Olympio and Eugenio

Anon. Play Titles A (1595)Property "Paratext" (as page type) with input value "{{{paratexts}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Contributor" (as page type) with input value "{{{contributors}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.Property "Partnering Institution" (as page type) with input value "{{{partneringInstitutions}}}" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process.

Historical Records

Performance Records

Playlists in Philip Henslowe's diary


Fol. 12v (Greg I.24)
ye 4 of septmbʒ 1595 . . . . . . . . . . Rd at olempeo & hengenyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xviijs


Fol. 13 (Greg I.25)
ye 3 of octobʒ 1595 . . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at olempeo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvs


Fol. 14 (Greg, I. 27)
ye 22 of novmbʒ 1595 . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at olempo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iiijs vjd


Fol. 14v (Greg, I. 28
ye 18 of febreary 1595 . . . . . . . . . . . Rd at olempeo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xs



Theatrical Provenance

Probable Genre(s)

Unknown

Possible Narrative and Dramatic Sources or Analogues

References to the Play

Critical Commentary


Malone considered "Olympio and Eugenio" to be the same play as "Seleo and Olympo," which was introduced on 5 March 1595, declaring that "Seleo ... is in a subsequent entry called Olempo and Hengengs" (p. 296, n.6). He did not therefore list "Olympio and Eugenio" when it first appeared in Henslowe's listings for September 1595.


Collier, at the appearance in the playlists of "olempeo and hengenyo," conceded that this "Olempeo" might be "Seleo and Olympo" and that the spelling of the second name might be "Ingenio." Then, letting frustration get the better of editorial restraint, he added that "it is sometimes hardly possible even to guess, on account of Henslowe's ingeniously corrupt spelling" (p. 56, n.1).


Fleay, BCED itemized "Olympio and Eugenio" separately from "Seleo and Olympo" (2. #143, p. 301), thereby disconnecting the two plays, but he had no comment on its possible narrative.


Greg II (#70, p. 175) collapsed the entries in the diary for "Olympio and Eugenio" into those for "Seleo and Olympo". He devoted his entry for the merged pair to a discussion of Fleay's identification of the play/s as an early version of Heywood's Golden Age; he wrestled (as Fleay had not) with the implications of such an identification for the stage history of Heywood's 1611 play, if it had indeed been first performed by the Admiral's men in 1595 under varying titles with some spelling of "Olympo/Olympio."


Gurr combined the entries for "Seleo and Olympo" with those for "Olympio and Eugenio," commenting only that the former was "[p]robably the play also named Olympio and Eugenio" (p. 214, n.40).


Wiggins, Catalogue, #994, #995 reflects the inclination of previous theater historians in leaning toward the merger of "Seleo and Olympo" and "Olympio and Eugenio" as a single play. He finds it persuasive that "Olympio and Eugenio," the later of the two play-titles to appear in Henslowe's lists, is not marked "ne" (suggesting it has been staged previously), but he finds troubling the consistency with which Henslowe gave the word common to both titles distinct spelling:s "Olympo" for earlier-appearing play and "Olympio" for the later-appearing one.

For What It's Worth

Works Cited




Site created and maintained by Roslyn L. Knutson, Professor Emerita, University of Arkansas at Little Rock; 9 February 2021.