. on May 27 by deductions from the annual salaries of 23 actors and dancers for 19 nights on account of "the death of His Late Majesty King George the Second." A little more than 10 per cent was taken from the salary of each: From Miss Macklin's salary of #300, was deducted #31 16s. 10d., &c. The others who were similary taxed were: @Name Salary Deduction@Ross #300 #31 16s. 10d.@Maranesi & Mrs Maranesi[Wife #270 #28 13s. 2d.@Sparks #250 #26 10s. 8d.@Dyer & Mrs Dyer[Wife #250 #26 10s. 8d.@Beard #210 #22 5s. 9d.@Ridout #180 #19 2s. 1d.@Poitier Jr #150 #15 18s. 6d.@Miss Capdeville #150 #15 15s. 5d.@Barrington #100 #10 12s. 3d.@Bencraft #100 #10 12s. 3d.@LaLauze #100 #10 12s. 3d.@Poitier Sr #80 #8 9s. 9d.@Leppie #80 #8 9s. 9d.@Mrs Jansolien #60 #6 7s. 4d.@Mrs Viviez #60 #6 7s. 4d.@Rotchford #50 #5 6s. 1d.@Mrs Marianne #50 #5 6s. 1d.@Hussey #35 #3 14s. 3d.@Mrs Welsch #35 #3 14s. 3d.@Mrs Crawford #35 #3 14s. 3d.@ On 30 May the deficit was further reduced by receipts from 26 actors for advances, one-half value of tickets for their benefit performances, &c., plus #200 from John Rich, in the amount of #506 6s. 5d. (Account Book).] Receipts: #43 7s. 6d. (Account Book)

Event Comment: Benefit for Smith. By Particular Desire. Afterpiece: Taken from The Jovial Crew. Part of pit laid into boxes. Send servants by 4 o'clock. Paid Mr Grimaldi's draft on Mrs Adams #100 (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #291 9s. 6d. Charges: #68 18s. Profits to Smith: #212 9s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@145, p. 120. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349. There is no certainty that this is the first performance, but a licensing date of 28 Jan. 1677@8 and Mrs Behn's statement in the Preface that she hurried the play into print suggest a premiere not far from this date. Edition of 1678: To the Reader: I Printed this Play with all the impatient haste one ought to do, who would be vindicated from the most unjust and silly aspersion, Woman could invent to cast on Woman; and which only my being a Woman has procured me, That it was Bawdy, the least and most Excusable fault in the Men Writers, to whose Plays they all crowd, as if they came to no other end then to hear what they condemn in this: but from a Woman it was unnaturall. One song, Sitting by yonder river side, with music by Thomas? Farmer, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Second Book, 1679

Event Comment: [By Richard Savage.] Edition of 1724: I think it my Duty also, to return Thanks to the Town, for their favourable Reception of this Play; and for the Applause their Indulgence bestow'd on the Performance of the Young Actors: Particularly for my own Success, in a double Capacity, as Actor and Author

Event Comment: By Command of their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Wales. Benefit the Author of Sir John Cockle at Court. Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir Richard Steele

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. On Thursday 10 Dec. 1663, Pepys reported that this play was to be acted the following week, but the date of the first performance is uncertain. But--except for the holidays--it was probably acted on consecutive days until 1 Jan. 1663@4, when Pepys saw it. The play is also in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138, as a "Revived Play." Pepys, Diary: I perceive the King and Duke and the Court was going to the Duke's playhouse to see Henry VIII. acted, which is said to be an admirable play. But, Lord! to see now near I was to have broken my oathe, or run the hazard of 20s. losse, so much my nature was hot to have gone thither; but I did not go. Downes (p.24): King Henry the 8th, This Play, by Order of Sir William Davenant, was all new Cloath'd in proper Habits: The King's was new, all the Lords, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Doctors, Proctors, Lawyers, Tip-staves, new Scenes: The part of the King was so right and justly done by Mr Betterton, he being Instructed in it by Sir William, who had it from Old Mr Lowen, that had his Instructions from Mr Shakespear himself, that I dare and will aver, none can, or will come near him in this Age, in the performance of that part: Mr Harris's performance of Cardinal Wolsey, was little Inferior to that, he doing it with such just State, Port, and Mein, that I dare affirm, none hitherto has Equall'd him:...Every part by the great Care of Sir William, being exactly perform'd; it being all new Scenes; it continu'd Acting 15 Days together with general Applause

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Downes (p. 29): It took well, but Inferior to Love in a Tub. Pepys, Diary: I to the Duke of York's playhouse; where a new play of Etherige's called She Would if she Could; and though I was there by two o'clock, there was 1000 people put back that could not have room in the pit: and I at last, because my wife was there, made shift to get into the 18d. box, and there saw; but, Lord! how full was the house, and how silly the play, there being nothing in the world good in it, and few people pleased in it. The King was there; but I sat mightily behind, and could see but little, and hear not all. The play being done...here was the Duke of Buckingham to-day openly sat in the pit; and there I found him with my Lord Buckhurst, and Sidly, and Etherige, the poet; the last of whom I did hear mightily find fault with the actors, that they were out of humour, and had not their parts perfect, and that Harris did do nothing, nor could so much as sing a ketch in it; and so was mightily concerned: while all the rest did, through the whole pit, blame the play as a silly, dull thing, though there was something very roguish and witty; but the design of the play, and end, mighty insipid. Thomas Shadwell, Preface to The Humorists (1671): The last (viz.) imperfect Action, had like to have destroy'd She Would if she could, which I think (and I have the Authority of some of the best Judges in England for't) is the best Comedy that has been written since the Restauration of the Stage: And even that, for the imperfect representation of it at first, received such prejudice, that, had it not ben for the favour of the Court, in all probability it had never got up again; and it suffers for it, in a great measure, to this very day

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the premiere is not known. Although the play was not in print until 1671, it was acted on 9 May 1670 and again at Dover on 19 or 20 May 1670. Downes (p. 29) placed the comedy among the plays of 1669, but the presence of Mrs Johnson (who, according to Downes, p. 31, did not join the company until 1670) and the performances in May 1670 suggest that the comedy was first given in the spring of 1670. Downes (pp. 29-30): The Play being Singularly well Acted, it took 12 Days together

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347. It is uncertain, however, just when this performance occurred. The L. C. lists at Harvard (see VanLennep, Plays on the English Stage, p. 19) suggest that the three performances at the head of this list belong to the spring of 1672 rather than the spring of 1671. If this is correct, this performance of Sir Solomon is out of place in the list, for it can hardly be placed at 14 Nov. 1672, yet it is surprising that, so soon after the opening of dg, the Duke's Company should act at court, especially when the King and Queen attended dg on the following day, 15 Nov. 1671. This performance of Sir Solomon should be judged as an uncertain one