Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Goodall. [In mainpiece the playbill retains King as Trappanti, but "King being indisposed, Trappanti...was represented by Benson" (unidentified clipping on playbill of 27 Apr., BM: Harris, Vol. III).] Morning Herald, 9 Apr.: Tickets to be had of Mrs Goodall, No. 13, Great Russell-street, Covent-garden. Receipts: #364 8s. 6d. (125.13.6; 36.15.0; 4.7.0; tickets: 197.13.0) (charge: #157 11s. 2d.)

Event Comment: The King's Theatre having been rented to the Proprietors of Drury-Lane House, with a reserve of the Nights for the Italian Opera to be carried on there for the Opera Trust, the Drury-Land Patent will in future be moved on Tuesdays and Saturdays to the Theatre Royal, Hay-Market, where all old and new Renters, claiming under the Drury-Lane Patent, will be entitled to Free Admission, and to their Rights for each Night of Performance. Half Price not being taken at this Theatre, the Performances will be reduced to the old established Prices. Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. Gallery 2s. Upper Gallery 1s. Places for the Boxes in the Theatre Royal, Hay-Market, to be taken at Fosbrook's Office at the King's Theatre as usual. [Mainpiece in place of Cymon; afterpiece of The Patron, both advertised on playbill of 25 Jan.] Receipts: #140 11s. (139.0; 1.11)

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 116. The King's Company

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 117. The King's Company

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: I took my Lord Hinchinbroke and Mr Sidney to the Theatre, and shewed them The Widdow, and indifferent good play, but wronged by the women being to seek in their parts

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: I went to the Theatre, and there I saw Claracilla (the first time I ever saw it), well acted. But strange to see this house, that used to be so thronged, now empty since the Opera begun; and so will continue for a while, I believe

Event Comment: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118

Event Comment: Possibly this was acted by the King's Company, which had given it on 16 Nov. 1660 and 8 Jan. 1661. Evelyn, Diary: This Night was acted before his Majestie the Widow, a lewd play

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Here we staid some time, thinking to stay out the play before the King to-night, but it being The Villaine, and my wife not being there, I had no mind

Event Comment: The Kings' Company. The play was probably acted through 11 Oct. Pepys, Diary, 4 Oct.: To-morrow they told us should be acted, or the day after, a new play, called The Parson's Dreame, acted all by women

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Luellin...tells me what a bawdy loose play this Parson's Wedding is, that is acted by nothing but women at the King's house, and I am glad of it

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The Prologue, by John Dryden, is in Covent Garden Drollery (1672). Pepys, Diary: To the Duke's playhouse, and there saw Albumazar, an old play, this the second time of acting. It is said to have been the ground of B. Jonson's Alchymist: but, saving the ridiculousnesse of Angell's part, which is called Trinkilo, I do not see any thing extraordinary in it, but was indeed weary of it before it was done. The King here, and, indeed, all of us, pretty merry at the mimique tricks of Trinkilo

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list at Harvard: the King and Queen [present]. See VanLennep, "Plays on the English Stage," p. 13

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play is on the L. C. lists at Harvard. See VanLennep, "Plays on the English Stage", p. 14. A song in this play, Thus all our Lives, with music by John Banister, is in Choice Songs and Ayres, 1673. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 31): [Concerning several plays] All which Expir'd the third Day, save the Royal Shepherdess, which liv'd Six. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke of York's house, and there before one, but the house infinite full, where, by and by, the King and Court come, it being a new play, or an old one new vamped, by Shadwell, called The Royal Shepherdesse!; but the silliest for words and design, and evepything, that ever I saw in my whole life, there being nothing in the world pleasing in it, but a good martial dance of pikemen, where Harris and another do handle their pikes in a dance to admiration; but never less satisfied with a play in my life

Event Comment: The King's Company. This is another in the series of plays acted entirely by actresses and probably Performed in the early summer of 1672. The Prologue and Epilogue are in Covent Garden Drollery, 1672. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 313): This play was reviv'd at the Old Theatre, in little Lincolns-Inn-fields, and acted all by Women, a new Prologue and Epilogue being spoken by Mrs Marshall in Man's Cloaths, which Reader may find printed in Covent-Garden Drollery, 80, pag. 3. &c

