In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Eighteenth Century Drama: Censorship, Society and the Stage
  • Trevor R. Griffiths
Eighteenth Century Drama: Censorship, Society and the Stage. An Online Resource. Marlborough: Adam Matthew Digital, 2016

Please contact the publisher for pricing information.

The publishers state that:

The main focus of Eighteenth Century Drama is the John Larpent plays, there are over 2,500 plays included within this collection and they have been digitised and made available here for study. Correspondence between key theatrical figures, biographical information, advertisements, portraits and companion texts provide context for the plays and emphasise the role of theatre in society not only as entertainment, but as an opportunity for social commentary.

Browse by a variety of themes and genres, follow a particular theatre manager, Lord Chamberlain or actor, or find documents relating to a specific theatre thanks to the detailed metadata attached to each document. Explore portraits, cartoons, objects and architectural drawings through the bespoke, searchable Image Gallery or use the interactive Chronology and Performance Data to supplement research and visualise the world of eighteenth century theatre in new ways.

The essential companion text The London Stage 1660–1800 , which lists every traceable performance 1660–1800, has been made available as a searchable database and used to power our London Stage Data Associations feature and London Stage Data Visualisations .

The companion text A Biographical Dictionary of Actors etc. 1660–1800 has also been made available as a searchable database

(From the Online Introduction)

Putting together three of the most significant resources for the study of eighteenth-century British theatre in one package is a brilliant idea that Adam Matthew has carried out very well. The Larpent Collection from the Huntington Library has records, including texts, of most plays submitted to him (as the Lord Chancellor's inspector of plays) for licence between 1737 and 1824 as well as “the diaries of Larpent’s wife and professional collaborator Anna . . . playbills, theatrical records and correspondence” (Adam Matthew Brochure). As well as a photographic copy of the original London Stage 1660–1800 and the items in the Larpent collection, we also have searchable digitised versions of the Biographical Dictionary and of the London Stage. Complementing these resources [End Page 131] are a number of essays and additional features that enhance the usefulness of the whole package.

Inevitably in imagining possible user journeys through the material, there will be some aspects of the mapping that will seem less than perfect, but any reservations I may have are far outweighed by the sheer convenience of being able to access such a vast array of useful research material.

My chosen journey was through the Garrick management of Drury Lane, concentrating mainly on the London Stage and the Biographical Dictionary and most of my quibbles go back to the original materials rather than Adam Matthew’s transformation of them. For example, the coverage of dramatic authors is patchy in the Biographical Dictionary, and the London Stage generally only identifies authors if there is an additional comment from a prompter or similar source for a particular performance. So tracing authors of plays can be a more complex task than might first appear.

Some issues do appear to relate to the digitisation: the London Stage records for February and March 1758 have been conflated because the days and dates are the same in each month, and the play called The Odosius is in fact called Theodosius. The London Stage can be a trap for the unwary since it does not necessarily pick up that works may be known familiarly by a different title to the one that we now identify them by. Perhaps the clearest example is The Beaux’ (sic) Stratagem which figures in the London Stage under its full title and as The Stratagem. The digital search will pick up 761 performances of The Stratagem and 59 of the Beaux Stratagem but will not pick up the fact that these are the same play. Nor will it differentiate between plays with the same or very similar titles, so that the researcher will need to be alert to the fact that the total number of records for a particular title may actually be for several different works. For example, searching the...

pdf

Share