Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Gibbs. 1st piece: Never acted here. 2nd piece [1st time; M. INT 1. In it the playbill lists Dicky Gossip by Suett, but "Fawcett came forward with an apology, stating that Suett had been suddenly taken ill, and was unable to attend the theatre. The galleries...insisted on Fawcett's singing the song in Suett's stead. Fawcett pleaded his incapacity, and at length, by dint of a little buffoonery and grimace (talents essentially necessary on such occasions) succeeded in a appeasing the tumult" (Dramatic Censor, III, 127)]

Event Comment: The King's company. On 31 Aug. or 1 Sept. 1664 Orrery wrote to Sir Henry Bennett: Ther was noe Play of myne Acted, they are now but Studyinge it; I hope within less then a Fortnight twill be on ye Theater And if you are not surfetted, with what of mine you have already seene [Henry V], I will beg ye honour to wait on you when tis Acted (see The Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, ed. W. S. Clark@II [Cambridge, Mass., 1937], 1, 102). The play is also on the list of Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138. Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 281, lists it among the plays given at court, but Sir Heneage Finch's note (see below) seems to indicate an afternoon performance. Sir Heneage Finch to Sir Edward Dering, 15 Sept. 1664: Yesterday was acted, in the Greatest and noblest presence wch ye Court can make, before ye fullest Theatre, & with the highest applause imaginable, my Lo Orerys new play calld ye Generall formerly acted in Ireland by the name of Altamira, but much altered & improved. From thence the whole Court went to Wallingford house, where the Earl of Arran and the Lady Mary Stuart were that night before Supper marryd in the Gallery (Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, I, 103, from Stowe MS 744 f. 81)

Event Comment: Henry Muddiman, 29 Nov. 1666: The Players have upon great proffers of disposing a large share to charitable uses prevailed to have liberty to act at Both Houses, which they begin this day (CSPD, Charles II, clxxcii, 6, in Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 250). A manuscript prologue for the opening of the theatre in Bridges Street is in J. Payne Collier's MS Restoration Stage History, Part I, p. 106, in the Houghton Library, Harvard. The Diary of John Milward, Esq., ed. Caroline Robbins (Cambridge, 1938), p. 49: This day at my coming to the House [of Commons] it moved that plays might be tolerated and acted in the common theatres, and whether any members of the House of Commons should be admitted to go to acts of the playhouses, but it was not resolved

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@139, p. 125. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. The play, licensed on 27 Nov. 1667, was not printed until 1667. There is no certainty that this is the premiere, but it may well have been, as Pepys saw it on 30 March and on 11 April suggested that it had recently had its first showing: [The Duchess of Newcastle] was the other day at her own play, The Humourous Lovers; the most ridiculous thing that ever was wrote, but yet she and her Lord mightily pleased with it; and she, at the end, made her respects to the players from her box, and did give them thanks

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: In haste to carry my wife to see the new play I saw yesterday, she not knowing it. But there, contrary to expectation, find The Silent Woman. However in; and there Knipp come into the pit...[and] tells me the King was so angry at the liberty taken by Lacy's part to abuse him to his face, that he commanded they should act no more, till Moone [Mohun] went and got leave for them to act again, but not this play. The King mighty angry; and it was better indeed, but very true and witty. I never was more taken with a play than I am with this "Silent Woman," as old as it is, and as often as I have seen it. There is more wit in it than goes to ten new plays. Nathaniel Wanby, Coventry, 1667: We have known in our time that the Silent Woman hath had the loud applause of a whole theatre (BM Harleian MS. 6430, p.23)