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but this play belongs to a group which have been considered as "Lenten plays," ones in which the young actors of a company comprise a large portion of the cast. On this basis, as Easter fell on 30 March 1673, this play has been assigned to March 1673. See Philip B. Gray Jr, Lenten Casts and the Nursery: Evidence for the Dating of Certain Restoration Plays, PMLA, LIII (1938), 781-94; for this play particularly, pp. 791-92. A song, Down with this love, set for this play by Alphonso Marsh, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, 1676

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but, as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1674, a first production not later than March 1674 is likely. In addition, the relatively large number of minor actors suggests that it might be a Lenten performance by the young players of the company. As to the authorship, the title page states: Written by a Person of Honour. On the other hand, Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 526) reports that he had heard that it was written by Duffett. The second Prologue is in Covent Garden Drollery, 1673, but the fact that it was intended but not spoken does not assist in dating the first performance

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 116. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. There is no certainty that this is the premiere, but the frequency of performance of The Tempest during September-October-November would make November 1674 a suitable time for a burlesque of this sort. A small quarto, The Songs & Masque in the New Tempest (in the Huntington Library, 122925), without a title page, contains what are apparently the songs and concluding masque of the play. It may have been issued during the run of the play and sold at the theatre. It does not name any performers. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 177): This Play was to draw the Town from the Duke's Theatre, who for a considerable time had frequented that admirable reviv'd Comedy call'd The Tempest

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance, the premiere, is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 216: first Acting. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 348. Nell Gwyn also attended this performance; see VanLennep, Nell Gwyn's Playgoing, p406. The title page states: The English Opera; or The Vocal Musick in Psyche, with the Instrumental Therein Intermix'd...By Matthew Lock. Preface: All the Instrumental Musick (which is not mingled with the Vocal) was Composed by that Great Master, Seignior Gio. Baptista Draghi, Master of the Italian Musick to the King. The Dances were made by the most famous Master of France, Monsieur St.Andree. The Scenes were Painted by the Ingenious Artist, Mr Stephenson. In those things that concern the Ornament or Decoration of the Play, the great industry and care of Mr Betterton ought to be remember'd, at whose desire I wrote upon this Subject. Roger North Upon Music: I am sure the musick in the Psyche was composed by Mr M. Lock, of whom wee may say, as the Greeks sayd of Cleomenes, that he was ultimus Heroum. This masque is also in print, and begins 'Great Psyche,' &c. and the book containing the whole musick of that entertainment is not unworthy of a place in a vertuoso's cabanet (ed. John Wilson [1959], pp. 306-7). Preface to Settle's Ibrahim (licensed 4 May 1676): I have often heard the Players cursing at their oversight in laying out so much on so disliked a play [Psyche]; and swearing that they thought they had lost more by making choice of such an Opera: writer than they had gained by all his Comedies; considering how much more they might have expected, had such an Entertainment had that scence in it, that it deserved: and that for the future they expect the Tempest, which cost not one Third of Psyche, will be in request when the other is forgotten. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 35-36): In February 1672. The long expected Opera of Psyche, came forth in all her Ornaments; new Scenes, new Machines, new Cloaths, new French Dances: This Opera was Splendidly set out, especially in Scenes; the Charge of which amounted to above 800l. It had a Continuance of Performance about 8 Days together it prov'd very Beneficial to the Company; yet the Tempest got them more Money

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Diary of Robert Hooke, 27 Aug. 1675: Saw Psyche Grand foppery

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the premiere is uncertain. This play is on the L. C. list, 5@142, p. 81: King and Queene at Alcibiades and a box for the Mayds of Honor. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 348. The item on the L. C. list is ambiguously dated; it follows an entry for 28 Sept. 1675 and bears only the figure "22." It is possible that the play was given on 22 Sept. 1675, but the order of the L. C. listing, the sequence of known performance on 24, 25, and 28 Sept., and the fact that most of the cast are principals in the company suggest a late September or early October production rather than an early September one